The URL can be used to link to this page

SR-041090-12B . Lfoz--ot!/ 2- Santa Monica, . 12-8 APR 1 0 1990 California CjED:PB:DKW:KF:kf PC/ap83715 council Mtg: April 10, 1990 1.1 ~ ~l vr!}-J ~ _~ -. -C""""-_.... 1 .,(.--.-r TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City staff SUBJECT: Combined Appeals of the Planning Commission's Approval of Conditional Use Permit 89-079 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 21511 at 837 and 839 Fifteenth Street Appellants: Ahmad and Henriette Hamini, Neighbor Lawrence & Harding, Applicant's Attorney Applicant: william and Maria Blase INTRODUCTION Two appeals have been filed regarding the Planning Commission I s approval of this project, one by a neighbor of the project regarding vehicle access to the site, and one by the applicant's attorney regarding the imposition of a standard condition regarding compliance with Program 10 of the Housing Element. Both appeals are considered herein. This report recommends that the City council rej act both appeals and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed four unit condominium, with access from the front of the site instead of the alley, and with retention of the standard Program 10 condition. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission approved this project on February 7, 1990 with access from the front of the site, since rear access is difficult because the difference in elevation between the front and rear of the project is over ten feet, with the higher portion at the rear of the site. Section 9044.7 (a) (2) of the Zoning 1 t:l.- , APR 1 0 1990 " . . Ordinance Code allows access to be from the front of the site if the topography precludes reasonable alley access to a sufficient number of parking spaces. The first appellant requests that access be from the rear of the si te because two parking spaces may be eliminated and two large trees on the site removed. Due to the steep slope, the applicant would have significant difficulty providing alley access while complying with the relevant development standards and building four condominium units. (Under the applicable zoning, up to five units could be developed on the site. ) Based on Planning commission and Council action on previous requests to allow street access, staff had recommended to the Planning Commission that alley access be required A However, the Planning Commission, after discussion of the issue, felt that given large grade differential of the site, requiring al1ey access would impose a significant hardship on the proj ect, and that street access was therefore reasonable. The other recent projects where alley versus street access was an issue involved less extreme topographic conditions. The second appellant, Lawrence and Harding, has appealed one condition of approval in order to preserve the applicant's right to challenge imposition of Program 10 fees if an ordinance imposing such fees is adopted. The standard Program 10 condition requires that the applicant comply with a proposed implementing ordinance if the ordinance is adopted prior to the certificate of occupancy being issued for the proj ect . This condition reads as follows: nprior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for this project, 2 . . the project shall comply with any ordinance adopted by the City Council to implement Program 10 of the Housing Element. In the event that such ordinance has not been adopted prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for this development project, this condition shall be of no further force and effect. Failure to adopt an implementing ordinance shall not excuse a developer from the obI igation to comply with any other condition imposed in connection with Program 10 of the Housing Element." This condition has been written and approved by the City Attorney pursuant to an ordinance adopted by the city Council; therefore staff recommends against changing the Program 10 condition. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATION It is respectfully recommended that the Council reject both appeals, and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of Conditional Use Permit 89-079 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 21511, with the findings and conditions set forth in the attached Planning commission statement of Official ActionA Prepared by: Kathryn Foster, Assistant Planner Paul Ber1ant, Director of Planning Planning Division community and Economic Development Department Attachments: A. First Appeal Filed by Ahmad and Henriette Hamini B. Second Appeal Filed by Lawrence and Harding c. statement of Official Action D. Letter From Lawrence and Harding Dated Feb. 5, 1990 E. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Initials 3 --- --- e ~~.If_ - Cavaf . Santa Monica COm:TI!.Jnlly ana Econom'c De~lopment Deoanment PlannIng and Zomn~ DiviSion i21j1458.8341 APPEAL FORM ,",(,.1.,1, J.! Iqt1i) !11!M~'I . . - '.1 J tl.~ C Lfl.lt{! I'l ;; Kt= FEE $100 00 'Ja'e Fi;eo ~ecer.oed llv ~ece'ol "lo ;2. !b.1b t-A1 LiY5S"'T,;3;3 , /'1 Y'~ "7 (~,1 (.,')~ "/-,-1',, '. _ - ",7.L J ..,LJ .L,I /? NaTl8 ;-- (/ / I ~ ;- I r (' I~ ! /r.....,...... E // '(~ r'r f" (J A::lreSS ( L.'l ~? --' '"(F L l., ,~ ' /~ ~ /~ .'7 ;- e F U..L....t2., /) I [J,:' (/l ,'/) c. "7 C"r:tact Person _ /-r-:'r"-, (i.- ' r- ..-- ,- r ;j,' \" ,# L1 m ( rl( P'1one (/- i 'I j --1 L I -:J - J LL -;7 <-/ / .... f _ - -' - ~- ../ / /, . / I" , PleaS!! de~~De tt.e pl'C1ec: and cec:SlOn '0 be acpealed r (/ P P 9.. 0 7 i ' Ie "-/'" ~L/; - 'I '/ '/ ~ , du 'c' ,-,;ell '--I {/(J(r- C;()(7(i0rY!/Y],!1r7' ,.,//-":/-7 / '2 ,r / II<' ,/-P;< It 0 ...; V f} ,.., Q () f;J 0 r;- (7 ( l / ,-? ;7 n ;- n 0 { ,0 I.n-in / ~ /,r, /J '27r {; P;Q /? ';.';' '7 I r' P a (' t" C c.s- l i2 iJrn I-:J.-./'y \'f-IPf,)~1-- ii:. t--I-/p (",-//?I-:.?k. /-La}1 kO-/l O:)f;,'1ge J -:;' Case Number (" U? R q _ () -1 q " Ad(Iress R ~ --; _ }<'::<.. q 1_ I <;- f---/I I r:::: I-- t;) p p I- .J If f7t- ~ Ii!.'^, j'1 j C IJ Apphcar.t Ii/';' 1//-,+ M /j /.-7 f.) m ;1--/? ! q. A 1 r7 S p Onglnal "eam,g dale ,c .P 'A ~ i I ,4. R 1.1 "1 I q Q n - Ongll1ar acllOn - ~, I .f /,/ ... ,. /0 ,.... Ln 9G-7bJ Please state It'e specific reason(s) !or the a+>p!!al (J) ,T fie l!