Loading...
SR-12-B (14) t( tJ 2- ..- {/{[Jg IZ-6 SEP I 3 191i CjED:RAS:KR:ca Council Meeting: September 23, 1986 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and city council FROM: city staff SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning commission Decision Approving Development Review 337, Conditional Use Permit 428, 2526 pico Boulevard. Applicant: Gilberto Rodriguez Sr. Appellant: Gilbert Rodriguez, on behalf of Gilberto ROdriguez Sr. INTRODUCTION This report recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and Uphold the Planning Commission's approval, subject to conditions, to permit the removal of a single story building and the construction of a 1484 sq. ft. 50 seat addition to an existing restaurant totaling 2,279 sq. ft. with 70 seats. BACKGROUND On October 3, 1983 following a Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission approved DR 198 for an addition of 645 sq. ft. to the rear of the existing El Indio Restaurant. As part of this addition, a customer entry was provided at the rear of the restaurant, the facade was remodeled, and per the Parking and Traffic Engineer's specifications, the parking lot was restriped to accommodate 24 cars, and a total of 70 seats were provided. In approving the project, the Planning Commission imposed standard conditions of approval which included a condition that the business be operated in a manner not detrimental to the surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, parking or lZ-5 - 1 - sa I 3 \~\:i~ other actions. Except for some complaints from the neighbors concerning noise from patrons, the project has been in conformance with its conditions of approval. On July 7, 1986, following a public hearing, the Planning Commission voted seven to zero to approve Development Review 337, Conditional Use Permit 428 for the removal of a single story building and construction of an addition to an existing restaurant at 2526 pico Boulevard, subject to the findings and conditions noted in the staff report (Attachment A), as amended in the statement of Official Action (Attachment B). An appeal of the Planning Commission action has been filed by the applicant's attorney on behalf of the applicant, Gilberto Rodriguez Sr. (Attachment C). The applicant's basis of appeal concerns the Planning Commission's conditions regarding the location of the restaurant entrance, hours for trash disposal, landscaping requirements, and the direction to the Architectural Review Board to carefully review the design of the proposed addition in relation to the existing building. ANALYSIS As proposed, the proj ect is consistent with the Municipal Code and in conformity with the policies of the Land Use Element. In approving the project, the Planning commission limited entrances to the restaurant to one main entrance on Pico Boulevard and required that exterior hardware on the doors located on the east and west elevations of the project be limited to an exterior key lock with interior panic hardware. This requirement was imposed - 2 - in response to concerns raised by the adjacent neighbors to the south who indicated that the existing rear entrance has resulted in increased noise and illegal parking problems in the alley and who stated they felt that the relocation of this entrance to the west side of the building would not alleviate these problems. The Planning Commission felt that by limiting the restaurant entrance to Pico Boulevard, the existing noise problems in the parking lot and illegal parking in the alley would be greatly reduced. In approving the project the Planning Commission prohibited trash disposal before 8:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. This condition was imposed in response to neighbors concerns regarding noise problems. The Planning Commission also required that the corner of 26th street and the alley be cut back to a 45 degree angle and the 8' fence along the property line at the alley shall be stepped down at the corner to provide visibility. This condition was imposed in