SR-1 (2)
-.l.
1.
41 tJ2---tJt??
MAY 2 1 1985
C/ED:PPD:PJS:DKW:kc
Counc~l Meet~ng: 5/21/85
Santa Mon~ca, Cal~fornia
TO:
Mayor and C~ty Counc~l
FRON:
Clty Statf
SUBJECT:
Appeal of Plannlng Commlsslon's DeClSlon DenYlng
DR 291 and ZA 4880-A, to Permlt Constructlon of a
349-Room Hotel at 1700 Ocean Avenue In the R4 Zone.
Santa Mon~ca Hotel Assoc~ates, Ltd.: Appl~cant/
Appellant; Mayor Reed: Appellant.
INTRODUCTION
At 1 ts meet lng of Apr 1.1 15, 1985 the C1. ty Plannlng COmrn1.5S 1.on
reVlewed DR 291, ZA 4880-A, EIA 778, for a proposed hotel proJect
at 1700 Ocean Avenue ~n Santa Monlca.
The COrnm1.S51.0n f:nled to
adopt a motlon regardlng the proJect, effectlvely denYlng the
appllcat1.on.
Tnl;:; actlon has been appealed to the Clty CounCll
by
both the
appllcant and
Mayor
Chrlstlne
Reed.
Staff
recommendatlon lS to grant the appeals and approve the proJect
wlth condltlons.
BACKGROUND
The proposed project (DR 291) would amend DR 098, approved by the
Plannlng COmffilSS10n In June 1983. DR 098 lncluded demolltlon of
the eXlstlng motel at the S1. te and constructlon of a 4-story,
- 1 -
~
MAY 2 1 1!15
299-room hotel. The proJect rece1ved Arch1tectural ReV1ew Board
(ARB) approval In concept on July 6, 1983, and a Coastal PermIt
In September, 1983. In December, 1984, the D1rector of Planning
granted an extensIon of DR 098 to December 11, 1985.
The curr en t app11catlon (DR 291) would lncrease bUlldlng he 19ht
from 4 to 5 stor1es (but w1thln the Land Use Element's 56' - 0"
helght l1ffiIt for Ocean Avenue), lncrease room modules from 299 to
349, Increase restaur ant and meetIng room space, and Incr ease
underground parkIng capacIty from 320 spaces to 510 spaces. An
adJustment under the Zon1ng Code 1S also beIng requested to allow
IntrusIon of part of the proJect Into the requ1red rear yard
(ZA 4880-A). Changes to the approved proJect are be1ng proposed
by a new owner of the property after an extensIve re-evaluation
of the proJect des1gn. The applIcant has IndIcated the changes
are necessary to ensure successful operat1on of a fIrst-class
hotel facIlIty. W1th the exceptIon of the requested adJustment
whIch IS recommended for approval, the proJect conforms w1th
requlrements of the ZonIng Code and General Plan and 1S
recommended for approval wIth cond1tlons.
A Supplement to the certlf 1ed FInal EnvIronmental Impac t Repor t
on DR 098 was prepared by PlannIng Consultants Research under a
contract dIrectly wIth the Clty to analyze changes to the
approved pro] ect. Th~s document, wnIch includes an extensIve
descrlptlon and analysis of the proJect, was transmItted to the
PlannIng CommIssion and publlC for reVIew and comment on
February 11, 1985. Also provIded at that tIme was a copy of the
FInal Environmental Impact Report on the approved proJect
- 2 -
(DR 098) and var IOUS other repor ts concerning that pro] ect. A
publIC reVIew and comment perIod on the Supplemental
EnVIronmental Impact Report was conducted from February 13 to
March 21, 1985. The FInal Supplemental EIR and the orIgInal EIR
are provIded as attachments to thIS staff report. Also provIded
IS a copy of the staff report to the PlannIng CommISSIon on the
matter.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
PlannIng CommISSIon reVIew of thIS proJect was orIgInally
scheduled for Apr 11 1, 1985. A staff repor t on the matter was
prOVIded to the CommISSIon on March 26, 1985. The hearIng on the
proJect was carrIed over to the CommISSIon's April 15, 1985,
meetIng due to certaIn defects In the publIC notIfIcatIon
process. FIve CommISSIoners were present for the hearIng.
CommISSIoner Shearer was absent, and CommISSIoner Genser excused
hImself due to a conflIct of Interest.
One person spoke at the publIC hearIng on the matter. ThIS
IndIVIdual expressed concern regardIng the adequclcy of proposed
parkIng for the proJect, gIven an eXIsting parkIng problem in the
neIghborhood. FOllOWIng the close of the publIC hearIng the
CommISSIon dIscussed the proJect, makIng the follOWIng pOInts:
The proposed proJect IS generally well-desIgned.
