SR-12-A (20)
fn--t/tJ?-
I~-A
SEP - 8 1981
CjED:SF:KR:nh Santa Monica, California
Council Mtg: september 8, 1987
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Development
Review 391, To Permit the Construction of a 3 Story,
14,720 Sq. Ft. 24 Room Hotel with subterranean and
At-Grade Covered Parking Totalling 26 Spaces.
Applicant: Giorgio Dazzan, A.I.A. Appellant: Carol
Waldrop on Behalf of Michel Construction, Giorgio
Dazzan, A.LA. I....'B~ Dee-AN
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and
uphold the Planning Commission's denial of Development Review 391
for the construction of a 3 story 24 room hotel totalling 14,720
sq. ft. On July 6, 1987, the project was deemed denied by the
Planning Commission in that four votes could not be obtained for
any motion.
Carol Waldrop, on behalf of the applicant, is
appealing the decision (Exhibit A) .
BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes to remove an existing parking lot on the
east side of Ocean Avenue between Broadway and Santa Monica
Boulevard and construct a 3 story, 14,700 square foot 24 room
hotel with subterranean and at-grade parking totalling 26 spaces.
Access to the parking is provided from both the street and alley.
The ground floor includes retail spaces, the hotel lobby and
I~-A
SEP - 8 1981
- 1 -
covered parking and the second and third floors each contain 12
units.
Under Ordinance 1321 (CCS), this project falls within the square
footage threshold to exempt it from Development Review. However,
Planning staff was unable to find this project consistent with
the Land Use and Circulation Element policies concerning the
definition of floor area and dual-access to the on-site parking
and therefore required it to be brought before the Planning
Commission to determine if appropriate findings could be made to
approve the project as proposed (Exhibit B). At the Planning
Commission hearing on July 6, 1987 motions to both approve and
deny the project failed and the project received a technical
denial (Exhibit C). On July 9, 1987 Carol Waldrop, on behalf of
Michel Construction, Giorgio Dazzan, A.I.A., appealed the
determination.
ANALYSIS
Under the Land Use and circulation Element floor area is defined
as any portion of a building that accommodates activity in the
building or contributes to the visual mass and bulk of the
building. Floor area is the net floor space in a structure and
shall include restrooms, lounges, kitchens, partitions, storage
areas, interior and exterior hallways and corridors, interior
atria, and the like, but shall not include exterior and load
bearing walls, stairways and stairwells, elevators and shafts.
Floor area shall include at-grade and above-grade covered parking
but does not include at-grade, uncovered parking and subterranean
- 2 -
parking. Floor area devoted to at-grade and above-grade parking
shall be counted at two-thirds of its actual floor area if:
1. The floor devoted to parking does not exceed 10' in
heighti
2. There is at least one level of underground parkingi
3. At-grade and above-grade parking levels are sufficiently
screened from view (especially from the view of residents
in adjacent residential neighborhoods) and the design of
the parking levels is compatible with the design of the
buildingi and
4. There is no parking on the ground floor within a
reasonable leasing depth of the front property line
(401-501) which should be devoted to retail or other uses.
within the first 45 · of the front property 1 ine this proj ect
includes a 411 square foot retail space, the hotel lobby,
elevator, stairwell and an access ramp to the enclosed parking
area. The retail space extends approximately 26' back from the
front property line. If the at-grade covered parking is counted
at two-thirds of its floor area then the floor area ratio for the
proj ect is 1. 96.
However, if the at-grade covered parking is
counted at its actual floor area, then the floor area ratio for
the project is 2.2 which exceeds 2.0, the permitted FAR for this
district.
Planning staff maintains that the at-grade covered
parking should be counted at its actual floor area since the
second floor area does not comply with the Land Use Element
provision that requires a leasing depth of 40 to 50 feet from the
front property line.
At the July 6, 1987 Planning Commission hearing the Commission
members expressed concern regarding inclusion of a curb cut on
Ocean Avenue.