< q} ~cf-:- i Gf C:,(1{ f- f(1I ;}r;x'71 -h, /-i!? ffl.tl,n I ( I pa ( r r;r!Pr/ n 11 I--I-IP (7 p/JP j( o!... P /!1 f7 , ./J.I-L j) I..fJ j7 /7 / ~ c:.,f-a jJ fl/~ Il PC t'Jff} me /i.d a I/D /J 1'.4// S /201< ai--r pee. l-.c~rLiJ.L l/.s:..n i!..Rt2.l7Lh-I-I'?_a....! L~______ (,\prl/nf/1 O;4"-i./..R). '- 1 , f - - _0 Y< f<_ 11 add_mal space IS needed lIS8 back of form s~nalure~~~ ~L';,L:: Date~/;51?() ~',.iL .....~- - I.'" ,.A2 1--iAa& ~ Y---d}J:..t.di- -L/' S/9C Sanll Monica MunlclpIJ COW Subchapler tOL AppeD Section 9132.1 AppIIt of KIkA. (a) Myperlll)ll maJappeala~!'!!I\olltle ZonlngAdmIl1lSll3lorlolhe Plamng CommlSSlOll A deosianollhe Plamng CommISSiOn GI\ sudl aj:lpBaI shall be wi and not subted 10 IurIhet 3Al$aI1O 11& Clly CoUld. (b) Rrrperson may appeal: an orignaJ decision of !he PIamng CommisSIon ~ lh8 CIty CWlaI (c) Ora- an ~ is ftIed... appeIal& body may rmew aI11 tab acliOn on a. ch;Ntil_ii1Ilions. In18lpreratJonS. deaSlOfl$. judgmenII. 01' SllTUIar actions tak8n wtIICIlwera lithe ~ of 1M ongmaI ~ body-on tbe appicalIon or project and 1& noIllmillcf 10 any !hi .:;,4-.aI reason stated lor Ih& appeal SeclIon913U FlIIna 01 Appeals. (a) Appeals shall be addr8ssed 10 tP", appellate bOdy on a form prescribed by the Zomrq AdmlnlSll'ator pursuant to the Sr_~ to..:. Theawellll.1t s.-~':: s:a... t:'>& s;:3Q!.: ;;1a~!cI'!'Ie basi! of !he app!a!. (1:1] An appeal 01 a ZonnJ Acbll1lSll'3tor aCllOnshaD baRed 'M\I'I1ha PIii''-.'.w IJMSlOn.lhln ,. conseartrve calendar days following h _ 01 actIan 110m wIW:h an appeailttaken. (c) Anappeel of I Platnlll Comnllssion deasIon shdba flied n tit afa OI'!IlI ClyClelt and wIh 1IlI ZOntng Admlf!lstralOl' w11W114lXlfl111C\JlM calendar days roIowf1g h dalt ofaeliantor'lllfd1 aI apJl8aIlS made. (el] ~ shaI be ~_~_,_,",paned by thI requred Iting lee Seclio" 9132.3. AppdI HMttngt-. NlIlc noticI of an appeal healing Shall eonIorm jg tne mamer In wtIich!he original nob was g1Vl1n SecIIon9132..4 EIIIdIVe 0. of ApptIItd Acflont. (a) E1tepI uohrinapro\/1CleCl for III this Chapler,an action ofhZon:ng AdnIl1lSlrator appealed 10 the P'.al1f11ng ComlTllS5lon shall not become elIedIve lJIIess and unlil approved by ltI8 CammlSlilon. (b) An at1Xlll 01 hl Comnussaon appealed Ie the CIty Courd shall OO! ~ IlffeclJve unless and IIlli app-Md b)' tlle City Cwd.. SectIon 9132.5 AppNI F.... Members of ,. ell}' COI1Idl and Plamlng CommiSSIOn ~aJ1 not be ~ 1D piy a fee when filing 1/1 appeal . e r-- "f-, i , -, / /~:. / e / s /7 () c- 2- / / 0 (j G II [t.' C C e s s )- /i. :.. iF /-/-~ 'z>---' 5: " · , 'I . (- ~ .1,...,1. -. I c;; ee f::- ;,/j t C.' t:LLt- :f t/i7,sl/ //) G {j I! f-/('A ;/ -I ,/ ati' {; /i t:' / ^ !::-!//t b2c1 It. t- / fJtL! t czl! /' //' 2. 6A.'r:: C~. . (3~' J ~ 1/-1 { ! L e. il/ /J] / J} C! I-- e- ,,12 jJ II J.-' /(/ /7 &' ,f ;;CI C t? 5; \:::/ /~lA?{ll? file- SC-k-eel:- ~ ([j) TfIe sde /-~ /~ Bt.uck //?Ul'li LllJcc!./v fIf flI6HsclioOL tl/1/J /.i if/Lll cJ?('a!-c-- jlk! ;z ( t'JI tl/~ LJ S. ate ty J/ (2 -Z 6' I- cis; t- 0 f< tile. c ilL:! c/ lf2/? ' @ j) cce..r~ IS cd.o/J @ '~II.R.- /mm e dlal-e.- r fl-OjJefit fI biJe of' g 23 .-JslII .J't:,feef- t7/J D f) e/.t- ft I/I.e e...x I sfl)," G st-;<.ee t CLCce~ 0 I fH/s a...V~CO;/~ P/<..bl.e;,l: II . @ jUt. 0;1 file tYccujJ Ll/)[ S 61 2 ~3- Is;tf ~ t-I< eel:- /-I tlfe et '{-II e,€. tl/ ~ /tfe 17 i6!: II-€- !/ f/ Il/J I/; G . [. c mil! I ss / ~ 11 , tl /1 cI jo/Z rt.CR';? d eel !:-J1e jJ LLl /) iJ I/} G Cc If? m / -is / () fJ ~ !! &I/!.. Jill b- () /J Jd;. fit? I-/j 1 tJ! - jJJ(t? t es f.. /17 G 5. t Ab2t- C{cces. ~ . II \iU~li\1 Z~}I I t1Qo ~~~ (xv) City of Santa Monica Communllyand EconomiC Development Departlnfnh.- - Planning and Ionlng Olvlslon -;! '-' '::," ~ ,t , (213) 458-8341 .~, APPEAL FORM . '~ rr-)'" .--'J 0-~i_ _I' Dale Filed f' L- , Received by , ,. " ReceIpt No. ..c NameLawrence & Harding a Professional Corporation Address 1250 sixth Street, SUJ..te 300 ConlaclPerson Kenneth L. Kutcher Phone (213) 393-1007 " - FEE: $100.00 "") II r. I_!~""'" Pleasedescnbelhepl"oJectanddeClSlOntobeappealed a two story 4-unit cr...ndominium pro;ect over a subterranean parking garage with twelve parking spaces. Case Number CUP 89-079 Mdress 837-39 Fifteenth Street Applicant Wi 11 iam a11.d. Mar ia Blase Ongll1al heanng dale f~br\larv 7. 1990 OrlglnalactlOf1 Approval of pro;ect Please slate Ihespeclflc reason(s)ror lheappeal Our law f1rm represents the proJect applicant. It has c::crre to our att':?ntion that an appeal of the 'Planning WluLl.S'31.0n I s dec1sion has been filed by an adlacent ne~qhl:or. We w:>uld also like to a~l the Plarming CUlXlfLl.SSl.On 's np~l ~lnn hnt: only on the narrow issue relatlnq to the l.ItlpOs.::..t1on of a condJ..tJ.on relating to Program 10 fees. We believe the condition should reserve the applicant 's rl.ght to challenge the imposition of these fees if an ordinance inposing such fees J.S adopted prJ.or to the date a certificate of occuwncy is issued tor the ProJect. If addlllOiial space IS needed, use back 01 form. Signa lure ~~ ~ Date February 21, 1990 Kenneth L. Kutcner Santa MonJca "'L.r.ic:~1 C:-dl Subchapter tOL. ~t:peal.. Sactlon 9132 1 Appeal Of act:on (a) Any persen may appeal a dec:SIOll olN Zonlrq Adm.... O;"o1::r I~ I!.e ,:arn"'O r..crr:"lr.c..cn "dee'sion ollhe Plal'l/"llr1Q Comrr:lsslon 01 well appeal shall be ~nal arxl not SlJbll!Ct 10 I~rther appoallO hi Clly COl11CI. (bJ Any person may appeal an cnglral deC!S1on ollhe PfanrlOg CommiSSlQI1IQ Iho el!)' ColJ'lCil. {cJ Once an appeal Is ftled, ItIe appelale body may reVIew and lake action on illl delermlnatlons. t~lerpretabons, deas:ons. judgments, or similar actions taken which were in !he pu'V'rw 01 :'le ell;,:-..I: rl'a,"Il"oIW ~ C'~ l'e i!PS'\.G:I' :in ~r P"=.t':t MId is not t imlted to onI'f ~ :. ,;.