Concern that thIS IS a new, rather than amended proJect.
- 3 -
Lack of tlme for Commlsslon to study the proJect;
preference for reVlew of pcoJects at a more conceptual
stage.
Parking should be managed to ensure that enccoachment by
beach-goers does not occur.
Preference for proJect deslgn that "stepped down" to
Applan Way; bellef that proJect 15 of larger scale than
approprlate.
Calculatlon of he1ght 1n relatIon to Land Use Element
standards 15 unclear and appears InconSlstent Wlth Zonlng
Code defInltlons.
Need for clear slgnage and speed bumps to faCIlItate
lnternal cIrculatlon.
Suggestlon that landscaped area 1n front of Ocean Avenue
reta~l uses be converted to "hardscape".
A motIon to approve the proJect WIth condltlons fa1led by a three
yes, one no, one abstaIn vote.
After further d1Scusslon, a
second motlon to approve the proJect WIth cond1tIons falled by a
three yes, two abstaIn vote. A thIrd motlon to deny the proJect
Wl thou t pre] ud lce al so falled by a two yes, thr ee no vote. The
fallure to adopt a motlon effectlvely den1ed the appllcat10n.
Proper appeals to The Cl ty Councll were flIed on Apr 11 17, 1985
by Mayor Reed and the app11cant.
- 4 -
ANALYSIS
All of the project deta~ls are fully analyzed ~n the attached
staff report and EIR Supplement. In add~tlon, staff has reviewed
the 1.ssues ra1.sed at the Plannlng COmmlSS1.0n meet1.ng. Analys1s
1n the Supplemental EIR lndlcates that the proJect IS 510 f1xed
parklng spaces, wlth abI11ty to provlde up to 100 addItlonal
spaces through valet/tandem parklng, wlll be suff1.Clent to meet
the proJect's parklng needs. ParkIng w1.ll be managed to ensure
that appropr Ia te utI11.zatlon of the par k Ing fae il i tles occurs.
On the lssue of whether the pro] ect 1.8 a new or an II amended II
proJect, the deslgn
prev10usly approved
Counc 11 on appeal 1S
appl1catlon.
clearly represents an evolutlon from the
proJect. In any case, the CommIss10n or
free to act on the mer 1 ts of the cur rent
Rev~ew of the heIght and scale Issues lndlcates that the proposed
proJ ect WIll conform to applIcable reg ulat~ons. A ffil.nOr
devIatlon from Code requlrements has been corrected by lowerlng
the over all pro] ect approx~mately one foot. The slopIng nature
of the lot produces an unusual sltuatlon. The proJect 15 wlthIn
the envelope establlsned by the average natural grade and
appllcable Land Use Element and Zonlng Code standards.
Staff 18 recommendlng that Plannlng Commlssloner's comments
concecnlng clrculatlon slgnage, c1rculatlon
the landscaped front setback areas be
approprlate condIt10ns of approval.
safety features and
lncorporated into
- 5 -
CITY COUNCIL AUTHORITY
Under the provls~ons of Sect~on 4 of Ord~nance No. 1321 (CCS),
the C~ty Council may aff~rm, reverse or modlfy any determinatlon
of the Planning Comm~ss~on in regard to a Development Permlt and
the deClSlon of the Clty Council shall be flnal. In approving an
appllcatlon the Commlss~on or Councll on appeal must make certaln
required f~ndlngs and may impose condit~ons to further the
purpose of Ord~nance 1321.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
If approved
approximately
such as the
as
reconunended,
the proJect would result
In
llcense Tax,
expenditures,
$837,000 ln annual municipal local tax revenues
Translent Occupancy Tax, Sales Tax and Business
and approximately $90,000 in annual municlpal
for a net flscal benefit of approximately $747,000
per year.
or fund
approval.
park tax
The proJect owner would also be obllgated to operate
the shuttle system speclfled in the conditions of
Non-recurrlng revenues would also be derlved from the
(a total of $ 69,800) and BUlldlng Perfil t and General
SerVlces fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully recorrunends that, conSlstent Wl th a plurall ty
of the Plannlng Conmussion who voted on th~s matter and the
- 6 -
or1g1nal staff recommendat1on, the appeal be granted and that the
C1ty CouncIl:
A) Conduct a publIc hearIng on the appeal provld1ng the
appellants and other lnterested members of the public to
have an opportun1ty to present theIr VIews.