response to the neighbors I concerns regarding safety. At the public hearing the Planning Commission expressed their concern regarding the design of the new addition in that it represents a departure from the Spanish style of the existing building. In approving the proj ect, they directed the Architectural Review Board to carefully review the proposed addition to insure its compatibility with the existing building and the treatment of the parapet wall to insure its compatibility with the existing rooflines. - 3 - CITY COUNCIL AUTHORITY Under the provisions of Section 4, Ordinance 1321 and section 9148 (SMMC) the City Council may affirm, reverse or modify any determination of the Planning commission in regard to a Development Review Permit and Conditional Use 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 to protect the public welfare. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT The recommendation in this report has no budget or fiscal impacts. RECOMMENDATION Staff respectfully recommends that the city Council deny the appeal and affirm the decision of the Planning Commission adopting the findings and conditions contained in Attachment B. Prepared by: R. Ann Siracusa, Director of Planning Suzanne FriCk, Principal Planner Karen Rosenberg, Associate Planner Attachments: A. Staff Report to Planning Commission July 7, 1986 B. Statement of Official Action C. Letter of Appeal, Gilbert Rodriguez, Attorney at Law for Gilberto Rodriguez, Sr. July 28, 1986 D. Letter to Eric Falkowski, Parking and Traffic Division from Gilbert Rodriguez I September 10, 1986 RAS:KR:nh CCDR337 09/16/86 - 4 - r"'- ~ -e,b ( EXHIBIT A ( CITY PLfu~NING DIVISION Co~unlty and EconOW1C Development Department M E MaR AND U M DATE: July 1, 198C TO: The EonorQble Plannlng COmffilSS10n FROM: R. Ann Slracusa, Dlrector of Planning SUBJECT: DR 337, CUP 428, '10 Perml t the Removal of a Slngle Story Buildlng and Construction of a 1484 sq. ft. Add1tlon W1.th 50 Seats to an EXlstlng Restaurant Totalllng 2279 sq. ft. with 70 Seats. Address: Appl1cant: 2526- Plr.O Boulevard G11berto Rodrlguez SITE LOCATION M\D DESCRIPTIOK The sUbJect property is a 5400 sq. ft. parcel located on the south slde of P1CO Boulevard between 25th Street and 26th Street, hav1ng a frontage of 54 feet. Surrounding uses cons1st of a church (C4) to the north, slnglt famlly resldentlal (Rl) uses to the south, commerclal uses (C4) to the east and the eX1.stlng restaurant (C4) to the west. Zonlng Dlstrlct: C4 Land Use Dlstrlct: Comnerclal Corrldor Parcel Area: 54' x 100' = 5400 sq. ft. [new 51. te j L 7[.00 sq.ft. eXlstlng lot] PROPOSED PROJECT The proposal lS for the add1.t1on of 1484 sq. ft. to an eXlst1.ng 70 seat restaurant. With the new addlt10n a total of 120 seats wlll be prov1.ded. A CUP 15 requlred ln th~t seatlng lS belng increased by more thdn 25%. The addltlon wlll replace the eXlst1ng on-51 te parklng along the west slde of the bUl.ld1ng. The eX1.stlng nursery school bUlld1.ng on the east slde of the eXlstlng restaurant wlll be removed and replaced by parklng. Add 1 tlonally, the eXlst1ng curb cut on P1CO Boulevard wlll be closed and a new curb cut for 1ngress and egress wlll be provlded on pica Boulevard. Currently, the restaurant parklng lS completely accesslble from the alley. The appllcant proposes to close th1S access wlth an 8 foot cha1.n 11nk fence screenEd wlth vlnlng and only provlde a slngle eXlt from the restaurant at the alley. The parklng and Clrculatlon plan has been approved by the Clty'S Trafflc Englneer. - 1 - ( ( MUKICIPAL CODE AND GEKERAL PLAN COKFORMANCE The proposed proJect lS conslstent wlth the Munlclpal Code and In conformlty wlth the General Plan as shown ln Attachment A. CEQA STATUS The proJect lS categorlcally exempt Monlca GUldel1nes for lmplementatlon. frOM CEQA, Cl ty of Santa (Class 1 (5b)). FEES The proJect lS exempt from the hous1ng and parks mlt1gatlon progra~ contalned ln the adopted Land Use Element. fu"JAL YS I S Currently the restaurant has a customer entrance on P1CO Boulevard and one at the -r.ear of the bUlldlng. In that the rear entrance 1S adJacent to the parklng area lt has become the prlmary entrance to the restaurant. 