-..,: re;"s.:-n staled lot !.he appea! SecUon 9132.2. FIling of AtlPCii:S (a) Appeals shaU be addressed fo the appellate oodyon a form prescribed by 1M 7ofl,ng AdlT'llnisl1alol pursuant 10 the Subchapter 1 OJ, The appellant shall slale the specihc reasons lor 1he basis of the appeal. (b) .An appeal of a Zoning AdmlOlstrator action shall be filed with !he PlaMing Division WIlhin 14 COl'lseaJtve calerodat days IolJooMng'fhe dale or action trom whICh an appealls laker'! (e) M appeal of a P\annir9 Commission dedston shaI be filed i11he Qftiet of the City C1$t( and wdh the Zoning Adminlsl18tor within 14 COIlSeCUUve calendar days rOuowtlg If1e dale of aebon ror vdich an appeal IS made. " . . -.~~ --...... J _rr _l! ?arcel "rap 21Sl:" Address: 837/839 :"5~~ S~=2et S~~::S:':C";L !;,;:C~~!~~T:O"'J S:::::~"I' I. ~u~~er 8: ~n:ts a~d F:oar Ar~a U:l1 'c A: 1706 sq. ft.. [r:l't B: 10."'> sq:. ft. J_I u.....,..... c: ' a-"'> sq. ~. ...... .... ... ~ ,j I ..... . Unl:' D: 1730 sq. r.. .......... II Tota2-: 7310 sq. ft. for the four U:ll ts r:.Lot area In square footage~ 7,496 sq. ft. III. ?ercentage of lot covered by bUlldlng: 50% IV. Percentage of lot covered by landscaplng: 34% v. Estimated selllng prlce of each unlt: $350,000 approx. VI. Other: (See attached) ~ WIIMJf 12. . XftF L-\\,-RE\CE & H~-\RD[~9T'( ")~ (" ... aoool"~SS ::; ....._ C:')IiI'~O....." ON :::.... -- S-Cj:h.. E q .... 1"'1&1=;':;::- NG R' C....A=i;:J.a, _.AWFlI'It"'H:1E .rTC~....lt'ys AT ;...AoN .250 5. X+H S...I=tE~'" S7,J.T't: 300 I(~""'''''E'''H .... Ki..,'T"C-tEI:I' $AI'oI""'A uC""'ICA ::::AL.III'O~N;A ~C"'OI II\~ ST... looI:.;ee"'~:) ::-C.....".A !: "NA'l-R!:~ II.,I!:-.. N .." t\QZAL It:.. lASe;-.... A. S....!:R..... February 5, 1990 --E_EPHONE '21.31.351-.3-1007 -~_I!:CO"'~R 'a'3l 4S8--95l;1 s...e:~""."'-I .. S-AC.tV 0" ::::::::'..;"'!,I[l. y'IA MESSENGER Planning commission City of Santa Monica 1685 Main street Room 212 S~nt~ ~n~i~~, C~ 90401 Re: Vesting TPM No. 21511; CUP No. 89-079 Property Address: 837-839 Fifteenth Street Applicant: W~lliam and Maria Blase Our File NOA 571.1 Dear Commissioners: Our firm represents will~am and Maria Blase who intend to develop a two-story/four-unit condominium project w~th twelve subterranean parking spaces on theIr property at 837-839 Flfteenth street. The public hearlng on th~s proJect (VestIng TPM No. 21511: CUP No. 89-079) is scheduled for February 7, 1990. Staff has recommended that the Commission approve this proJect, but that access to the subterranean park~ng garage be relocated to the alley at the rear of the lot. As will be dIscussed below, because of the existing 11-foot slope of their property, Mr. and Mrs. Blase obJect to this particular proposed condition of approval, In that it ~s contrary to the prov~s~ons of zoning Ord~nance Sectlon 9044.8(a) (2). Mr. and Mrs. Blase have no objectlons to any of the other recommended conditIons to approval. L-\\\."RE:\" CE &: H.-\R Dr\ G .- . \. ..... ..qO,-tSSIOr.-AL CC~POR""TIC" ATTO~"'e:ys AT I..A..... Planning comm1ssioners February 5, 1990 Page 2 This property is located in the R2 Low Density Mult1ple Family Residential District. The project will comply in all respects with the physical development standards for the R2 District, including its height, number of units, number of floors, percentage of lot coverage and setbacks. No variances of any kind are sought. However, the property slopes downward by approximately eleven feet when measured diagonally from one corner at the alley in the rear of the site to the opposite corner of the frontage on Fifteenth Street. For th1S reason, the project has been designed to provide automobile access to its subterranean parking structure from Fifteenth Street. This exceptibn to alley access is expressly permitted by Zoning Ordinance Section 9044.8(a) (2). A. Municioal Code Section 9044.8 (a) Sanctions street Access Under Appropriate Circumstances. Zoning Ordinance Section 9044.8 (a) generally requIres alley access for new residential projects. However, this Sectlon acknowledges that the topography of sloping lots may make alley access infeasible under particular circumstances, and it requires the Planning Commission to permit street access to residential proJects in those circumstances A Specifically, Section 9044.8(a) states in relevant part as follows: L\\\-'RESCE & H.\RDI~G . . ... P'ROF'"ESSION....'i.. COAPOIQATlO..... ATTORN EYS AT L.AW Planning Commissioners February 5, 1990 Page J "Parkinq Access in the Rl and MUlti-Family Residential District. The following parking access requirements apply in the Rl and multi- family res1dential districts: "( a) No new curb cuts for purposes of providing street access to on-site parking spaces shall be permitted except where a project site meets at least one of the following conditions: * * * .. (2) The topography or configuration of this site or placement of buildings on the site precludes reasonable alley access to a sufficzent number of parlang spaces to the extent that use of the property is restncted beyond othenvzse applicable Property Development Standards. II (Emphasis added.) B. The Blase Property Is Sloped In A Manner That Precludes Alley Access For Their Lawfully Desiqned Proiect. The Blase property is not flat. It slopes sign1ficantly upward from Fifteenth Street and then generally levels off. The overall slope of the property is more than eleven feet when measured diagonally. Tile lot c.CJtltains a.pproAimately 750C sq'Jare feet and, as stated above, is located in the R2 District. Consequently, pursuant to Section 9012.6 of the Zoning Ordinancel up to five dwelling units can be developed on the site. Nevertheless, Mr. and Mrs. Blase propose to construct only four J- bedroom units on their property, each conta~n1ng between 1706 and 1937 square feet. L\~'RE.\TE & H.\RDL\ G .