SR-12-B (17)
......
..
/jti Z --co t
'--~~" ,-
(lc;' '~ '
I( ;, U' -,_
~.'. ~ ---r '"' ... !
- I ,-'- Jv"''''-~
cjED:PJS:RM:ca
Councl1 Mtg: May 28, 1985
Santa Monlca, Californla
I~-:B
MAY 2 8 ,ns
TO:
Mayor and Clty Counel1
FROM: Clty Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of Plannlng Commlssion Denial of DR 294 and Z.A.
4840-U, 316 P1CO Boulevard (C4 and R3 Dlstricts), for
24-hour Fast Food Restaurant. AppllcantjAppellant:
Sotlrlos Alevlzos for Tom's #5 Restaurant.
Introductlon
ThlS lS an appeal from Plannlng CommlSSlon denlal on Aprl1 15,
1985, of a Development ReVlew Permit and Use Permlt for a 24-hour
fast food restaurant at 316 P1CO Boulevard. The appeal lS by Mr.
Sotlrlos AlevlZOs for Tom's #5 Restaurant.
Background
The proposal represents a change of use from a laundromat to a
24-hour fast food restaurant In a 1,100 sq. ft. lease space In a
4,600 sq. ft. one-story commerclal bUlldlng.
The restaurant would
front on P1CO Boulevard, wlth parking along the slde and to the
rear in a parking lot WhlCh extends into an R3 Dlstrlct and abuts
an eXlstlng apartment bUlldlng.
A detalled proJect descrlptlon
lS provlded In the attached Aprll 15, 1985, Plannlng Commlssion
staff report (see Attachment A).
Issues ra.lsed and dlscussed at the Plannlng Commlsslon' s publlC
hearlng lncluded eXlstlng nUlsance problems on the subJect slte;
securlty and publlC safety concerns, partlcularly the pdrtlally
hldden rear portlon of the parklng lot; sanltary concerns
relatlng to the trash dumpster locatlon adJacent to a resldentlal
use; the number of nearby 24-hour uses; the proxlmi ty of Santa
- 1 -
/.2 -B
HAY 281m
Mon~ca H~gh School, the C~v~c Auditor~um and the beach; trafflc
and circulatlon, especlally the impacts on Thlrd Street; the use
of the park~ng lot by other nearby buslnesses on property owned
by the same landowner; and the adequacy of the buffer between the
site and adJo~nlng res~dences.
The P1ann~ng COffiA~SS10n
the~r unan~mous den~al
stated numerous f~nd~ngs
on Apr~l 15, 1985, and
as a baS1S for
adopted formal
wrltten f~ndlngs on May 13, 1985 (see Attachment B). The
appl~cant f~led a t~mely appeal on Apr~l 3D, 1985 (see Attachment
C) .
Financial Impact
The recommendatlons presented ~n th~s report do not have a
budget/financ~al ~mpact.
Alternatlves
The Clty Counc~l may aff1rm the determinatlon of the Plann~ng
Commlsslon, reverse the determlnatlon and approve the appllcatlon
subJect to any approprlate condltlonS and wlth flnd~ngs requlred
by Ordlnance 1321 and Sectlon 9146 (SMMC), or remand the matter
back to the Commisslon Wl th speclflc gUldance as to how to the
Comm1ssion should proceed.
Recommendation
It ~s respectfully recommended that the Clty Councll:
1. Conduct a pub11C hearlng on the appeal affordlng the
appellant and any other lnterested members of the public
an opportunlty to be heard; and
2. Deny the appeal and afflrm the declslon of the Plannlng
- 2 -
CommlsSl0n to deny DR 294 and ZA 4840-U for a 24-hour fast
food restaurant, adoptlng the CommlsSlon's May 13, 1985,
flndlngs as ltS own.
prepared by: Paul J, Sllvern, Dlrector of Plannlng,
Rlchard Ml11s, Asslstant Planner
Plannlng and Zonlng D1V1S1on
Communlty and EconomlC Development Department
Attachments: A. Aprll 15, 1985, Staff Report
B. May 15, 1985, Plannlng Commlsslon Denlal Flndlngs
C. Aprll 30, 1985, Letter of Appeal
cc16
- 3 -
e
e
pqlAatMftt-J r k-.