'These two entrances were approved by the Plannlng Comm1SSlon ln 1983 (DR 196) when the restaurant applled for a 645 sq. ft. addltlon. Over the past several IPonths, the a.dJacent n€lghbcrs who 11 ve across the alley to the south have ralsed concerns about lncreased nOlse from the custower parklng area and rear entrance. They have also indlcated that customers tend to park lllegally ln the alley. In order to ml tlgate these problems the appllcant proposes to 1nstall an 8' h1gh fence at the rear property llne and relocate the rear entrance to the west Slde of the new addltlon. Th1s entrance wlll be located adJacent to the restaurant's new wa1tlng area WhlCh lS larger than the eXlst1ng wal t1ng area. The appll.cant also prcposes to relocate the P1CO Boulevard customer entrance to the front of the new bU1ldlng. A th1rd entrance lS proposed on the east slde of the eXlstlng buildlng. This entrance w111 be for dellverles only and wl11 not be used as a custOF.er entrance. The neighbors have lnd1cated to plannlng staff that they are concerned that the restaurant customers may stlll congregate outslde the new slde entrance on the west s1de of the bu~ldlng creatlng exceSSlve nOlse WhlCh w1l1 contlnue to dlsturb the nelghbors. The neighbors have suggested that the restaurant be llmlted tc one customer entrance on pico Boulevard. However, under Sectlon 3303A of the Unlform BUlldlng Code, 1982 Edltlon, a mlnlffium of two customer entrances are requlred for restaurants over 50 seats. Plann1ng staff feels that the appllcant has adequately addressed the nelghbors concerns by screenlng the~r parklng at the alley and relocatlng the rear entrance to the west slde, therefore staff supports the entrance locatl.ons as proposed. As proposed, departure from their rev~ew, reVlew the compatlblllty the des~gn of the new addltlon represents a the spanl.sh style of the existlng bUlldlng. In the Archl tectural ReVlew Board should carefully deslgn of the proposed addltlon to ~nsure wlth the eXlstlng bUlldlng. They should pay - 2 - ( ( pdrt1cular attent10n to the artlculat10n of the parapet wa~l, the proposed wlndow treatment, bUlldlng colors, rrater1als, landscap1ng and screenlng. CONCLUbION As proposed, the proJect 1S conslstent with the provls1ons of the Munic1pal Code and the pol1cles of the Land Use Element. In that a second customer entrance 1S requ1red under the Unlfor~ BUlldlng Code and the appllcants have addressed the neighbors concerns by screenlng the lot and relocatlng the new entrance away from the nelghbors properties as well as provldlng a larger waltlng room 1n the restaurant, Plannlng staff supports the proJect as submltted. RECOl>1HENDATION Plannlng staff recommends approval of DR 337 sUbJect to the follow1ng f1ndings and cond~~lons. FINDINGS 1. The development lS cons1stent with the flndlngs and pur- pose of Ordlnance 1321 as set forth below. 2. The physlcal locatlon and placeroent of proposed structures on the slte are compatlble wlth and relate harmonlously to surroundlng sltes and nelghborhoods In that the proposed addltlon wll1 be placed adJacent to the eXlstlng bUlldl0g and screening and landscaplng wl1l be provlded along the alley to mlnlffilze the lmpact on the adJacent property. 3. The eXlstlng and/or proposed r1ghts-of-way and faclIltles for both pedestrlan and autoIT'oblle trafflC wlll be ade- quate to accornmoda te the antlcl.pated results of the pro- posed development lDCludl.ng off-street parklng fac1I~tles and access thereto in that 24 parklng spaces w~th lngreSS and egress from Plea Boulevard and egress to the alley wlll be provlded on slte. 4. The existlng and/or proposed publlC and/or prl.vate health and safety facl.lltl.eS (l.ncludl.ng, but not ll.ffilted to, sanl.tatlon, sewers, storm drdlns, flre protectlon devlces, protectl. ve serV1ces, and publl.c utl.11 ties) wl.lI be ade- quate to accommodate the ant1c1pated results of the pro- posed developQent. 