- . ~ ... ~RO~ESSIONAio.. :.Ol:tDOO.......Olot ...TTO~..EYS "'T ~...., Planning Commissioners February 5, 1990 Page 4 Pursuant to Section 9044.4 of the Zoning Ordinance, this project must provide 10 parking spaces (i.e., two covered parking spaces for each of the four units, plus an additional 0.5 spaces for the third bedroom in each of the four units) A No visitor spaces are requ~red because the proJect consists of less than 5 units. The Blase proj ect vnll provide 12 subterranean parking spaces if access is taken as designed from Fifteenth Street, two more spaces than required by the Code. If alley access to the subterranean garage were required, the ramp to the spaces would be at least 45 feet long and would extend almost the entire length of the subterranean parking garage because of the slope of the Blase property. Due to the area which would be occupied by this ramp, only nine parking spaces could be provided. With these nine parking spaces, the development of the property would be artificially l~mited to no more than two 3- bedroom un~ts (i.e., 5 spaces) and two 2-bedroom units (i.e., 4 spaces). This artificial development restriction would v10late Zoning Ordinance Section 9044.8(a), as set forth above. Not only would alley access preclude development of the 4-unit project as designed, but it would also preclude development of a standard 5- un~t proJect which is otherwise permitted on the site.' Such a project would be required to provide two covered spaces for each unit, whether these units contained one or two bedrooms, plus one visitor space, for a total of eleven spaces. L.\wllE~CE & HARDlXG . . A PRor-ESSIONAL ::'ORDQRA,TIO". ATTOROIEYS AT ~W Planning Commissioners February 5, 1990 Page 5 Therefore, requiring alley access at the property would unreasonably restrict the amount of development permitted at the property below what is otherwise allowed by the development standards for the R2 District. Section 9044.8 (a) (2) expressly states that new curb cuts are permitted where alley access would preclude development which complies wlth the applicable development standards. In this partlcular case, the project would lose three parking spaces if alley access were required, resulting in an inability to construct the proposed project. Due to the fact that (1) the project, as designed, meets all applicable development standards for the R2 District, (2) an alley access requlrement would reduce the number of parking spaces which can be provided due to the topography of the lot, and (3) only nine spaces can be provided with alley access whereas eleven spaces are required for a 5-unit project of 2-bedroom units or ten spaces are required for the Blase's 4-unit project with )-bedroom units, we contend that the Planning Commlss1on is legally requlred to authorize street access for this particular project under Zonlng Ordinance section 9044.8(a) (2). L-\\\-'RE~(E & H.\RDr~G . . \. A pQOl'"[S510NAL ::C-=lPQQATlON ATTOR"EYS AT LAW Planning Commissioners February 5, 1990 Page 6 c. The Interpretation Of Sect10n 9044.8 (a) In the Staff Reoort Is Overly Restrictive. At the bottom of page 1, the Staff Report incorrectly concludes that alley access is II required" by Zoning Ordinance Section 9044.8(a). However, the interpretation of Section 9044.8(a) in the staff Report is overly restrictive. The Zoning Ordinance does not rigidly require alley access for projects in all cases. It is true that alley access is generally required for residential projects, but this section also explicitly sets forth the criteria for evaluating when to permit street access to new projects. As discussed above, the Blase property, because of ~ts existing topography, meets the cri ter~a set forth 1n Sect10n 9044.8(a) (2) for permitt1ng street access to its subterranean garage. Thus, street access must be approved for this project. Additionally, Fifteenth street is not a busy thoroughfare. In fact, it dead ends into Georg1na Avenue approximately four blocks north of the Blase's property and dead ends into Washington Avenue approximately two blocks south of the property. Consequently, the section of Fifteenth Street on which the property is located consists of only six blocks. This section of Fifteenth street can only serve traffic with a beginning or destination point within those six blocks and does not serve L.\\fRE\TE & H.\RDf~G . . .. PAQi:'"ES SIO.......L ::OPIll'CRA""OIt+ ....TTOR...EYs ....T ~"'" Planning Commissioners February 5, 1990 Page 7 through traffic. Thus, allowing street access at the project will not create any foreseeable traffic conflicts. Moreover, we have confirmed with Ron Fuchiwaki of the Cityfs Parking and Traffic Division that he would not object to street access to the subterranean parking garage at the project on the basis of traffic or circulation issues. Mr. Fuch1waki indicated he normally defers to the planning and zoning issues in decid1ng whether street or alley access is appropriate, and he does not inherently prefer either street or alley access over the other. Mr. Fuchiwaki recognizes that each access point has certain advantages and disadvantages. For example, alleys are physically limited in the amount of traffic they can safely handle, because there are narrow and are not physically designed to accommodate significant amounts of traffic. street access, on the other hand, can reduce street parking. In this particular case, however, we are not ask1ng you to make a pOlicy judgment regarding the appropriateness of one type of access over the other. Notwithstanding any P011CY considerations, Section 9044.8(a) of the Zoning Ord1nance authorizes street access if certain criteria are met. The Blase property meets these criteria. Thus, you can and should permit this project, due to the slope of the property 1t is located on, L-\w'RE.\TE & H.-\RDrsG tp . \. .. i:l-RCf'E:SS~-:>""I\,.... CORPCt:I*'''.Q""'t ATTO"""EYS AT I..A"'" Planning Commissioners February 5, 1990 Page 8 to have street access without, in any way, making a policy judgment as to the appropriateness of street access in relation to alley access. Addi tionally, the properties adj acent to the alley across from the Blase's property have numerous windows facing the alley. Thus, requiring the project to provide alley access would adversely impact these adjacent properties. D. The Project Will Comply with The Zoninq Reoulrements For Lofts. The Staff Report correctly reports that each of the unl ts at the project will contain a loft. The Staff Report recommends certain restrictions by Special Condition No. 2 to ensure that these lofts satisfy applicable Zonlng Ordinance requirements. The loft spaces at the project will satisfy those restrlctions, and we have no objection to Special Condition No.2. CONCLUSION On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Blase f we recommend that Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 21511 and ConditIonal Use Permlt No. 89-079 be approved as recommended by Staff, but that SpeCIal Condition No. 1 be deleted because it is inconsistent with Zoning L-\~'RE.