PLAJ~NING AND ZONING DIVISION
Community and Economlc Development Department
M E M 0 RAN DUM
DATE:
April 1$, 1985
TO:
The Honorable P1annlng Commission
FROM:
Paul J. Sllvern, Dlrector of Planning
SUBJECT: DR 294, Z.A. 4840-U, 316 Pica Boulevard, C4 and R3,
Fast Food Restaurant, Tom's #5 Restaurant.
Summary: ThlS is an app11catlon for a development reVlew permlt
and a use permlt to allow a change of use from a laundromat to a
fast food restaurant. Appl1catlon is by Sot1rios Alevizos for
Tom's #5 Restaurant. Staff recommendation is for approval with
cond1tions.
~~-h~tl~ Condi t1ons: The 16,200 sq. ft. 51 te contains a 4,600
sq. ft. one-story multL-tenant commercial bULld1ng and a 20 space
parklng lot shared by build1ng tenants. The subject lease area
occuples approxlmately 1,100 sq. ft. of P1CO Boulevard frontage
space. The storefront, WhlCh is currently boarded up, was last
used as a retall laundromat. A vacant 900 sq. ft. lease space
and an eX1stlng automotive repair bUSlness occupy the remalnder
of "the bUlldlng. A Use Permit (Z.A. l63-U.P.) was approved 1n
1972 to allow the rear of the bUlldlng and the ffialn portion of
the park.1.ng area to extend into the R3 Distrlct at the rear of
the slte.
The parking lot has one-way clrculatlon, w1th lngress from P1CO
Boulevard and egress onto Third Street. It 1S in very poor con-
dition, wlth large areas of buckled pavement, potholes up to six
feet in diameter wlth standing water in them, no 1andscap1.ng or
screenlng, and only a Wlre fence adjacent to the apartment build-
ing to the south of the lot.
Prior to submi~tal of this appllcation, the applicant in1.tiated
various exterlor and ~nter1.or remodellng work without obta~nlng
necessary C1. ty permits. Stop work orders were issued by the
BUJ.lding Department and rema~n in effect pendJ.ng action on this
appllcation and the follow-up ArchJ.tectural Review Board and
Coastal Commission appl1catlons.
Abutting the slte on the east lS an ARCa AM/PM Mini-Mart gas sta-
tion. To the west,' ln one-story bUJ.ldings, are retail businesses
including a bicycle shop and liquor store, and a small furniture
refinishing business. A two-story multl-fami1y residential
buildlng abuts the s1.te's parking lot on the south.
- 1 -
e
e
Proposed ProJ~S:.!:.: Proposed 1S a 36-seat, fast-food restaurant,
to be operated as Torn's #5 Restaurant. Eight parking spaces in
the ad]oinlng parking lot would be reserved for the exclUSlve use
of the restaurant. Proposed hours of operation would be from
10:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M. seven days a week. No llquor license 1S
currently belng requested.
Torn's #5 was previously located in Santa Mon1ca at the corner of
Ocean Avenue and Plea Boulevard untll the restaurant moved to
Venice 1n 1981.
Municipal Code and General Plan Requlrements: Fast food res-
taurants are permltted ln the C4 Dlstrict with approval of a use
permlt. Land Use Element POllCY 1.2.4 lists fast food res-
taurants as one of a number of speclfic uses WhlCh may requlre
controls over their number, locat1on, or operation to I1mit ad-
verse lffipacts on surroundlng nelghborhoods. Accord1ngly, Or-
dinance 1321 (CCS) reqUlres approval of a development reVlew per-
mit for any change of use to a fast food bUslness.
The proposed restaurant requires a minlffium of one parking space
for every flve seats. Slnce 36 seats are requested, eight park-
lng spaces are required. (In practice, then, the restaurant
could have up to 40 seats.)
As a change of use withln an existlng buildlng, there are no 1S-
sues relatlng to height, bulk, floor area ratlo, or bUllding
sltlng.
