SR-12-B (25)
t!t?Z-C/tPZ
12-~
OCT 1 ,1987
C/ED:SF:KR:nh
Council Mtg: October 13, 1987
Santa Monica, california
TO: Mayor and city Council
/.2 -/-7
OCT 27 1987
FROM: City staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Development
Review 367, EIA 836, Zone Change 28, To Permit the
Removal of a 21 unit Motel and the Construction of a 4
story, 66 Room Addition to an Existing 3 story, 82 Room
Hotel at 2801 Santa Monica Boulevard with 118 On-Site
Parking Spaces. Applicant/Appellant: Ron Milberger
for Solberg and Lowe Architects, A.I.A.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council remand Development
Review 367, Environmental Impact Assessment 836, back to the
Planning Commission and uphold the appeal and reverse the
Planning Commission I s denial of Zone Change 28 for the
construction of a 4 story, 66 room addition to an existing 3
story 82 room hotel. On July 20, 1987 the project was denied by
the Planning commission by a 6-1 vote. Ron Milberger on behalf
of Solberg and Lowe Architects, A.I.A. is appealing the decision
(Exhibit A) .
BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes to remove the existing 21 unit Dawn Dee
Motel and construct a 4 story, 66 room addition to the existing
82 room Comfort Inn at 2801 Santa Monica Blvd. Nineteen parking I'~_JQ
spaces below the existing building will be retained with accesOCT 2 7 1987
from the alley at the rear of the building and a total of 35
at-grade parking spaces will be provided on the ground floor of
- 1 -
12-8
OCT 1 ., 19&1
the new addition. Access to these spaces will be provided from
Santa Monica Boulevard and Harvard street. An existing driveway
along Santa Monica Boulevard will be removed. Additionally, the
existing surface parking lot to the rear of the site will be
restriped, and a total of 64 parking spaces will be provided.
Access to this lot will continue to be provided from Harvard
street and the two alleys adjacent to the lot. In 1971 a
variance was issued to permit this R2 lot to be used for surface
level parking in connection with the motel operation. The
applicant is requesting a zone change for this property to R2A
which permits surface level parking lots.
At the July 20, 1987 meeting, the Planning Commission heard the
applicants request for the hotel addition (Exhibit B). Following
the pUblic hearing the Planning Commission denied the applicant's
request for a 4 story, 66 room hotel addition and proposed
rezoning based on the findings outlined in the statement of
Official Action (Exhibit C). On August 3, 1987 Ron Milberger on
behalf of Solberg and Lowe Architects, A.I.A., appealed the
Planning Commission decision.
ANALYSIS
The Planning Commission denied the project on the basis that the
proj ect is inconsistent with POlicy 3.2.1 of the Land Use and
Circulation Element in that the proj ect does not step down or
relate to the height limit of the adjacent 2 story residential
buildings to the north and that, as proposed, the project fails
to include landscaping in the parking lot to buffer the project
- 2 -
from the adjacent residential property. Policy 3.2.1 of the Land
Use and Circulation Element states the following: "Allowable
height limits for commercial and industrial uses should step down
or otherwise relate to the height limit of the adjacent
residential zone to reduce visual intrusion, shading and scale
incongruity. II Planning staff maintains that the mitigation
measures outlined in the Final Initial study to include adding
articulation along the rear elevation, varying the setbacks on
the upper floors and providing a clearly defined pedestrian
entrance at the rear elevation will reduce the visual mass of the
building and mi tiga te its effect on the adj acent neighborhood
(Exhibi t D). Addi tionally, staff maintains that the adj acent
surface level parking lot provides a transition between the
commercial buildings on Santa Monica Blvd. and the residential
buildings on Harvard Street. Additionally, Planning staff
recommends that the parking lot be screened and landscaped in
conformance with Municipal Code requirements.