\CE & H.-\RDl~G . . ... PIil'Or:-ESSIOr.Al- ::OI;lP-QQ...ON ATTORNEYS AT LAW Planning commissioners February 5, 1990 Page 9 Ordinance section 9044.8(a) (2). street access to the twelve subterranean parking spaces should be approved as designed. Respectfully submitted, ~ ' --1 ''l/~ -J-'c.,- Iv ~ ..L-....:f - Kenneth L.Kutcher for LAWRENCE & HARDING a Professional Corporation cc: Paul Berlant D. Kenyon Webster ~thryn Foster Laurie Lieberman Ron Fuchiwak~ Stephen Frew Mr and Mrs. will~am Blase KV/lk ((lA-N05.571 ~~C--. -- ~/-'Y t,!O;}. - (" \,.' STATEMENT OF OPFICIAL ACTION l/c-z...-OOZ- PROJECT NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit 89-079 LOCATION: 837 and 839 Fifteenth street APPLICANT: william and Maria Blase REQUEST: To construct four condominium units. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 2/7/90 Date. x Approved based on the following findings and subject to the conditions below. Denied. other. TENTATIVE PARCEL/TRACT MAP FINDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision, together with its prOV1S10n for its design and improvements, is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as adopted by the City of Santa Monica. 2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development in that the site is zoned for multifamily residential use. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development in that the density allowed by the zoning of the site is up to five units. 4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or sub- stantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat in that the site is located in a fully urbanized area which has been developed residentially. 5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will not cause serious public health problems in that the site is zoned for multifamily residential use and the ex- isting infrastructure is adequate to provide service to the proposed project. - 1 - . . 6. The design of the subdiv~sion or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivis1on. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS 7. The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the SUbJect d1strict and complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that it satisfies the zoning requirements with the added conditions. 8. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located, in that it would be located in multifamily residential district. 9. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the proposed project is a level lot that can be developed with five residential units. 10. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain, in that this does not apply since the ex- isting duplex will be demolished. 11. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located, in that the zoning allows multifamily development on that site. 12. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the infrastructure is in place and has provided adequate services to the existing structure. 13. Public access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that the Subject site is adequately served by an existing public street and alley. 14. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the sur- rounding neighborhood, in that the setbacks provide buff- ers from the adjacent residential structures. 15. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, in that this is a low density multiple family project. 16. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that residential use is allowed for the site and will provide needed housing. - 2 - . . 17. The proposed use conforms precisely to the applicable per- formance standards contained in Subchapter 6, section 9050 and special conditions out11ned 1n Subchapter 7, section 9055 of the City of Santa Monica comprehensive Land Use and zoning Ordinance, in that it complies with the development standards and other requirements in the Zoning Ordinance. 18. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that it com- plies with the Zoning Ordinance for multifamily residen- tial use, which is the site's intended use. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. Access to the subterranean garage shall be from the alley at the rear of the site. 2A The den shall not constitute a third floor and shall be a 10ft which is open and unenclosed to the room below. 3. The storage space indicated at the western portion of the subterranean garage on the project plans dated September 20, 1989 shall be eliminated and that area shall be used for additional unexcavated front yard landscaping. Additionally, the north side of the project shall be landscaped in a substantial manner acceptable to the ARB, such as providing a two-foot unexcavated side yard along the wall of the subterranean parking garage. Driveway access to the project from Fifteenth Street is approved: however, if the driveway ramp can be shifted two feet to the south without, in the determination of the ARB, detrimentally affecting any eX1.st1.ng street trees, then the driveway shall be relocated to that location. If the relocation will, in the opinion of the ARB, detrimentally affect existing street trees, then the driveway ramp may remain in its location as shown on the project plans dated September 20, 1989. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS Plans 4. This approval is for those plans dated September 20, 1989 a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. 5. The Plans shall comply with all other provisions of Chap- ter 1, Article IX of the Municipal Code, (Zoning Or- dinance) and all other pertinent ordinances and General Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica. - 3 - . . 6. Final parking lot layout and specifications shall be sub- ject to the review and approval of the Parking and Traffic Engineer. 7. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subj ect to Planning Commiss~on Review. construction shall be in conformance with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board or Director of Planning. 8. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash en- closures, and signage shall be subject to review and ap- proval by the Architectural Review Board. 9. The Architectural Review Board, in its review, shall pay particular attention to the project's pedestrian orienta- tion and amenities; scale and articulation of design ele- ments; exterior colors, textures and materials; window treatment; glazing; and landscapingA Fees 10. The City is contemplating the adoption of a Transportation Management Plan which is intended to mitigate traffic and air quality impacts reSUlting from both new and existing development. The Plan will likely include an ordinance establishing mitigation requirements, including one-time payment of fees on certain types of new development, and annual fees to be paid by certain types of employers in the City. This ordinance may require that the owner of the proposed project pay such new development fees, and that employers within the project pay such new annual em- ployer fees related to the City's Transportation Manage- ment Plan. 11. A Park and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per residential unit shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the construction or placement of the residential unit(s) on the subject lot, per and subject to the provisions of Section 6670 et seq. of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. Demolition 12. Until such time as the demolition is undertaken, and un- less the structure is currently in use, the existing structure shall be maintained and secured by boarding up all openings, erecting a security fence, and removing all debris, bushes and planting that inhibit the easy surveil- lance of the property to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Officer and the Fire Department. Any landscap- ing material remaining shall be watered and maintained until demolition occurs. - 4 - . . 13. Unless otherw1se approved by the Recreation and Parks De- partment and the Plann1ng Division, at the time of demol1- tion, any street trees shall be protected from damage, death, or removal per the requ1rements of Ordinance 1242 (CCS). 14. Immediately after demolition (and during construction), a security fence, the height of which shall be the maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained around the perimeter of the lot. The lot shall be kept clear of all trash, weeds, etc. 15. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, applicant shall prepare for Building Division approval a rodent and pest control plan to ensure that demolition and construction activities at the site do not create pest control impacts on the project neighborhood. 16. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for this project, the project shall comply with any ordinance adop- ted by the City Council to implement Program 10 of the Housing Element. In the event that such an ordinance has not been adopted prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for this development project, this condition shall be of no further force and effect. Failure to adopt and implementing ordinance shall not excuse a developer from the obI igation to comply with any other condition imposed in connection with Program 10 of the Housing Element. Construction 17. Unless otherwise approved by the Department of General Services, all sidewalks shall be kept clear and passable during the grading and construction phase of the project. 18. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveways which need replacing or removal as a result of the project as deter- mined by the Department of General Services shall be re- constructed to the satisfaction of the Department of General Services. Approval for 'this work shall be ob- tained from the Department of General Services prior to issuance of the building permits. 19. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the s1 te shall cover any open load with a tarpaul in or other secure covering to minimize dust emissions. 20. 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. - 5 - . . 21. A construct~on period mit~gatlon plan shall be prepared by the applicant for approval by the Department of General services prior to issuance of a buildlng permitA As ap- plicable, this plan shall 1) Spec~fy the names, addresses, telephone numbers and business license numbers of all con- tractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and architect; 2) Describe how demolit~on of any eXlsting structures is to be accompl~shed: 3} Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erection/construction; 4) Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or side- walk is proposed to be used in conjunction with construc- tion; 5) Set forth the extent and nature of any pile- driving operations; 6) Describe the length and number of any tiebacks which must extend under the property of other persons; 7) Specify the nature and extent of any dewater- ing and its effect on any adjacent buildings; 8) Describe anticipated contruction-related truck routes, number of truck trips, hours of hauling and parking location; 9) Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling; 10) State whether any construction activity beyond normal- ly permitted hours is proposed; 11) Describe any proposed construction noise mitigation measures; 12) Describe con- struction-period security measures including any fencing, lighting, and security personnel; 13) Provide a drainage plan; 14) Provide a construction-period parking pIan which shall minimize use of public streets for parking; 15) List a designated on-site construction manager. 22. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consis- tent with the public hearing sign requirements which shall identify the address and phone number of the owner and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and complaints during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours of permissible construction work. 23. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily visible and accessible location at all times during con- struction at the project site. The pages shall be lami- nated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy. Environmental Mitigation 24. Ultra-low flow plumbing fixtures are required on all new development and remodeling where plumbing is to be added. (Maximum 1.6 gallon toilets and 1.0 gallon urinals and low flow shower head.) Miscellaneous Conditions 25. The building address shall be painted on the roof of the building and shall measure four feet by eight feet (32 square feet). - 6 - . . 26. If any archaeological remains are uncovered durIng excavation or construction, work in the affected area shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be contacted to conduct a survey of the affected area at project's owner's expense. A determination shall then be made by the Director of Planning to determine the Sl.g- nificance of the survey findings and appropriate actions and requirements, if any, to address such fl.ndings. 27. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 5B (Landscaping Standards) of the zoning ordinance including use of water-conserving landscaping materials, landscape maintenance and other standards contained in the Subchapter. 28. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall screened in accordance with SMMC section 9040.13-9040.15. Refuse areas shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site need, including recycling. The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attentl.on to the screening of such areas and equipment. 29. 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. 30. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the re- quired front yard setback area; The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the location and screening of such meters. 31. Any lofts or mezzanines shall not exceed 99 square feet unless appropriate required parking is supplied. Such areas shall also not exceed 33.3% of the room below unless compliance with the district's limits on number of stories can be maintained. Validity of Permits 32. The conditional use permit shall be of no further force or effect if the Tentative Map expires prior to approval of a Final Map for said tract. 33. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with any conditions of approval of this permit, no further per- mits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. 34. Within ten days of Planning Division transmittal of the Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the statement of Official Action prepared by the Planning Division, agreeing to the Condi- tions of approval and acknowledging that failure to comply - 7 - . . with such conditions shall constitute grounds for poten- tial revocation of the permlt approval. By signing same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights appli- cant may possess regarding said condl.tions. The signed statement shall be returned to the Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds for potential permit revocation. 35. This determination shall not become effective for a period of fourteen days from the date of determination, or, if appealed, until a final determination is made on the ap- peal. Any appeal must be made in the form required by the Zoning Administrator. TENTATIVE PARCEL/TRACT MAP CONDITIONS 36. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed. Plans and specifications for off site improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil en- gineer and approved by the City Engineer. 37. Before the City Engineer may approve the final map, a sub- division improvement agreement for all off site improve- ments required by the city Engineer shall be prepared and a performance bond posted through the City Attorney's office. 38. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval, except as provided in the provisions of California Govern- ment Code Section 66452.6 and Sections 9380-9382 of the santa Monica Municipal Code. During this time periOd the final map shall be presented to the city of Santa Monica for approval. 39. The developer shall provide the Engineering Department of the city of Santa Monica wlth one Dizal Cloth print reproduction and microfilm of each sheet of the final map after recordation. 40. Prior to approval of the final map, Condominium Associa- tion By-Laws (if applicable) and a Declaration of CC & R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The CC , Ria shall contain a non-discrimination clause as presented in Section 9392 (SMMC) and in the case of con- dominiums, contain such provisions as are required by Sec- tion 9122E (SMMC). 41. The developer shall provide for payment of a Condominium Tax of $1,000 per saleable residential unit per the provi- sions of Section 6651 et seq. of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. 42. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final subdivision map shall conform to the provisions of Sections 9330 through 9338 (SMMC) and the Subdivision Map Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall be paid - 8 - . . prior to scheduling of the Final Map for City Council approval. 43. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final parcel map shall conform to the provisions of Sec- tions 9350 through 9357 (SMMC) and the Subd~v~s~on Map Act. 44. The final map shall be recorded with the Los Angeles Coun- ty Recorder prior to issuance of any build~ng permit for a condominium project pursuant to Government Code Section 66499.30. 45. Pursuant to Section 9366 (SMMC), if the subdivider or any interested person disagrees with any action by the Planning commission with respect to the tentative map, an appeal or complaint may be filed in writing with the City Clerk. No appeal or complaint may be filed after a ten day period from the Commission's decision on the tentative map. VOTE Ayes: Farivar, Kaufman, Lambert, Menchur, Nelson, Pyne Nays: Rosenstein Abstain: Absent: NOTICE If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Or- dinance, the time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of civil Procedure Section 1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the city pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1400. I bereby certify tha~ this statement of Official Action accurate- ly reflecta the final determination of the Planninq Commission of the City of 8an~a Honica. signature date print name and title I hereby aqree to the above conditions of approval and acknowledge that failure to comply with such conditions shall - 9 - . . constitute qrounds tor pot approval. ia1 revocation of the permit Applicant's S1gnature Print Name and Title PCjsa8979 - 10 - ~ VWNtf t_. . .