CEQA Status: Categorlcally Exempt. Class 1, Santa Monlca GUlde-
llnes for-Implementatlon.
Analysls: A parking plan showlng 20 parklng spaces for the site
has been reviewed and approved by the Parking and Trafflc En-
gineer. Of these, eight are ava11able for restaurant use, the
remalnder being required spaces for the rest of ~he bUllding. As
noted above, the present condl tion of the parking lot is such
that the lot must be complet_ely resurfaced, strlped, landscaped
and screened before the it could funct10nally provlde requlred
parking for the proposed use. Det_alled condi t10ns of approval
address this concern.
In 1972, as a condition of approval of Z.A. 163-U.P., the parking
lot was required to be "paved, marked, bumpered and walled" in
accordance wlth then applicable sections of ~he Zonlng Ordinance.
A five to SLX foot high SOlld masonry wall adJacent to the neigh-
boring resldent1al lot was requlred, but never installed. The
current lack of repair of the parking lot also confllcts with the
intent of the 1972 cond1tions of approval. To ensure protectlon
of the public interest and nelghbor~ng properties, therefore, it
is recommended that no bUSlness l~cense for the proposed res-
taurant use (a more intense use than the prevlous laundromat use)
be issued until the parking lot renovatlon and requlred buffer
wall are completed.
- 2 -
e
e
As addi tlonal protectlon for the nelghborlng residentlal bUlld-
ing, condltlons are attached relatlng to restaurant hours of
operation and general conduct of buslness.
Determlnatlon: It is respectfully recommended that DR 294 and
Z.A. 4840-U be approved based on the following flndings and sub-
Ject to the following conditlons.
DeveloP1!'~1!f:_g~'\I'-!.~w1<'!.!!gin9~.
1. The development is consistent with the flndlngs and pur-
pose of Ordlnance 1321 as set forth below.
2. The physical locat1on and placement of proposed structures
on the site are compatlble with and relate harmoniously to
surrounding sites and nelghborhoods 1n that_ the bU1lding
currently eX1sts, lS one-story in he1ght and lS cons1stent
in scale and sitlng with other commercial development
along the commercial portions of P1CO Boulevard.
3. The existing and/or proposed rights-of-way and faCllitles
for both pedestrlan and automob1le traffic w1ll be ade-
quate to accommodate the antlcipated results of the pro-
posed development lncludlng off-street parklng facilitles
and access thereto 1n that_ the parking lot lS in place,
the Park1ng and Traffic Englneer has approved a parking
plan that wlll provide an adequate number of park1ng
spaces to meet Mun1cipal Code requirements for the pro-
posed use, and condl t:ions of approval ensure that the
parklng lot will be refurbished to provlde the requlred
on-s1te parklng.
4. The eXlsting and/or proposed publlC and/or private health
and safety facil1ties (includlng, but not limited to,
sanitation, sewers, storm drains, flre protection dev~ces,
protecti ve serV1ces, and publlC utlll tles) will be ade-
quate to accommodate the anticlpated results of the pro-
posed development.
5. The proposed development, as condl tloned, is conSlstent.
with the General Plan of the City of Santa Monica and the
Zon1ng Ordinance in that the proJect w1ll conform to the
height, bulk, use and urban deslgn pOll.CleS for the P1CO
Boulevard Commerc1al Corridor as specified 1n the Land Use
Element of the General Plan and conform to the appropriate
C4 D1str1ct standards contained 1n the Zoning Ordlnance.
~~~_~e~ml~_~~~~~~gS.
6. The proposed use and location are in accordance with good
Zon1ng practice, in the public lnterest and necessary that
substantial justice be done in that the building currently
eX1sts, is one-story l.n height and is cons1stent in scale
and siting with other commercial development along the
commercial portions of P1CO Boulevard.