- 3 -
Policy 3.3.2 of the Land Use and Circulation Element states the
following:
Ensure continuity of the sidewalk by limiting curb cuts;
locating parking behind buildings and below grade; and,
except for development on large parcels in the Ocean
Front/civic Center area (such as the Rand site and civic
Auditorium) the Special Office District, and at the Airport,
encouraging vehicular access from alleys and side streets.
Encourage alley and side street access only when the
potential traffic intrusion into adjacent residential
neighborhoods is minimized.
The appellant maintains that by denying the project on the basis
of the inclusion of a curb cut on Ocean Avenue, a precedent would
be set for 50 foot wide parcels in the area. Additionally the
amount of floor area that actually can be built on these parcels
would be effectively reduced in that fewer parking spaces can be
provided on-site when only alley access is provided. While this
may be true, staff maintains that driveway access should be
permitted from Ocean Avenue only for large parcels or where no
reasonable alternative access is available.
However, while a
curb cut would be a negative impact of the project, it would be
permissible under the Land Use Element and is not the primary
basis for the recommendation of denial. Rather, it is the FAR
overage, driven by the lack of retail to a depth of at least 40'
which in turn necessitates the counting of the at-grade parking
at
full
FAR val ue,
that
forms
the
basis
of
staff's
recommendation.
CITY COUNCIL AUTHORITY
Under the provisions of Section 4, Ordinance 1321, the City
Council may affirm, reverse or modify any determination of the
- 4 -
Planning Commission in regard to a Development Review Permit and
the decision of the City Council shall be final. In approving an
application, the Council, on appeal, must make appropriate
findings and may add conditions necessary to protect the public
welfare.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendations presented in this report do not have a
budget/fiscal impact.
RECOMMENDATION
staff respectfully recommends that the City Council deny the
appeal and affirm the decision of the Planning commission denying
Development Review 391 with the following findings.
FINDINGS
1. The development is inconsistent with the findings and
purpose of Ordinance 1321 as set forth below.
2. The proposed development is inconsistent with the General
Plan of the city of Santa Monica in that the project is
inconsistent with the floor area definition as specified
in the Land Use Element of the General Plan as it pertains
to counting the at-grade covered parking at two-thirds its
floor area in that the ground floor includes non-leasable
areas wi thin the first 40' to 50' of the front property
line.
Prepared by: Karen Rosenberg, Associate Planner
Suzanne FriCk, Principal Planner
Planning Division
Community and Economic Development Department
Exhibits:
A. Letter of Appeal, July 9, 1987 from Carol
Waldrop on behalf of Michel Construction,
Giorgio Dazzan, A.I.A.
- 5 -
KR:nh
PC/CCDR391
08/27/87
B. July 6, 1987 Planning Commission staff Report.
C. statement of Official Action.
- 6 -
\::;O'I'Vl\Q. , \
.. ...
r
(-
f1 MleJJ
.c...--- . -
CAROL WALDROP & ASSOCIATES
Planning and Development ConsultIng
CITY OF ~~:-:T ~ Ia1 ,r-
CITY PLA."m\ ~ OP~~.!t
. - .. f r!L..t:
.i7 JL 13 Pz :l6
July 9, 1987
Ms. Suzanne Frick
Planning Division
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
, Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: 1453 Ocean Avenue, DR 391
Dear Suzanne:
./
This letter is to request an appeal, on behalf of Michel Construction,
(Giorgio Dazzan, Applicant) of the Planning Commission denial of
DR 391 on Monday, July 6, 1987. The basis for the appeal is as
fo11 ows:
1. The project was denied because the Conmission could not
garner four votes either for approval or denial. The vote
was 2 to 2 to deny and 2 to 2 for approval.
2. The only articulated reason for the motion to deny was that
one Commissioner could not support the project because it
had a curb cut on Ocean Avenue.
3. The Commission did not respond to the staff request for a
determination as to whether the at-grade parking qualified
for the square footage discount provided for by the Land Use
Element.