5. The proposed deveIoPQent lS conslstent w1th the General Plan of the Clty of Santa Mon1ca dnd the Zonlng Ordlnance in that the proJect wl.II conform to the hel.ght, bulk, use and urban des1gn pallCl.eS for the Plca Commerc1al Corrldor as spec1fl.ed l.n the Land Use Element of the General Plan and conform to the approprlate C4 standards contained 1n the Zonl.ng Ord1nance. - 3 - (- ( Alcohol Outlet F2ndlngs 1. The proposed use and locatlon are In accordance wl~h good zonlng practlce, ln the publlC lnterest, and necessary that substantlal Justlce be done in that thlS restaurant already has a general splrl ts license and the proposed addltlon of seatlng will not affect parklng and trafflc condl tlons In that addl tlonal parking to meet Munlclpal Code requlrernents Wl th an lmproved clrculatlon plan lS provided for the restaurant. 2. The proposed use 18 cornpatlble with eXlsting and potential uses Wl thln the general area; trafflc or parklng congestlon w2ll not result; the publlC health, safety, and general welfare are protected; and no harm to adJacent propertles wl1l result 2n that ample on slte parklng and screenlng wlll be provlded for the restaurant. 3. The welfare of nelghborhood resldents wlll not be adversely affected in that the bUSlness already operates wlth a general Splrlts llcense and no change to the eXlstlng llcense classlflcatlon lS proposed. 5. There w2ll be no detr1mental affect on nearby resldentially zoned nelghborhoods conslder1ng the dlstance of the alcohol outlet to resldentlal bUlldlngs, churches, schools, hospltals, playgrounds, parks, and other eXlstlng alcohol outlets In that thls establlshment currently operates wlth an eXlstlng general sp1rlts llcense and the condltlons for approval wlll mlnlmlze the potentlal affect on the adJacent resldentlal uses. Spec1al Condltlons 1. The Archltectural ReVlew Board, ln thelr reVlew, shall pay part1cular attentlon to the proJect I s compatlbl11 ty \"/1 th the eXlstlng bUlldlng scale and artlculatlon of deslgn elements, treatment of the parapet wall, exterlor colors, textures and materlals, wlndow treatwent; glazlng and landscap1ng. 2. The eXlstlng driveway(s) and apron(s), located on P1CO Boulevard shall be removed and the eXlstlng curb cut (s ) replaced wlth standard curb and gutter per the speclflca- tlons of the Department of General Servlces. 3. On-slte parklng shall be made avallable wlthout cost to bUllding customers and employees. Standard Condltlcns 1. Plans for final deslgn, landscaplng, screenlng, trash en- closures, and slgnage shall be subJect to reVlew and ap- proval by the Archltectural Revlew Board. - 4 - ( ( 2. Mlnor amendments to the plans shall be subJect to approval by the Dlrector of Planning. An lncrease of more than 10% of the square footage or a slgnlflcant change 1n the ap- proved concept shall be subJect to Plannlng Comrr:lSSlon Revlew. Constructlon shall be 1n substant1al conformance Wl th the plans submitted or as rnod1.fled by the Planning Commlsslon, Archltectural ReVlew Board or Dlrector of Plannlng. 3. The rlghts granted herel.n shall be effectl ve only when exerClsed wlthl.n a perlod of one year from the effect1ve date of approval. Upon the wrltten request of the appll- cant, the Director of Plannlng may extend th1S perlod up to an addltlonal SlX months. 4. The applicant shall comply w1th all legal requlrements regardlng prov1sions for the dlsabled, lncludlng those set forth In the Call fornla Adrrlnlstratl ve Code, Tl tle 24, Par t 2. 5. The parklng lot shall be striped, screened and landscaped 1n conformance w1th Sec. 9l27.J.l and Sec. 9l29.F.7 ( SNMC) . 6. Flnal parkl.ng lot layout and speclflcatlons shall be sub- Ject to the reV1CW and approval of the Parklng and Trafflc Englneer. 7. Refuse areas, be screened Refuse areas need. storage areas and mechanlcal equlprrent shall In accordance wlth Sec. 9127J.2-4 (SMMC). shall be of a Slze adequate to meet n~-slte 8. The operatlon shall at all tlmes be conducted ln a manner not detrimental to surroundlng propertles or resldents by reason of llghts, nOlse, actlvltles, parklng or other actlons. 