- 3 -
e
e
7. The proposed use 1S compatlble with existlng and potential
uses wi thln the general area, trafflc or park1ng conges-
tion will not result, the publlc health, safety and
general welfare are protected and no harm to adJacent
propertles will result in that compliance with previously
approved Use Permlt Z.A. 163-U.P. is requ1red prlor to the
open1ng of the proposed restaurant, the Parking and Traf-
fic Engineer has approved a parking plan that will provide
an adequate number of parklng spaces to meet Municipal
Code requirements for the proposed use, condltions of ap-
proval ensure that the parking lot will be refurb1shed to
provide the requl.red on-s1. te parking, hours of operation
wl1l be llmi ted and a masonry buffer wall wl.ll be con-
structed to protect resldents of t~he adjacent multi-unit
residential bUl1ding from late night disturbances due to
noise and l1.ghts, and no liquor will be served by the
restaurant.
Condltl.ons:
1. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash en-
closures, and signage shall be subJect to reVlew and ap-
proval by the Archl.tectural Review Board.
2. Prlor to the Buildlng Department's fl.nal sign-off for 1n-
ter10r remodeling for the proposed restaurant, all ex-
terior remodell.ng, paintlng and signage completed without
proper C1ty permI. ts shall be removed w1.thin 30 days of
th1S actlon unless revlewed and approved by the Architec-
tural Revlew Board or modlfied to conform with a Board
approved plan.
3. The parklng lot shall be strlped, screened and landscaped
In conformance wlth Sec. 9l27.J.l and Sec. 9129.F.7
(SMMC). Flnal parklng lot layout and speciflcations shall
be subject to the reV1.ew and approval of the Parking and
Traffic Englneer.
4. Prlor to lssuance of a business l1.cense for the proposed
use:
a) The property owner shall comply w1th all conditions of
Z.A. 163-U.P., speclfically relatlng to parklng lot and
buffer wall requirements,
b) The Arch1.tectural Review Board shall review and approve
a final parkl.ng lot refurbishment, landscaping and
screening plan,
c) In accordance with Sec. 9127.1 (SMMC) and per Z.A. 163-
U. P., a 5 to 6 foot solid masonry wall shall be pro-
vided along the southerly property line which abuts the
adjoining residential property, and
d) Such improvements shall be substantially completed and
receive final Building Department l.nspection approval.
- 4 -
e
e
5. All inoperative veh~cles shall be removed from the parking
lot prior to final BU1lding Department inspect10n approval
for parking lot improvements. The park~ng area shall be
maintained for use as employee and customer park1ng only
and shall not be used for purposes of automoblle repalr or
finlsh1ng work or for the long-term (over one week)
storage of veh1cles.
6. The appl1cant shall comply wlth all legal requirements
regardlng provisions for the d1sabled, includlng those set
forth in the Callfornia Adminlstrative Code, Title 24,
Part 2. The handicapped park~ng space shall be relocated
adjacent to the restaurant portlon of the buildlng, unless
the Parking and Traffic Englneer spec1fically determ~nes
that it is not possible to do so.
7. Elght on-S1 te parking spaces shall be designated for the
excluslve use of the restaurant.
8. Based on the submltted application, the restaurant re-
qUlres elght parking spaces, which l~mits the restaurant
to no more than 40 seats. The Dlrector of Plann1ng may
approve an lncrease in the number of seats up to 50 if the
Dlrector is able to determ~ne that adequate park~ng 15
available on-slte. In no case shall the number of seats
exceed 50 Wl thout pr10r approval per the procedures set
forth 1n Ordinance 1321 (CCS) or 1n any subsequent
Municipal Code provlsions.
9. No llquor (lnclud1ng beer and wine) shall be served, un-
less such 1S approved per the prov1sions of Ordinance 1319
( CCS ) .
10. Hours of operatlon of the restaurant shall not extend
beyond 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.
11. Mlnor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval
by the D1rector of Planning. A significant change in the
approved concept shall be subject to Planning Commission
ReVlew. Construct1on shall be 1n substantlal conformance
wlth the plans submitt_ed or as mod1fied by the Planning
Comrnlss1on, Architectural Review Board or Director of
Plann1ng.