4. In denying the project solely on the basis of a driveway
opening on Ocean Avenue, the Commission has set a precedent
for that property and any other 50-foot wide parcel by
effectively reducing the development potential from 2.0 FAR
to the amount of square footage which can be permitted in
relation to the amount of parking that can be provided by
bringing parking access entirely from the alley. (a 50'
wide parcel does not provide enough width for a circular
ramp to parking).
If the City wishes to construct the development potential of
small lots by imposing a prohibition on curb cuts at the
1603 Camberwell Place. Westlake Village. California 91361 · (805) 497-9610
{
(,
to ~..
Suzanne Frick
July 9, 1987
Page 2
street frontage, the City should, after deliberation and
consideration of the City-wide implications of that decision
and holding public hearings, amend its ordinance so that
restrictions apply equally, or provide criteria by which to
decide under what circumstances a curb cut at the street
footage may be permitted, or should be denied.
5. In technically denying the project, the Conmission has
bypassed the opportunity to provide moderate-rate hotel
rooms in the coastal area to offset the loss of affordable
accommodations to major new "up-scale" hotel and mixed use
developments. Since the inception of this project, the
app 1 i cant has planned and des i gned the hate 1 to prov i de
affordable, moderate-rate lodging for visitors to the Santa
Monica Coastal Area, and is willing to provide reasonable
assurances to the City to that effect.
/ Enclosed is a check for $75.00 to ensure the appeal. Please notify me
when a date is set for hearing.
Sincerely,
Q;:f~~
kjs
enclosures
cc: Giorgia Dazzan
docllsflet2
"
(
~\b\t- B
c
74
. s
CITY PLANNING DIVISION
Community and Economic Development Department
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 6, 1987
TO: The Honorable Planning commission
FROM: Planning staff
SUBJECT: DR 391, To permit the construction of a 3 story 14,720
square foot 24 room hotel with subterranean and
at-grade covered parking totaling 26 spaces.
Address:
Applicant:
1453 Ocean Avenue
Giorgio Dazzan, AIA
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The subject property is a 7,500 sq.ft. parcel located on the east
side of Ocean Avenue between Broadway and Santa Monica Boulevard
having a frontage of 50 feet. Surrounding uses consist of
commercial and residential uses (C3 ) to the north, commercial
uses (C3) to the south, commercial uses (C3) to the east, and
palisades Park (R4) to the west.
Zoning District:
C3
Land Use District:
Oceanfront District
Parcel Area:
501 X 1501
PROPOSED PROJECT
The applicant proposes to remove an existing parking lot and
construct a 3 story, 14,720 square foot 24 room hotel with
subterranean and at grade parking totaling 26 spaces. Access to
the parking is provided from both the street and alley. The
ground floor includes retail space, the hotel lobby and covered
parking, and the second and third floors each contain 12 units.
Under Ordinance 1321 (CCS), this project falls within the square
footage threshold to exempt it from Development Review. However,
Planning staff is unable to find this project consistent with the
Land Use and circulation Element policies concerning the
definition of floor area and dual-access to the on-site parking.
Therefore, the project is before the Planning commission to
determine if appropriate findings can be made to approve the
project as proposed.
- 1 -
(
c
t
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The proposed project is consistent with the Municipal Code and
inconsistent with the General Plan as explained in the analysis
section. (Attachment A)
CEQA STATUS
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA,
city of Santa Monica Guidelines for Implementation (Class 3
(14) ) .
FEES
The project is exempt from the Housing and Parks Mitigation
program contained in the adopted Land Use and Circulation
Elements.
ANALYSIS
Land Use Element Inconsistencies
Policy 3.3.2 of the Land Use and Circulation Element states the
following:
Ensure continuity of the sidewalk by limiting curb cuts;
locating parking behind buildings and below grade; and,
except for development on large parcels in the Ocean
Front/Civic Center area (such as the Rand site and Civic
Auditorium) the Special Office District. and at the
Airport, encouraging vehicular access from alleys and side
streets. Encourage alley and side street access only when
the potential traffic intrusion into adjacent residential
neighborhoods is minimized.
Planning staff is unable to find consistency between this project
and Policy 3.3.2, in that this proposal includes vehicular access
from both the alley and street which will not ensure the
continuity of the sidewalk.