9. No nOlse shall be bUlldlngs. generatlng compressors placed adJacent to or other such equlpment nelghborlng resldentlal 10. Street trees shall be malntalned, relocated or prov1.ded as requ1red in a manner conslstent wlth the Clty'S Tree Code (Ord. 1242 CCS), per the speclflcatlcns of the Department of Recreatlon and Parks and the Vepartment of General Ser- Vlces. No street tree shall be removed Wl thout the ap- proval of the Department of Recredtlon and Parks. 11. Street and/or alley l1.ghtlng shall be provlded on publlC rlghts-of-way adJacent to the proJect If and as needed per the speclflcatlons and WJ.th the approval of the Department of General SerVlces. 12. Any outdoor llghtlng shall be shlelded and/or away from adJacent resldentlal propertles, w1th dlrected any such - 5 - ( r \ ll.ghtlng not to exceed 0.5 foot candles of l.llurllnatlon beyond the perlmeter of the subJect property. Alcohol Outlet Condltl.OnS 1. The restaurant shall not serve alcoholl.c beverages In the bar area after ffil.dnl.ght but may contl.nue to sell alcoho11c beverages In the d1n1ng area. 2. Park1ng lot 1.11uffi1.natlon shall be provlded and malntalned. 3. The owner shall prohlb1t lOl.terl.ng l.n the park1ng area and shall control nOlsy patrons leavl.ng the restaurant. 4. The prlmary use of the preml.ses shall be for Sl.t-down meal serVl.ce to patrons. 5. In order to malntaln the prl.mary use of the prem1.ses for S1.t-down ~eal serVlce, patrons shall-not be perml.tted to use the bar unless they are Wal.tlng to be seated fer real serVlces. 6. The premlses shall malntal.n a kl.tchen or food-servlng area In whl.ch a varl.ety of food l.S prepared and cooked en the preml.ses. 7. The preml.ses shall serve food to patrons durlng all hours the establlshment 1.S open for customers. 8. Seatlng arrangements for slt-down patrons shall not exceed 120 seats and the number of total seats shall r:.ot be expanded by more than 10% unless approved by the Clrector of Plannl.ng. 9. No addl.tl.onal seats may be added unless addltlonal parklng l5 prov1.ded. 10. Take out serV1.ce shall be only lnc1.dental to the prlrrary slt-down use. 11. No alcohollC beverage shall be sold for consuDptl.On beyond the prenuses. 12. No danclng or llve entertaln~ent shall be permltted on the premJ..s€.s. - 6 - ( ATTACHr>1EN'I A MUNICIPAL CODE AKD GENERAL PLAK CONFORMANCE Category Perrnltted Use Helght F .A. R. Parklng BunlClpal Code C4: permlts restaurants 6 storles, 90' N/A EXlstlng: "10-- seats at 1:5 seats = 14 parklng spaces Addl tlon: 50 seats at 1:5 seats = 10 parklng spaces Land Use Element permlts restaurants 2 storles, 30' 1.5 SaI'1e as Munlclpal Code ( ProJect 1484 square foot restaurant addl- tlon to restaurant tota111ng 2279 square foot 1 story, 14'6" .28 24 parklng spaces provlded Prepared by: Karen Rosenberg, ASSOclate Planner KR:ca DR0337 7-2-&6 - 7 - EXHIBIT B STATE~ENT OF OFFICIAL ACTIOK PROJECT NCMBER: CR 337, CUP 428 LOCATION: 2526 P~co Boulevard APPLICANT: G~lberto Rodr~guez REQUEST: To Permlt the Removal of a S~ngle Story Build~ng and Construct1on of a 1,464 Sq.Ft. Addlt~on W~th 50 Seats to an Ex~st~ng Restaurant Totalling 2,279 Sq.Ft. With 70 Seats. PLANNING CGM~1ISSIO~ ACTION--- 7-7-66 Da te . x Approved based on the followlng flnd~ngs and sUbJect to the condit~ons below. Den~ed. ether. FIKDINGS 1. The development lS conslstent W~ th the f~nd~ngs and pur- pose of Ord~nance 1321 as set forth below. 2. The phys~cal locatlon and placement of proposed structures on the s~te are compatible w~th and relate harmonlously to surround~ng s~tes and ne~ghborhoods ~n that the proposed addltlon wlll be placed adJacent to the eXlstlng bUlldlng and screenlng and landscC:i.ping wlll be provlded along the alley to ffilnlffilze the lmpact on the adJacent property. 