B) Adopt the attached resolutIon certifYIng that EIA 778, the
Supplemental
EnVIronmental
Impact
Report
for
the
Redevelopment of
the Santa MonIca Bay
Inn Property,
adequately dIscusses all slgnlflcant envIronmental Issues,
and that the f1nal Supplemental EIR has been prepared In
compl1ance w1th CEQA, the State EIR GUIdelInes, and the CIty
of Santa MonIca CEQA GUIdel1nes, and that It has reviewed
and consIdered the contents of the flnal supplemental EIR In
Its deCISlon-maklng process.
C) Approve DR 291 and ZA 4880-A accordlng to the followIng
fIndIngs and subJect to the followIng condItIons:
Flnd1ngs:
(1) The development 18 cons1stent W1 th tne flndlngs and
purpose of Ord1nance 1321 as set forth below.
(2) The phYSIcal locatlon and placement of proposed
s~rUctures on the slte are compatIble WIth and relate
harmonIously to surroundlng SItes and ne1ghborhoods In
that the proJect, WIth the exceptlon of the rear yard
setback,
conforms
to
the
property
development
standards for the R4 zone.
The proJect provIdes
- 7 -
substantIal setbacks along all property lines and 1S
des Igned WI th publIC open spaces and balconIes WhICh
contr1bute to redUCIng the VIsual Impact of the
bU1lchng mass.
( 3)
The
eXIstIng
and/or
proposed
rIghts-of-way
and
faCIlItIes for both pedestrIan and automobIle traffIC
WIll be adequate
to accommodate
the
antICIpated
results
of
the
proposed
development
IncludIng
off-street par k1ng fac III t1es and access thereto In
that, as demonstrated In the Supplemental EIR, the
proJect WIll not contr Ibute a SIgnIfIcant Impact to
eXIstIng CIrculatIon patterns and that the parkIng
prOVIded exceeds the number of spaces reqUIred by the
MunIcIpal Code.
(4) The eXIstIng and/or proposed publIC and/or prIvate
health and safety features (IncludIng, but not lImIted
to, sanItatIon, sewers, storm draIns, fIre protectIon
deVIces, protectIve serVIces, and publIC utIlItIes)
WIll be adequate to accommodate the antICIpated
results of the proposed development.
( 5 )
The proposed development
IS conSIstent WIth the
Gener al Plan of the CIty of Santa MonIca and ZonIng
OrdInance In that ObJectIve 1.5 of the Land Use
Elemen t spec 1 f Ically calls for expansIon of VISI tor
accommodatIons and related uses In the Oceanfront
area, and WIth approval of the proposed rear yard
- 8 -
adJustment, the proJect compl~es w~th the Zon~ng
Ord~nance.
(6) The proposed development w~ll not preJud~ce the
ab~l ~ ty of the C~ ty to adopt a Spec~ f~c Plan for the
Oceanfront area ~n that the proJect ~s cons~stent w~th
the Land Use Element standards set forth under
ObJect~ve 1.5.
AdJustment F~nd~ngs
(1) That the proposed adJustment would not be detrimental
to the ne~ghborhood or d~str~ct ~n wh~ch the property
~s located ~n that wh~le part of the structure
~ntrudes ~nto the 15' rear yard, other port~ons
prov~de a setback greater than 151.
( 2 ) That the proposed adJustment IS necessary In order
that the applIcant may not be deprIved unreasonably In
the use or enJoyment of h~s property rIghts in that
the adJustment would enhance the physIcal desIgn of
the pro] ec t.
(3) That the proposed adJustment IS consIstent WIth the
legIslatIve Intent of Chapter 1 of Art~cle IX of the
Santa Mon~ca Mun~clpal Code, as expressed partIcularly
In SectIons 9101 and 9156 thereof In that It would not
be detrImental to the publIC health, safety and
general welfare, SInce the proJect generally provIdes
- 9 -
setbacks substant~ally greater than those requIred by
the MunIcIpal Code.
Development ReView ConditIons
The folloWIng condltlons of approval for DR 098 shall also apply
to DR 291:
(1) Owner shall ro1 tlgate the potent1al adverse Impact on
tne avaIlab~ll ty of affordable overnIght accom-
modat1ons In the CIty I S Coastal Zone caused by the
loss of the eXistIng n1nety-seven room motel by
entering Into a contrdct with the C1ty prOViding for
such mitIgatIon prIor to Issuance of a bUilding permit
for the proJect.
(2) The proJect owner shall contact the PolIce Department
1n order to identify and Implement appropriate deSIgn
and operatIonal features WhiCh maXimIze security.