In denying the proposed zone change to rezone the surface level
parking lot from R2 to R2A, the Planning Commission made the
findings that the existing land use is a legal non-conforming use
which should be reverted back to residential use as part of the
redevelopment of the adjacent site for the hotel expansion and
that the existing parking on this lot should be incorporated on
the hotel site thereby making the R2 property available for
residential development or open space.
Policy 1.2.2 of the Land Use and Circulation Element states the
following:
- 3 -
Surface parking lots zoned residential adj acent to highway
commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for
residential use or public open space on the surface (use for
underground parking is acceptable). This policy shall not
apply to lots zoned "A" Off-Street Parking District.
In that the applicant proposes to restripe the lot, one could
argue that this constitutes redevelopment.
Planning staff
maintains that this is a minor modification to an existing use,
will not alter the characteristics of the site or represent a
further encroachment of a commercial use into a residential area
and therefore Policy l.2.2 is not relevant in this case.
The existing variance permitting surface level parking on the R2
lot does not have an expiration date.
The Draft Zoning
Ordinance, if adopted, would impose a sunset clause of 20 years
requiring the elimination of commercial parking lots in
residential zones.
with the adoption of this requirement, the
Comfort Inn would lose 51 existing spaces whether or not the
proposed expansion is approved unless a zone change is permitted.
Planning staff maintains that by rezoning this lot from R2 to
R2A, the ability to develop residential units on the property is
not eliminated and parking for the existing Comfort Inn and any
expansion will be provided over the long term.
Planning staff believes that with the addition of articulation on
the rear elevation to include the provision of additional setback
areas on the upper floors, that the project is consistent with
the policies and objectives of the Land Use and Circulation
Elements. Additionally, staff maintains that in order to ensure
that adequate off-street parking for the existing motel and new
- 4 -
addition are provided over the long-term, the R2 lot should be
rezoned to R2A and that the lot be appropriately screened with a
3' high block wall and a minimum 20' front setback which shall be
landscaped along Harvard street. Additionally, one tree for
every 1,200 square feet of paved area shall be provided in the
lot.
CITY COUNCIL AUTHORITY
Under the provisions of section 4, Ordinance 1321 (CCS) , the city
Council may affirm, reverse or modify any determination of the
Planning commission in regard to a Development Review Permit and
the decision of the city Council shall be final. Under the
provisions of 9l49C4 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC),
the city council may affirm, reverse or modify any determination
of the Planning Commission in regard to a zone change 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 uphold the
appeal and reverse the decision of the Planning commission
approving Zone Change 28 with the attached findings. Staff
- 5 -
further recommends that the City Council direct the applicant to
redesign the project, adding additional articulation on the rear
elevation to include the provision of additional setback areas on
the upper floors, provide landscaping to meet Municipal Code
requirements, in the parking lot as well as the proper loading
zone and remand Development Review 367 and Environmental Impact
Assessment to the Planning Commission for their consideration.
ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
1. The public necessity, public convenience and general wel-
fare require the proposed zone change from R2 to R2A in
that the change will not alter the existing land use
characteristics of the site; and it will ensure the con-
tinued availability of off-street parking for the existing
hotel and new addition, while not eliminating the ability
to develop residential units on the site in the future.
2. Good zoning practice requires the proposed zone change
from R2 to R2A in that the change will conform the zoning
classification to the existing land use on the property in
question; does not represent a change in intensity or na-
ture of the land use; does not represent a further en-
croachment of commercial uses into residential areas, pro-
vides an adequate buffer between the commercial develop-
ment on Santa Monica Boulevard and the abutting R2
residential development on Harvard street; and will ensure
that adequate parking continues to be provided for the
existing motel and new addition.
Prepared by: Karen Rosenberg, Associate Planner
Suzanne Frick, Principal Planner
Planning Division
community and Economic Development Department
SF:KR:nh
PC/CCDR367
09/17/87
Exhibits: A. August 3, 1987 Letter of Appeal from Ron Milberger
on behalf of Solberg and Lowe Architects, A.I.A.
B. July 20, 1987 Planning Commission staff Report.
c. statement of Official Action.