12. The r1ghts granted herein shall be effective only when
exercised within a per10d of one year from the effective
date of approval. Upon the wrltten request of the appll-
cant, the Director of Plann1ng may extend this perlod up
to an add1tional SlX months.
13. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equ1pment shall
be screened in accordance w1th Sec. 9117J.2-4 (SMMC). Re-
fuse areas shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site
need, and shall contaln no less than two standard trash
dumpsters.
- 5 -
e
e
14.
No nOlse
shall be
bUlldlngs.
generatl.ng compressors
placed adjacent to
or other such equlpment
nelghboring residential
15. The operation shall at all times be conducted ln a manner
not detrl.rnental to surrounding properties or resldents by
reason of lights, nOlse, activltles, parklng or other
act1.ons.
Prepared by: Richard M1Ils, Assistant Planner
PS:RM:rm
DR294
- 6 -
~.'rr~fC-1..JT IS
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
M E M 0 RAN DUM
DATE:
May 13, 1985
TO:
Honorable Plannlng Commisslon
FROM:
Paul J. S11vern, Dlrector of Planning
SUBJECT:
Denlal Findlngs for DR 294 and ZA 4840-U, Tom 's #:5
Restdurant, 316 Plca Boulevard
FINDINGS BELOW APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION ON MAY 13. 1985
Sl1l11l1lary: At lts Aprl1 15, 1985, meeting the Plannlng Cornmlssion
voted to deny the above noted appllcatlon and requested that
staff return wlth floal language for flndlngs of denial. Commis-
Sloners verbally noted speclflc flodings on Aprl1 15. These have
been incorporated into the followlng formal findlogs for adoptlon
by the COmmlSS10n.
The appllcaot, Mr. Sotlrlos Alevizos, submitted a formal appeal
to the Commlssion's determinatlOo on Aprl1 30, 1985. ThlS Ltem
wlll therefore be heard on appeal by the Clty Council. The date
of the appeal hearlng wll1 be made known to the CommlSSlon.
Denial Findings: DR 294 and ZA 4840-U, for a change of use from
a laundromat to a fast food restaurant, flIed by SotlrlOS
Alevizos for Tom's #5 Restaurant, are den1ed based on the
following flndlngs:
Development ReVlew Flndlngs:
1. The proposed use lS not conslstent wlth Land Use Element
policy 1.2.4 ln that it would result 1n a 24-hour and a fast
food use that would have an adverse lmpact on the adJacent
nelghborhood for the following reasons:
a. The subJect slte and parklng lot extend lnto an R3
res1dentlal dlstrlct and to w1thln flve feet of a two-
story apartment bUl1d1ng. 24-hour use of the parklng
lot would generate light and n01se immedlately adJa-
cent to resldentlal units at all hours of the day and
nlght.
b. Due to the conflguration of the parklng lot and sur-
roundlng bUlldlOgS, the rear portlon of the parklng
lot 1S hldden from Vlew from Pleo Boulevard thus
creatlng a safety and securlty hazard. ThlS portion
of the lot, WhlCh abuts a resldentlal property con-
ta~n~ng a two-story apartment buildlng, has had
- 1 -
securl ty problems ln the past and would represent an
lncreased safety and securlty risk to the nelghborhood
If a 24-hour fast food business operated on the slte.
c. The locatlon of an addltlonal 24-hour fast food use In
the nelghborhood would create an over-concentration of
such uses and lncrease adverse impacts such as llghts,
nOlse and the llkelihood of crlme on the surrounding
nelghborhood. 24 hour and/or fast food uses currently
exist lmmediately adJacent to the slte at Fourth
Street and P1CO Boulevard (Ar>-l/PM Minl Mart), and at
Ocean Avenue and P1CO Boulevard (Burger Plus) and Lln-
coin and Pleo Boulevards (Topp's). In addltion, a
late nlght llquor store (C1V1C Liquor) is located in a
commercial bUlldlng adJolnlng the subject slte.
d. The Sl te 1S one block from Santa Monlca Hlgh School,
directly across the street from the Santa Monlca Civic
Aud1torium, and four blocks from the beach, all of
WhlCh would serve to lDcrease the number of persons
who would be attracted to the proposed use and lnten-
slfy the adverse lmpacts on the adJacent neighborhood.
e. The on-site trash dumpsters are located adJacent to
the resldentlal bUllding to the south. Food wastes
from a restaurant would create an odor and pest prob-
lem and potentially attract transients looking for
food to the area.