(3) To mItigate fIre safety Impact, approprIate fIre-
suppreSSIon, emergency access and construction deSign
features shall be Implemented as reqUired by the City
Fire Department.
(4) To mItigate parking and traffIC Impacts the proJect
owner shall:
- 10 -
a. Arrange for approprIate van or bus serVIce to and
from Los Angeles InternatIonal AIrport for Hotel
guests.
b. prov Ide
local
publLc transLt dIsplays on-SIte
and headway schedules along wIth
ldentIfYIng
routes
promotIonal InformatIon concernlng destInatIons WIthIn
walkIng/tranSIt/bIkIng dIstance of the Hotel.
c. Provide maps to hotel patrons showlng locatIons of
restaurants, shopPIng areas, beach faCIlltIes, PIer
actIvItIes, etc. thac can be reached easlly by
walkIng.
d. Pay for converSLon of ArcadIa Autoway to a one-way
street, If the Clty chooses to do so.
e. Pay for removal of and provIde approprIate
reImbursement for lost revenue (up to $350 per meter
per year, for 20 years) from curb parkIng along Ocean
Avenue In order to ensure adequate SIght dIstance for
vehlcles If the CIty, after approprIate study, chooses
to do so.
f. GIve fIrst prIorIty to CIty residents for all
Hotel jobs not otherWIse fIlled by then-eXIstIng Hotel
employees subJect to the reqUIrements of State and
Federal laws.
- 11 -
g. Regulate
driveway off
per~ods.
timlng of
of Applan
deliverles by the
Way to avold peak
servlce
traffiC
h. provlde a shuttle system servlng the maJor local
areas of Hotel user destinatlons. The shuttle route
shall be set by the Cl ty and lncl ude the Downtown,
Santa Monloca Ploer, Maln Street and the Hotel. The
shuttle shall be owned and operated by the proJect
owner and shall be avallable for hotel and general
publlC use. The Shuttle shall operate on a schedule
establlshed by the Cl ty for at least 8 hours daily
with the understand~ng that the mlnlmum 8 hour block
of time could be broken lnto two parts to cOlnclde
Wl th peak Hotel demand. The vehlcles chosen shall
have a dlstlnctlve character that ln ltself would
promote tourlsm 1n general (for example a double
decker bus). The shuttle bus shall beg~n operatlon
when the Hotel reaches an lnltlal seventy (70) percent
occupancy rate. The Clty shall cons~der requlrements
that future hotels join ln supporting a slmilar
shuttle system wlth shared expenses. In lleu of
provldlng a shuttle serVlce, the Clty wlll reserve the
r 19ht to unllaterally requlre annual payment to the
Clty of annual shuttle operating costs lncludlng
replacement reserves and depreciation for fundlng a
Clty-sponsored shuttle system.
- 12 -
L EstablIsh and operate a rIde-sharIng program for
employees.
J. ProvIde bus tokens to employees at one-half cost.
k. Upon tak~ng meet~ng/banquet room reservat~ons,
hotel management shall routInely encourage that
veh~cle occupancy among attendees be maxlm~zed.
1. Regulate mee tlng banquet schedule to group 51 zes
that can be accommodated wIth on-s~te park~ng capacIty
at tImes wnen addl tlonal off-s~ te capacl ty cannot be
secured.
ffi. ProVIde a valet parkIng system In a port~on of the
parkIng garage durIng peak events to obtaIn addItIonal
aIsle and t3ndem spaces. The layout shall be approved
by the CIty ParkIng and Traffic EngIneer.
( 5 )
ProvIde
appcoprlate
pool dcainage hookups
to a
sanItary sewer lIne.
(6) Include a sIdewalk of not less than SIX feet In w~dth
and approprIate pedestrIan amen~t~es along the ArcadIa
Autoway edge of the property, IncludIng, but not
limited to decoratIve pavIng, landscapIng, and
11gntIng fIxtures.
The ArchItectural RevIew Board
shall reVIew the desIgn of the features.
The followIng condItIons of approval shall also apply to DR 291:
- 13 -
(1) Plans for fInal deSIgn, landscapIng, screenIng, trash
enclosures, and slgnage shall be sUbJect to reVIew and
approval by the ArchItectural ReVIew Board.
(2) The ArchItectural ReVIew Board, In theIr reVIew, shall
pay partIcular attentIon to the proJect's pedestrIan
orIentatIon and pedestrIan amenItIes; scale and
artIculatIon of deSIgn elements; exterIor colors,
textures and materials; WIndow treatment; glaZIng: and
landscapIng.
