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