D. Final Initial Study for Comfort Inn.
- 6 -
~.
~OLBERG + LOWE
ARCHITECTS AlA
] ncorporated
1901 MaIn SHeer
Sama MOnica, CA 904()5
(21')1392-95:2[
August 3, 1987
Cl tv of Santa MOnica
Planmng and Zonmg OlvlSlon
\685Mam Street, Room 2\2
Santa MOnlca, Ci\ 9040 J
Attn Karen Rosenberg
RE Comfort Inn J)v2.*,,-=f-
Dear Karen.
t;~ \-ibiT- It
ClTY OF S~".;T!l. MONICA
CITY PLANN, QFF!C[
OS7 AUG -3 P2 '07
In that we dIsagree wlth the fmdmg of the Plannmg ComrmsslOn wlth reference to the
abovementlOnecl project, we wish to appeal the ruling Enclosed you wlll fmd 6 check for
$7500 (seventy-fIve dollars) If there are any QuestlOns, please do not hesItate to cal'
Most Smcerely,
Ron MIl berger
RM/mc
cc Charles T10g
.;:
tt<VI,btl"- B
CITY PLANNING DIVISION
Community and Economic Development Department
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 6, 1987
TO: The Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: DR 367, EIA 836, Zone Change 28, To Permit the Removal
of a 21 Unit Motel and the Construction of a 4 story,
66 Room Motel Addition to an Existing 3 story 82 Room
Motel. A Zone change is Requested to Permit the R2
Zoned Lot at the Rear to be Rezoned R2A.
Address:
Applicant:
2801 Santa Monica Blvd.
Charles Ting
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The subject property is a 32,400 square foot parcel located on
the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard between Harvard street
and Yale Street having a frontage of 216 feet. The subject
property also includes a 15,000 square foot surface level parking
lot located behind the site on the east side of Harvard street
between Santa Monica Boulevard and Arizona Avenue having a
frontage of 80 feet. Surrounding uses consist of multi family
residential uses (R2) to the north, commercial uses (C4) to the
south, commercial uses (C4) to the east, commercial uses (C4) to
the west.
Zoning District:
C4, R2
Land Use District:
Commercial Corridor, Residential
Parcel Area:
C4: 216' x 150' = 32,400 sq. ft.
R2: 80' x 187.5' = 15,000 sg.ft.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The propos,iil is to permit the removal of the existing 21 unit
Dawn Dee Motel and the construction of a 4 story 66 room addition
to the existing 82 room Comfort Inn at 2801 Santa Monica
Boulevard. Nineteen parking spaces below the existing building
will be retained with access from the alley at the rear of the
building and a total of 35 at-grade parking spaces will be
provided on the ground floor of the new addition. Access to
these spaces will be provided from Santa Monica Blvd. and Harvard
street. An existing driveway along Santa Monica Boulevard will
be removed. Additionally, the existing surface parking lot to
the rear of the site will be restriped, and a total of 66 parking
- 1 -
spaces will be provided. Access to this lot will continue to be
provided from Harvard street and the two alleys adjacent to the
lot. In 1971 a variance was issued to permit this R2 lot to be
used for surface level parking in connection with the motel
operation. At this time the applicant is requesting a zone
change for this property to R2A which permits surface level
parking lots.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The proposed project is consistent with the Municipal Code and in
conformity with the General Plan as shown in Attachment A.
CEQA STATUS
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project and approval
of a Negative Declaration is recommended. A public review period
commenced on May 22, 1987 and concluded on June 22, 1987 and no
comments were received. The Final Initial study is attached.
FEES
The proj ect is not subj ect to the Parks and Housing Mi tiga tion
Fees contained in the adopted Land Use Element.
ANALYSIS
Proposed Zone Change
The applicant is requesting a zone change for the parking area at
the rear of the motel from R2 to R2A. This change in zoning
would permit the use of the area for parking by right rather than
depending on a variance for such use which was issued in 1971.