3. The eXlstlng and/or proposed rlghts-of-way and faClllties for both pedestr1an and automoblle traff~c wlll be ade- quate to accommodate the antlclpated results of the pro- posed development lncluQlng off-street parking faCllltles and access thereto In that 24 parking spaces with lngress and egress fron F1CO Boulevard and egress to the alley wlll be provlded on slte. 4. The eXlstlng and/or proposed publlC and/or prlvate health and safety fdCllltles (lncludlng, but not Ilffilted to, sanltation, sewers, storm dralns, flre protectlon devlces, - 1 - protectl ve serVlces, and publlC utlll. tles) wlll be ade- quate to accoITmodate the antlcl.pated results of the pro- posed development. 5. The proposed development is conSl.stent wlth the General Plan of the Cl.ty of Santa Monlca and the Zon~ng Qrdlnance l.n that the proJect w11l conform to the he1ght, bulk, use and urban deslgn pol1c1es for the pico COITmerc1al Corr1dor as specl.fl.ed l.n the Land Use Element of the General Plan and conform to the approprl.ate C4 standards conta1ned 1n the Zonlng Ordl.nance. Alcohol Outlet F1ndl.ngs 1. The proposed use and locatlon are l.n accordance with good zonlng practl.ce, in the public interest, and necessary that substantlal ]ustl.ce be done In that thlS restaurant already has a general Spl.rl ts llcense and the proposed add1. tl.on of seatl.ng--wJ::ll not affect -parklng and traffic condl. tl.ons In that addi tlonal parkl.ng to meet MUnl.C1pal Code requlrements Wl. th an lmproved C1.rculatlon plan lS provlded for the restaurant. 2. The proposed use lS cOITpat1.ble wlth eXlstl.ng and potentlal uses Wl. thl.n the general area; trafflC or parklng congestl.on wl.ll not result; the publlC health, safety, and general welfare are protected; and no harm to adJacent propertl.es w1.11 result l.n that ample on S1 te parklng and screenl.ng wlll be provlded for the restaurant. 3. 1he welfare of nelghborhood res1dents will adversely affected 1.n that the buslness already w1.th a general sp1.r1.ts llcense and no change eXlstlng 11.cense classiflcatlon 1.S proposed. not be operates to the 5. There wlll be no detr1.mental affect on nearby reSl.dentlally zoned nelghborhoods cons1.der1.ng the dlstance of the alcohol outlet to resldential bUlldl.ngs, churches, schools, hospl.tals, playgrounds, parks, and other eXlstlng alcohol outlets 1n that thlS establlshment currently operates wlth an eXlstl.ng general Spl.rlts ll.cense and the COnd1.tlons for approval wlll ffil.nl.rnlZe the potential affect on the adJacent reSl.dentlal uses. Speclal Condltlons 1. The Arch1.tectural ReVlew Board, l.n the1.r reVl.ew, shall pay partlcular attentl.on to the proJect's cornpatlbl1lty wlth the eXl.st~ng bUl.ldl.ng scale and art.lculatlon of deslgn elements, treatment of the parapet wall WhlCh shall be compatl.ble with the eXlstl.ng roofllnes, exterlor colors, textures and ~aterlals, wlndow treatITent; glazlng and landscaplng. 2. The eXlstl.ng dr 1 veway (s) and apron (s) , located on P1CO Boulevard shall be removed and the eXl.stl.ng curb cut (s) - 2 - replaced wlth standard curb and gutter per the speclflca- t~ons of the Cepartment of General Serv~ces. 3. On-s~ te parklng shall be made ava~lable Wl thout cost to bUlld~ng customers and employees. 4. An 8' fence and screen~ng mater1al to lnclude vlnlng with an automatlc lrr1gat1on system shall be provlded alcng the property Ilne at the alley. 5. The corner of 26th Street and the alley shall be cut back at a 45 angle and shall be sUbJect to the approval of the ParKlng and Trafflc Eng1neer. The fence shall be stepped down at this corner to provlde ViSlbl11ty. 6. Splkes shall be added at the alley eXlt to prohlblt auto- rroblles from enterlng the park1ng lot from the alley. 7. A 51-ngle maln ent-rance shall be - provlded on P1CO Boulevard. No other customer entrance shall be provlded. Exterlor hdrdware on the doors WhlCh are located on the east and west elevatlonb shall be 11ffilted to a key lock, no other hardware shall be permltted. 8. An luterlor door shall be lnstalled and rema1n closed. at the east end of the hallway adJacent to the restrooms to lndlcate that the eXlt door lS an emergency eXlt only. 9. hours of operatlon shall p.m. Sunday-Thursday and Saturday. be 11mi tea to 8:00 a.m.