SR-12-B (4)
-, .
t/ 02-..,- ?'O 'I
C/ED:PJS:ca
Councll Meetlng: February 19, 1985
Santa Monica, Callfornla
,2. - ~
rE6 1 9 1985
TO: Mayor and Clty Councll
FROM: Clty Staff
SUBJECT: Adoption of Flndlngs for Declslon on Proposed Outpa-
tlent surglcal Faclllty at 1508 Arizona Avenue (DR 275,
ZA 4828-Y)
At lts ~eeting on January 22, 1985, the Clty Counell denled wlth-
out pre]udl.ce the appllcant I s appeal from the Planning COImnlS-
Slon 's actJ..on on the subJect proJect.
The Councll remanded the
proJect to the Planning CommlSSlon wlth certaln lnstructions and
dlrected staff to present flndJ..ngs for adoptlon at a subsequent
Councll meeting.
ThlS report presents proposed flndings for
Councll adoption.
RECOMMENDATION
It J..s respectfully recommended that the Cl.ty Counell adopt the
follow~ng flndlngs and deCJ.Slon in connectlon wlth Development
ReVlew Permlt No. 275 and Zonlng Admlnlstrator Case No. 4828-Y:
FINDINGS
1. The proposed proJect conslsts of a 14~ 177 square foot,
three story outpatlent surglcal facl1ity to be located at
1508 Arlzona Avenue, a 7,491 square foot parcel located 1n
the Commercial Professlonal (CP) Dlstr1ct ("the project").
2. Jerrold Martln Sherman, M.D. ("Dr. Sherman") lS the owner
of the subject property and is the appllcant/appeallant In
the 1nstant proceedlng.
f).. - B
FER 1 9 1965
- 1 -
I .
3. On March IS, 1984 the Santa Monica Rent Control Board
granted Re~oval Permit Appllcatlon 112R-C, pursuant to the
author1.ty granted the Board 1.n regulat10n Sect1.on 5013(c),
for three un1nhabi table 51ngle faml1y dwelllng' s located
on the subject property.
4. On August 13, 1984, Dr. Sherman flIed a proper applicatlon
for Development ReV1ew Perm1.t w1.th the Clty's Planning and
Zonlng D1vision pursuant to Ordlnance 1251 (CCS).
5. On October 24, 1984, Dr. Sherman flIed a proper app11ca-
t1.on w1th the C1ty'S Plannlng and Zonlng DlviSlon for a
var1ance of front yard requlrement pursuant to Munlclpal
Code Seetlon 9145 1n connectlon wlth the proJect.
6. On November 5, 1984 the Santa Mon1ca Planning Comm15sion
conducted a publlc hear1ng on the Development ReVlew
Permlt and Varlance applications. Followlng testlIDony
from Dr. Sherman and hlS archl tect, and from members of
the publlC, the Plannlng Commisslon fal1ed to adopt any
rnotlon approvlng, denying or contlnulng the appllcations.
The appllcatlons were therefore deemed den1.ed as a matter
of law.
7. On November 13, 1984 Dr. Sherman's legal counsel flled a
tlrnely appeal of the Plannlng Cornmlsslon's action pursuant
to Ordlnance 1251 (CCS).
- 2 -
, .
8. On January 8, 1985 Dr. Sherman's legal counsel submitted a
wr~ tten request to the c~ ty Councl.l requesting that the
appeal hearl.ng be cont~nued to January 22, 1985.
9. On January 22, 1985 the C~ ty Councl.l conducted a public
hearlng on the appeal, taklng test~mony from Dr. Sherman's
legal counsel, Dr. Sherman's archltect and interested mem-
bers of the publlC in accordance wlth adopted Clty Councl1
procedures. Durlng the publlC hear1ng the Council con-
sldered a staff report prepared by the Dlrector of Plan-
Dlng which lDcluded the complete record of the Plannlng
Comnuss~on proceed1ng, a wrl tten response to the Staff
Report prepared by Dr. Sherman's legal counsel, and a let-
ter from W1111am F. Wel.ngarten on behalf of Santa Monlca
Ml.d-Cl.ty Neighbors. Dr. Sherman's archltect presented
drawings and a scale model of the proJect whl.ch l.ncluded
changes to certal.n deslgn features of the proJect as pres-
ented to the Plannlng Commissl.on. The Councll also con-
sidered a memorandum from the C~ty Attorney dated January
22, 1984 statl.ng that the Counell could grant or deny the
requested varlance due to the Clrcumstances of the
project.
10. At the conclusl.on of the appeal hear~ng and Councll dis-
CUSSlon, the Clty Councll voted unanl.mously to deny the
appeal wlthout preJudice and remand the proJect to the
Plann1ng Commlss~on for the followl.ng reasons:
- 3 -
a. It was not the ~ntent of the C~ty Council ~n adopt~ng
Pol~cy 1.13.1 of the Land Use Element of the General
Plan to ~mpose a moratorium on prlvate development in
the CP District pend~ng adoption of a CP Dlstrict
SpeclflC Plan, but rather to sUbJect prlvate develop-
ment to careful scrut~ny to ensure that such projects
w~ll not pre]UdlCe adoption of a CP Dlstrlct spec~flc
Plan
and
wll1
not
adveresely
impact
nelghboring
resldents.
b. The pro] ect deslgn presented to the Cl ty Counc~l in-
eludes substantlve changes from the verSlon reviewed by
the Plann~ng Comrnlsslon on November 5, 1984 and that
these changes have resulted in support of the proJect
by Santa Monlca Mld-Clty Nelghbors.
c. The pro]eet proposes a deslreable new dlmenslon to the
range of health care opportunities available to Santa
Monica resldents.
DECISION
Based upon the foregolng flndlngs, the Clty Councll of the City
of Santa MonCla denles the appeal of Development Revlew Perml t
No. 275 and Zonlng Admlnistrator Case No. 4828-Y, wlthout prej-
udlce, and remands the proJect to the Plannlng Comrnlsslon for
further conslderation.
Prepared by: Paul J. Sllvern,
Director of Planning
ZA4828Y
- 4 -