(3) The ArchItectural ReView Board shall reVIew the
landscaped area located In front of the retaIl uses on
Ocean Avenue and shall conSider whether a hardscape
treatment of that area would be approprIate.
(4) MInor amendments to the plans shall be subJect to
approval by the DIrector of PlannIng. Any SignIfIcant
change In the approved concept shall be subJect to
PlannIng CommiSSIon ReVIew. ConstructIon shall be In
substantIal conformance WIth the plans submItted or as
modIfIed by tne PlannIng CommISSIon, ArchItectural
ReVIew Board, or DIrector of PlannIng.
(5) The rIghts granted hereIn shall be effective only when
exerCIsed WIthIn a perIod of one year from the
effectIve date of approval. Upon the wrItten request
of the applIcant, the DIrector of PlannIng may extend
thIS perIod up to an addItIonal SIX months.
- 14 -
(6) The appl~cant shall comply wIth all legal reqUIrements
regardIng prOVISIons for the d1sabled, 1nclud1ng those
set forth 1n the Ca11fornia Adm1n~stratlve Code,
Tltle 24, Part 2.
(7) F1nal parkIng area layout and speclflcatlons shall be
subJect to the reVIew and approval of the Parklng and
Trafflc EngIneer. The ParkIng and Trafflc Eng~neer
shall partIcularly reVIew the need for approprIate
on-slte traffIc and parkIng Slgnage,
undulators or other safety features on the
SIte.
and for
project
(8) Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanlcal eqUIpment
shall be screened In accordance wi th Sec. 9ll7J. 2-4
(SMMC) . Refuse areas shall be of a SIze adequate to
meet on-SIte needs.
(9) 'rhe operatIon shall at all t1mes be conducted 1n a
manner not detr1mental to surroundlng propertIes or
reSIdents by reason of llghts, n01se, actIv1tles,
park1ng or other act1ons.
( lO )
No nOIse gener aCIng compressor s or
eqUIpment shall be placed adjacent to
reSldentlal bUlldlngs.
other such
neighborlng
(11) A secur1ty plan Shall be approved by the ChIef of
PolIce pr lor to lssuance of a CertIficate of
Occupancy.
- 15 -
(12) ProJect deslgn shall comply w~th the bUllding energy
regulations set forth ln the Callfornla AdmIn~stratIve
Code, Tltle 24, Part 2, (Energy Conservation Standards
for New Resldentlal BUlldlngs), such conformance to be
verIfied by the aUllding and Safety DIVIsion prlor to
lssuance of a BUIldlng PermIt.
(l3) Openable Windows Shdll be provIded throughout the
proJect, ln a manner conSIstent w~th applIcable
bUlld~ng code and energy conservatIon reqUIrements.
(14) The eXIstIng drIveways and aprons located at the slte
shall be removed and the ex~stIng curb cuts replaced
WIth standard curb and gutters per the speclflcatlons
of the Department of General SerVIces.
(15) Street trees
shall
be maln ta~ned ,
relocated
or
prov Ided as requIred In a manner conslstent WI th the
Clty'S Tree Code (Ord. 1242 CCS), per the specIfI-
catIons of the Department of RecreatIon and Parks and
the Depar tmen t of General Serv lces.
No street tree
shall
be
removed
wlthout
the
approval
of
the
Department of RecreatIon and Parks.
(16) Street and/or alley llghtlng shall be provIded on
publlC rIghts-of-way adJacent to the proJect If and as
needed per the specIfIcatIons and WIth the approval of
the Department of General Services.
- 16 -
..
(17) A Park and Recreatlon Facllltl.eS Tax of $200.00 per
hotel room shall be due and payable at the t1me of
lssuance of a bU11dlng permlt for the constructlon of
the hotel rooms on the subJect lot, per and subJect to
the provls1ons of Sect10n 6670 et seq. of the Santa
Monlca Munlc1pal Code.
( 18) In accordance W1 th the proll 1510ns of Ord lnance 1319
(CCS), appllcat10n for a Condltlonal Use PermIt shall
be requlred for the proposed alcohol outlet uses at
the slte, 1nclud1ng the two proposed restaurants.
Prepared by: Paul J. Sllvern, Dlrector of Plannlng
D. Kenyon Webster, Act1ng Manager, Program and
POI1CY Development D1V1S1on
Communlty and Econom1C Development Department
Attachments:
1)
2)
3)
4 )
5 )
6)
7 )
Supplemental EIR Resolutlon
ApplIcantls letter of appeal
Mayor Reedls letter of appeal
4/15/85 Plannlng Commlsslon staff report
ProJect plans
Flnal Supplemental EIR
Other envlronmental documentatlon
..
- 17 -