2. The eXlstlng rlghts-of-way and faclllties for both
pedestrlan and automob1le traffic, lnclud1ng off-street
parking facllltles and access thereto, are not adequate to
accommodate the anticlpated results of the proposed use ln
that:
a. The parking lot is ln very poor condition, wlth large
areas of buckled pavement, potholes up to SlX feet ln
dlameter with occasslonal standlng water, no landscap-
ing or screenlng and only a wire fence adJacent to the
apartment bUlld1ng to the south of the lot.
b. The proposed restaurant requlres elght parking spaces.
The remalnder of the bUlldlng on the sUbJect slte re-
qUlres 12 addi tlonal spaces, maklng all 20 of the
Sl te IS 20 parklng spaces requlred spaces. However,
contrary to the lnformatlon supplled by the appllcant
on his appllcat1on, the slte's park1ng lot is shared
by bUSlnesses on other than the sUbJ ect site. AdJa-
cent bUSlnesses on an adJoining cornmerclal property
owned by the same owner as the subJect Sl te use the
subJect site I s parklng lot, resultlng In a parklng
shortage and requ1ring approval of a parklng varlance
before any lncrease In use lntensity on the sUbJect
slte could be approved. No parklng varlance appllca-
tlon was flIed in regard to thlS appl~catlon.
- 2 -
ThlS flndlng lS based on the followlng: Bicyclevl11e
owner Roger P1ker and manager John Euw1ng stated that
B1cyclev111e used s~x of the 20 spaces in the subject
Sl te I slot. C1 V1C Liquor has a storefront Slgn di-
recting customers to park In the rear, on the subject
slte's lot. Additlonal testlffiony at the hearlng sub-
stantlated thlS use of the lot.
c. The use would generate add1 tlonal trafflc on Third
Street, a resldentlal street I since the parklng lot
c1rculat10n pattern requires all vehlcles to eXlt onto
Thlrd Street.
d. The northernmost dlagonal parklng space 1S Sl tuated
such that a veh1cle must back up over the P1CO
Boulevard Sldewalk in order to get out of the parking
space and eXl t the lot, thus creatlng a pedestrian
hazard.
e. The eXlsting parklng lot is not in compliance Wl th
condltlons of approval of a prevlous use permlt allow-
lUg commerclal use on the subJect slte to extend ~nto
the R3 Dlstrlct. In 1972, as a condltlon of approval
of Z.A. 163-U.P., the parklng lot was requlred to be
"paved, marked, bumpered and walled" 1n accordance
w1th then appllcable sectlons of the Zoning Ordlnance.
A five to six foot hlgh SOlld masonry wall adJacent to
the nelghborlng reSldential lot was required, but
never lnstalled. The current lack of repair and lack
of proper screenlng of the parking lot conflicts wlth
the 1972 condltions of approval.
3.
An lncrease in the lntenslty of use and resultlng
1n use of the parklng lot on the subject site would
Wl th Land Use Element POI1CY 3.2.3. in that the
wire fence does not represent an appropr~ate buffer
sltlon to the ad]Olnlng resldentlal use.
lncrease
confllct
eXlstlng
or tran-
Use Permlt Flndlng:
4. Based on the speclflc lnformation noted In the above f1nd-
lngs, the proposed use and locatlon are not 1n accordance
Wl th good zonlng practlce, are not in the public lnterest
and are not necessary for substantial ]Ustlce to be done.
The proposed use 15 not compatlble w1th existlng and poten-
t~al uses wlthln the general area, trafflc or parklng con-
gestlon may result, the publlC health, safety and general
welfare are not adequately protected and harm to adJacent
propertles may result.
Prepared by: Rlchard Mills, Asslstant Planner
ZA4840U
- 3 -