Policy l.2.2. states that surface parking lots zoned residential
adjacent to highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should
be reserved for residential use or publ ic open space on the
surface (use for underground parking is acceptable). The surface
level parking lot at the rear of the proposed addition represents
the precise land use situation addressed by the policy. In that
the applicant proposes to restripe the lot, one could argue that
this constitutes redevelopment, however, staff maintains that
this is a minor modification to an existing use, will not alter
the charactertistics of the site or represent a further
encroachment of commercial uses into residential areas, and
therefore iolicy 1.2.2 is not relevant in this case.
The existing variance to permit surface level parking on this R2
lot does not have an expiration date. However, the Draft Zoning
Ordinance, if adopted would impose a sunset clause of 20 years,
requiring the elimination of commercial parking lots in
residential zones. Assuming that this is adopted, the Comfort
Inn would lose 66 parking spaces within a period of 20 years or
less. This would occur whether or not the proposed expansion was
approved, unless a zone change is permitted. Adding the
Off-street Parking District classification to the R2 designation
- 2 -
would not eliminate the ability to develop residential units to
the R2 standards on the lot. Planning staff maintains that by
rezoning this lot to R2A the parking for the existing Comfort Inn
and proposed expansion will be maintained over the long term.
Additionally, this parking lot provides a transition between the
commercial buildings on Santa Monica Boulevard and the
res idential development on Harvard street. As outl ined in the
Initial study, the parking lot lighting should be designed to be
directed away from adjacent residential properties while ensuring
a safe parking area for the motel guests. Addi tionally , the
parking lot should be screened and landscaped in conformance with
section 9l27.J.l and section 9112 (SMMC).
Project Design
The proposed addition is consistent with the General Plan and
Municipal Code requirements. The design of the proposed addition
is generally compatible with the existing Comfort Inn. As
outlined in the Initial study the Architectural Review Board
should pay particular attention to the rear elevation which faces
the residential units to the north and has minimal detailing and
articulation. By adding additional detailing to the rear facade,
its apparent mass will be visually reduced. The Board should
also pay particular attention to the exterior colors, textures
and materials and landscaping to insure that a visually
consistent design is provided throughout the project.
Additionally, the Initial Study recommends that a clearly defined
pedestrian access be designed to the motel from the surface
parking lot.
Traffic Impacts
A traffic analysis was prepared for this project
Associates. The study concluded that the impact of the
proj ect on the local street system will be minimal
signficant impacts due to project-related traffic.
Conclusion
by DKS
proposed
with no
The proposed addition is consistent with the policies and
objectives of the Land Use Element in that it provides a
pedestrian oriented design at the street frontages. However,
Planning staff believes that additional articulation should be
added to the rear elevation in order to reduce its apparent
visual mass. staff believes that in order to ensure that
adequate Qff-street parking for the existing motel and new
addition is provided over the long term, the lot should be
rezoned from R2 to R2A.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the Planning Commission
approve DR 367, EIA 836, Zone Change 28 with the following
findings and conditions. It is respectfully recommended that the
Planning Commission recommend the change to the Council for
consideration.
- 3 -
FINDINGS
1. The development is consistent with the findings and pur-
pose of Ordinance 1321 as set forth below.
2. The physical location and placement of proposed structures
on the site are compatible with and relate harmoniously to
surrounding sites and neighborhoods in that the project is
designed to be compatible with the existing building
through the use of arched openings, raised planters and
varied setbacks along the street frontages. with the pro-
vision of additional articulation on the rear facade as
outlined in the conditions herein, a suitable transition
to the residential buildings will be provided.
3. The existing and/or proposed rights-of-way and facilities
for both pedestrian and automobile traffic will be ade-
quate to accommodate the anticipated results of the pro-
posed development including off-street parking facilities
and access thereto in that a total of 119 parking spaces
with access from the alleys, Harvard Street and Santa
Monica Blvd. are provided for the existing motel and pro-
posed addition which is in excess of the Muncipal Code
requirements.