Under the Land Use and Circulation Element floor area is defined
as any portion of a building that accommodates activity in the
building or contributes to the visual mass and bulk of the
building. Floor area is the net floor space in a structure and
shall include restrooms, lounges, kitchens, partitions, storage
areas, interior and exterior hallways and corridors, interior
atria, and the like, but shall not include exterior and load
bearing walls, stairways and stairwells, elevators and shafts.
Floor area shall include at-grade and above-grade covered parking
but does not include at-grade, uncovered parking and subterranean
parking. Floor area devoted to at-grade and above-grade parking
shall be counted at 2/3rds of its actual floor area if:
1. the floor devoted to parking does not exceed 10 I in
height;
- 2 -
(
(
2. there is at least one level of underground.parking;
3. at-grade and above-grade parking levels are sufficiently
screened from view especially from the view of residents
in adjacent residential neighborhoods and the design of
the parking levels is compatible with the design of the
building; a.nd
4. there is no parking on the ground floor within a
reasonable leasing depth of the front property line
(40'-50') which should be devoted to retail or other uses.
within the first 45' of the front property line, this project
includes a. 411 square foot retail space, a 554 square foot lobby
and an access ramp to the parking area. If the at-grade covered
parking is counted at 2/3 of its floor area then the floor area
ratio for the project is 1.96. However, if the at-grade covered
parking is counted at its actual floor area, then the floor area
ratio for the project is 2.2 which exceeds 2.0, the permitted FAR
for this district. In that the front 45' of the project includes
non-leasable areas planning staff is unable to make the necessary
findings to approve this project administratively.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff respectfully recommends that the Planning
Commission take one of the fOllowing actions:
1. Deny the project on the basis that the project is
inconsistent with the Land Use &- circulation Elements and
direct staff to return with findings for denial at the July
20, 1987 meeting.
2. Find consistency with the Land Use and circulation Elements,
approve the project and direct staff to draft findings and
conditions for approval and return to the Commission with
them at the July 20, 1987 meeting.
Prepared by: Karen Rosenberg, Associate Planner
PC:KR:ca
pc/DR391
06/30/87
- 3 -
,
.
(
i14)x~l~
ATTA.ENT A
,
J
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Category
Permitted Use
Height
F.A.R.
Parking
Municipal cod~
C3: General
Commercial
District
permits
retail, hotels
and general
c01I\Inercial uses
6 stories, 90'
N/A
24 rooms @
l/room = 24
411 sq. ft.
retail @
1:250 sq. ft. II:
2
26 spaces required
Land Use
Element
Oceanfront
District:
permits
visitor serving
commercial uses
3 stories, 45 ,
2.0
Same as
Municipal Code
- 4 -
(
project
26 room hotel with
ground floor
retail
3 stories,
2.2 with parking
counted at full
FAR 1.96 with
parking at 2/3/
FAR
26 parking spaces
provided
..
i.
b41\b\t Q
(
(
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT
NUMBER: DR 391
LOCATION: 1453 Ocean Avenue
APPLICANT: Giorgio Dazzan
REQUEST: To Permit the Construction of a 3 story, l4,720
Sq.Ft. 24 Room Hotel with subterranean and At-
Grade Covered Parking Totalling 26 Spaces. Ap-
plicant: Giorgio Dazzan.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
7/6/87
Date.
Approved based on the following findings and
subject to the conditions below.
Denied.
x
Other. Deemed Denied, could not obtain four
votes for any motion.
VOTE FOR APPROVAL:
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Vacancy:
Farivar, Nelson
Lambert, Perlman
Burns, Hecht
One
VOTE FOR DENIAL:
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Vacancy:
Lambert, Perlman
Farivar, Nelson
Burns, Hecht
One
- 1 -
~.I ~
,
r
\
X hereby certify that this statement of
accurately reflects the final determination
Commission of the city of Santa Monica.
signature
print name and title
STDR391
KR: nh
07/13/87
- 2 -
(
Official Action
of the Planning
date