-l:OO 8:00 a.m.-ll:OC Fr lday and a.m. 10. No trash QUmplng shall occur before 8:00 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m. 11. The ARB shall carefully reVlew the deslgn of the wall lo- cated on the eastern property 11ne to lnsure that lt lS properly capped to prevent people from Sl ttlng on 1 t. Outdoor seat1ng areas shall only be provlded alcng the Flca Boulevard elevat1on. Standard Conditions 1. Plans for flnal deslgn, landscaplng, screen~ngl trash en- closures, and s1gnage shall be SUbJect to reVlew and ap- proval by the Architectural ReVlew Board. 2. Mlnor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Dlrector of Plannlng. An lncrease of more than 10% of the square footage or a slgnlflcant change In the ap- proved concept shall be subject to Plannlng Comrr1sslon ReVlew. Constructlon shall be ln substantlal conformance Wl th the plans subml t ted or as modl fled by the P lannlng Commlsslon, Archltectural Revlew Board or Clrector of Plannlng. - 3 - 3. 'The rl.ghts granted here~n shall be effecLl. ve only when exerclsed Wl thln a perlod of one year from the effectl. ve date of a~proval. Upon the wrl.tten request of the appll.- cant, the Dlrector of Plannlng may extend thlS perloa up to an addl.tlonal 51X months. 4. The appllcant shall comply wlth all legal requl:::-eMents regardlng provlslons for the dlsabled, lncludlng those set forth in the Callfornla Adpunl.strat1 ve Code, Title 24, Part 2. 5. The parklng lot shall be strl.ped, screened ana landscaped 1n conformance wlth Sec. 9127.J.l and Sec. 9129.F.7 (SNNC) . 6. Flnal parklng lot layout and speclf1cat1ons shall be sub- Ject to the reVlew and approval of the Parklng and Trafflc Engl.neer. 7. Refuse areas, be screened Refuse areas need. storage areas and mechanlcal eqUl.pment shall 1n accordance wlth Sec. 9127J.2-4 (SMMC). shall be of a Slze adequate to ll'eet on-s1te 8. The operatlon shall at all tlIDes be conducted 1n a ~anner not detrlmental to surround1ng propertles or resldents by reason of llghts, n01se, actlv1tles, parkl.ng or other actlons. 9. No nOl.se shall be bl..ald1ngs. generat1ng compressors placed adJacent to or other such equlprrent. nelghbor1ng res1dent1al 10. Street trees shall be ma1nta1ned, relocated or prov1ded as requlred 1n a manner conslstent wlth the Clty'S Tree Code (Ord. 1242 CCS), per the speclf1cat1ons of the Lepartrrent of Recreatlon and Parks and the Department of General Ser- Vlces. No street tree shall be removed \oil thout the ap- proval of the Department of Recreatlon and Parks. 11. Street and/or alley 11ghtlng shall be provlced on publ1C rlghts-of-way adJacent to the proJect 1f and as needed per the speciflcat10ns and wlth the approval of the Department of General Serv1ces. 12. Any outdoor 11ght1ng shall be sh1elded and/or dlrected away from adJacent residentl.al propert1es, Wl. th any 51..1ch llghtlng not to exceed 0.5 foot candles of l.llur.unatlon beyond the perlmeter of the sUbJect property. Alcohol Outlet Condltlons 1. 1he restaurant shall not serve alcohcll.c beverages 1n the walt1ng area after mldnlght but may contl.nue to sell alcohollC beverages 1n the dlnlng area. 4 - 2. Parklng lot lllu~lnatlon shall be provlded and malntained. 3. The owner shall dlscourage lOlterlng In and shall exerClse reasonable control leavlug the restaurant. the parking area of nOlsy patrons 4. The prlmary use of the premises shall be for slt-down meal serVlce to patrons. 5. In order to malntaln the prlmary use of the premises for slt-down meal serVlce, patrons shall not be perm1tted to use the bar unless they are waltlng to be seated for meal serVlces. 6. The premlses shall malnta1n a kltchen or food-serving area In whlch a varlety of food is prepared and cooked on the prem1ses. 7. 'Ihe prerrlses shall- serve food to patrems dur1ng all hours the establ1shment 15 open for customers. 8. Seatlng arrangements for slt-down patrons shall not exceed 120 seats. 9. Ko addltlonal seats ~ay be added unless addltlonal park1ng 1S provldeci. 