4. The existing and/or proposed public and/or private health
and safety facilities (including, but not limited to,
sanitation, sewers, storm drains, fire protection devices,
protective services, and public utilities) will be ade-
quate to accommodate the anticipated results of the pro-
posed development.
\
5. The proposed development is consistent with the General
Plan of the City of Santa Monica and the Zoning Ordinance
in that the project will conform to the height, bulk, use
and urban design policies for the Commercial Corridor as
specified in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and
conform to the appropriate C4 standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance.
ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
1. The public necessity, public convenience and general wel-
fare require the proposed zone change from R2 to R2A in
that the change will not alter the existing land use
cha~acteristics of the site; and it will ensure the con-
tinued availability of off-street parking for the existing
hotel and new addition, while not eliminating the ability
to develop residential units on the site in the future.
2. Good zoning practice requires the proposed zone change
from R2 to R2A in that the change will conform the zoning
classification to the existing land use on the property in
- 4 -
question; does not represent a change in intensity or na-
ture of the land use; does not represent a further en-
croachment of commercial uses into residential areas, pro-
vides an adequate buffer between the commercial develop-
ment on Santa Monica Boulevard and the abutting R2
residential development on Harvard street; and will ensure
that adequate parking continues to be provided for the
existing motel and new addition.
STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash en-
closures, and signage shall be subject to review and ap-
proval by the Architectural Review Board.
2. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval
by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the
approved concept shall be subject to Planning Commission
Review. Construction shall be in substantial conformance
with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning
Commission, Architectural Review Board or Director of
Planning.
3. The rights granted herein shall be effective only when
exercised within a period of one year from the effective
date of approval. Upon the written request of the appli-
cant, the Director of Planning may extend this period up
to an additional six months.
4. The applicant shall comply with all legal requirements
regarding provisions for the disabled, including those set
forth in the California Administrative Code, Title 24,
Part 2. .
5. The parking lot shall be striped, screened and landscaped
in conformance with Sec. 9127.J.l (SMMC).
6. Final parking lot layout and specifications shall be sub-
ject to the review and approval of the Parking and Traffic
Engineer.
7. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall
be screened in accordance with Sec. 9127J. 2-4 (SMMC).
Refuse areas shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site
need.
8. A 5~to 6 foot solid masonry wall shall be provided along
property lines which abut residential property in accor-
dance with Sec. 9127.1 (SMMC).
9. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner
not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by
reason of lights, noise, activities, parking or other
actions.
- 5 -
10. No noise generating compressors or other such equipment
shall be placed adjacent to neighboring residential
buildings.
ll. Openable windows shall be provided throughout the project,
in a manner consistent with applicable building code and
energy conservation requirements.
12. street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as
required in a manner consistent with the City's Tree Code
(Ord. 1242 CCS), per the specifications of the Department
of Recreation and Parks and the Department of General Ser-
vices. No street tree shall be removed without the ap-
proval of the Department of Recreation and Parks.
13. Street and/or alley lighting shall be provided on public
rights-of-way adjacent to the project if and as needed per
the specifications and with the approval of the Department
of General services.
14. Any outdoor lighting shall be shielded and/or directed
away from adjacent residential properties, with any such
lighting not to exceed 0.5 foot candles of illumination
beyond the perimeter of the sUbject property.
15. This determination shall not become effective for a period
of ten days (twenty days for Development Review Permits
and Conditional Use Permits) from the date of determina-
tion or, if appealed, until a final determination is made
on the appeal.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. The Architectural Review Board, in their review shall pay
particular attention to the design of the rear elevation
and shall consider requiring additional detailing and ar-
ticulation to reduce the project's visual mass. The Ar-
chitectural Review Board should also review the project's
pedestrian orientation and amenities~ exterior colors,
textures and materials, window treatment~ glazing~ and
landscaping in order to ensure that the addition is com-
patible with the existing building. The Board should also
consider measures to reduce the mass and scale of the
building by varying the setbacks on the upper floors.
2. The Architectural Review Board should carefully review the
reat- elevation and consider requiring a clearly defined
pedestrian access into the motel from the parking lot at
the rear.
3. The parking lot shall be landscaped and screened in con-
formance with Section 9112 (SMMC).
- 6 -
Prepared by: Karen Rosenberg, Associate Planner
KR: nh
DR367
06/26/87
<:
- 7 -
ATTACHMENT A
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Category
Municipal Code
C4: Highway
C01lUl1ercial,
Permits Hotels
and Motels
R2: Permits
Residential
Permitted Use
Height
6 stories/90'
F.A.R.
3.3
parking
1. Space/Room
for lst 40
Rooms + PI us
1. Space/3
Rooms Over 40
Rooms
Existing: 82
Rooms = 54
Spaces
Addition: 66
Rooms = 49
103 Parking
Spaces Required
i:.:
Land Use
Element
commercial
corridor,
Permits
Hotels, Motels
3 stories/45,
or
4 stories/56'
With site
Review
2.0: 2.5 with
Site Review
Same as
Municipal Code
- 8 -
Project
66 Room Addition
to Existing 82
Room Motel
...-t
4 Stories/54'
2.'49
118 Parking
Spaces Provided
exw~\+- c
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT
NUMBER: DR 367, EIA 836, Zone Change 28
LOCATION: 2801 Santa Monica Blvd.
APPLICANT: Charles Ting
REQUEST: To Permit the Removal of a 21 Unit Motel and the
Construction of a 4 story, 66 Room Motel Addition
to an Existing 3 story 82 Room Motel.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
7/.20/87
Date.
x
Approved based on the following findings and
subject to the conditions below.
Denied.
Other.
FINDINGS
1. That the develop~ent is inconsistent with the Findinqs and
purpose of Ordinance 1321 as set forth below.
2. The physical location and placement of the proposed struc-
tures on the site are incompatible with and do not relate
harmoniously to surrounding si tes and neighborhoods in
that the project does not step down or relate to the
height limit of the adjacent residential which is incon-
sistent with Policy 3.2.1 of the Land Use and Circulation
Element and as proposed the project fails to include land-
scaping in the parking lot which would buffer the adjacent
residential property.
3. The existinq and/or proposed rights of way and facilities
for ~both pedestrian and automobile traffic will not be
adequate to accommodate the anticipated results Of the
proposed development in that as proposed, no loading zones
are indicated on the plans.
4. The proposed development is inconsistent with the General
Plan of the city of Santa Monica in that policies 3.1,1
and 3.2. 1 require that the perce! ved mass of the struc-
tures be minimized through the use of stepbacks to the
height limit of adjacent residential zones and as proposed
- 1 -
'-I (? ? --00 CZ'
this project does not provide any stepbacks on the north
elevation.
ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
1. The public necessity, public convenience and general wel-
fare do not require the proposed zone change from R2 to
R2A in that the existing land use is a legal non-
conforming use which should be reverted back to residen-
tial use as part of the redevelopment of the adjacent site
for the motel expansion.
2 . Good zoning practice does not require the proposed zone
change from R2 to R2A in that Policy 1.2.2 of the Land Use
and Circulation Element states that surface parking lots
zoned residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors
when redeveloped should be reserved for residential use or
public open space and therefore the parking on this lot
should be incorporated on site into the new development
thereby making this R2 property available for residential
development or open space.
VOTE
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Farivar, Hecht, Lambert, Mechur, Nelson, Perlman
pyne
I hereby certify that this statement of
accurately reflects the final determination
Commission of the City of Santa Monica.
Official Action
of the Planning
~~..~
signature
Dh/!i?
date' .
61 er.se A.) II,E:C 4--"'- /C#.4-/)(..,tJ ~.J
print name and title /
STDR367 ~
KR: nh
07/27/87
- 2 -