10. Take out serVlce shall be only lncldental to the prlmary slt-down use. 11. No alcchollC beverage shall be sold for consuwpt1on beyond the prerrlses. 12. No danclng or Ilve entertalnment shall be perm1~ted on the premlses. VOTE Ayes: Farlvar, Shearer, Perlman, Hecht Israel, Klrshner, Hebald-Heymann, Nays: Abstaln: Absent: - 5 - .. ,. I hereby cert~fy that th~s Statement of Official Act~on accurate- ly reflects the I1nal determination of the Planning Commiss1on of the City of Santa Monica. ~~ slgnz.ture d" //p c. date / G: r f- ~--t;: Ai ~C tc/- r-- prlnt na~e and t1tle C'.// ~ ;,;e. KR: nh STDR337 07/17/86 - 6 - EXHIBIT C LAW OFFICES PICCO, PRESLEY & RODRIGUEZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW EL PASEO PLAZA, SUITE 110 2121 CLOVERFIElD BOULEVARD SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90404-5201 GREGORY L PICCO MARGARET G. PRESLEY GILBERT RODRIGUEZ TELEPHONE. (213) 829-541~ (213) 453-0385 July 28, 1986 Honorable Planning Comm1ss1on Plann1ng and Zon1ng C1ty of Santa Mon1ca 1685 Ma1n Street, Room 212 Santa Monica, California 90401 Re: Notice of Appeal from Decision of Planning Comm1ssion, July 7, 1986 2526 Pico Boulevard, Santa Monica, Ca1iforn1a Dear Sir: The applicant, Gilberto Rodr1guez, Sr., hereby gives notice of h1s intention to appeal the dec1sion of the Planning Commission, which was made on July 7, 1986. That dec1s1on approved the applicat10n for an addition to and remodeling of the existing structure located at 2526 pico Boulevard, Santa Mon1ca. The application was approved subJect to conditions; a copy of the draft of the statement of offic1al action 1S attached hereto for reference. The subject conditions are not completely acceptable to the app11cant and the applicant hereby f11es his appeal of the approval and respectfully requests that the conditions regard1ng the entrance locations, dumping of trash, the parking lot landscaping, and the condit1ons dealing with the project's compatab1l1ty w1th the existing structure be reviewed and modified to allow for a west entrance, deletion of the land- scaping requirement, for more san1tary and suitable conditions for the trash dumping and acceptance of the proposed design of the parapet walls of the proposed add1t1on. The applicant w111 provide further comments and information to supplement this appeal. Very truly yours, PICCO, PRESLEY & RODRIGUEZ cc: R. Ann S1racusa, .. " r:XHJRI':' D LAW OFFICES PICCO. PRESLEY & RODRIGUEZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW EL PASEO PLAZA SUITE 110 2121 CLOVERFIELO BOULEVARD SANTA MONICA CALIFORNIA 90404 5201 GREGORY L PICCO MARGARET G PRESLEY GIlBERT RODRIGUEZ TELEPHONE. (213) 829-5414 (213)453-0085 , ~ September 10, 1986 k ~ , ~ Eric Falkowsk~ Department of Traffic and Engineering 1685 Main Street, Room 115 Santa Monica, California 90401 Re: Property located at 2526 Picco Boulevard Dear Mr. Falkowski: This will confirm the fact that on Tuesday, September 2, 1986, Mr. patricia CUlqUl reviewed the plans for the remodeling of the above descr~bed premises w~th you as they pertain to the park~ng requ1rements. After that interview, you indicated to him that such plans d~d not conform to the legal requ~rements as called for by the applicable bU11d~ng and safety codes for the City of Santa Monica. Said plans were subm~tted to you pursuant to the Statement of Off~cla1 Actlon for project number DR 337, CUP 428, and more spec~f~cally de11neated under number 6 of Standard Condit1ons, "F1nal parking lot layout and specif~cat1ons shall be subJect to the rev~ew and approval of the Parklng Trafflc Englneer." A copy of this letter will be presented to the members of the City Councll as part of the appeal of the Planning Commlsslons' decls10n approving Development ReVlew 337, Cond~tlonal Use Permit 428, 2526 P~co Boulevard. Very truly yours, PICCO, PRESLEY & RODRIGUEZ GR:lg BY7~<?;Z:~ .f;fLBERT RODRIG'UEZ II ) {~__torney at Law / CC: Karen Rosenberg Associate Planner/City Planning Division 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, Califonria 90401-3295