\ CITY PLANNING DIVISION Community and Econom~c Development Department M E M 0 RAN DUM DATE: February 7, 1990 TO: The Honorable Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 89-079 Address: 837-39 Fifteenth street Applicant: william and Maria Blase S U}1MA..~ Y Action: Application to construct a two story, 4 unit condominium with 12 subterranean parking spaces. Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Permit streamlining Expiration Date: May 26, 1990 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The subject property is a 7,500 sq. ft. parcel located on the east side of Fifteenth Street between Idaho and Montana Avenues having a frontage of fifty feet. surrounding uses consist of a two story apartment (R2) to the north, single family home (R2) to the south, two story condominium (R2) to the east, two story con- dominium (R2) to the west. Zoning Districts: R2 Land Use Districts: Low Density Multiple Residential District Parcel Area: 50 X 150 = 7,500 Square feet PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a two story, four unit condominium over a subterranean parking garage with twelve parking spaces. MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE The proposed project is inconsistent with the Municipal Code and the General Plan in the following respect: Access is taken from the front of the site on Fifteenth street instead of from the alley at the rear as required by section - 1 - . . " 9044.8 (a) of the Zoning ordinance. A cond1tion has beer. added requiring access be taken from the alley. CEQA STATUS The proj ect is categorically exempt per city of Santa Mon1ca Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA; Class 3(2). RENT CONTROL STATUS The applicant has received an owner occupied rent control exemp- tion and a duplex exists there currently. FEES The proposed four unit condominium is subject to a Parks and Recreation Facility Tax of $200.00 per unit and a Condominium Tax of $1000.00 per saleable residential unit. ANALYSIS The applicant proposes a four unit townhouse style condominium building over a twelve space subterranean parking garage. The building would be two stories with 10ft and 30 feet in height from average natural grade. Al though the square. footage of the site allows up to five units to be built, the applicant is pro- posing only four units. Each of the units has a kitchen, living room, dining room and guest bathroom on the first floor; a master bedroom including a bathroom, two bedrooms and a full bathroom en the second floor; a roof deck and loft on top which will be used as a den. A special condition has been added to ensure that the loft satisfies the code requirements and the space cannot be enclosed. The code requires 2.5 parking spaces per three bedroom unit for a total of 10 spaces. A guest space is not required if there are less than five units. Although only 10 spaces are required, a total of twelve spaces have been provided. The parking plan has been approved by the Parking and Traffic Engineer. A special condition is recommended requiring that access be taken from the alley instead of the Fifteenth Street as proposed in order to comply with Section 9044.8 (a). CONCLUSION The proposed condominium complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance with the added conditions and the General Plan, and therefore merits approval. - 2 - . \. . RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the Condi- tional Use Permit 89-079 and vesting Tentative Parcel Map 21511 sUbJect to the following findings and condit1ons: TENTATIVE PARCEL/TRACT MAP F!NDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision, together with its prOV1S1on for its des1gn and improvements, is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as adopted by the City of Santa Monica. 2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development in that the site is zoned for multifamily residential use. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development in that the density allowed by the zoning of the site is up to five units. 4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or sub- stantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat in that the site is located in a fully urbanized area which has been developed residentially. 5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will not cause serious public health problems in that the site is zoned for mUltifamily residential use and the ex- isting infrastructure is adequate to provide service to the proposed project. 6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS 7. The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the subject district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning ordinancelf, in that it satisfies the zoning requirements with the added conditions. 8. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located, in that it would be located in multifamily residential district. 9. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the proposed project is a level lot that can be developed with five residential units. - 3 - . . " 10. The proposed use presently on the are to remain, i~ 1sting duplex w11~ s compatible with any of the land uses lbject parcel if the present land uses :hat this does not apply since the ex- be dernoll.shed. 11. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the dis~rict and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located, in that the zoning allows multifamily development on that site. 12. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, i:;. that the infrastructure is in place and has provided adequate services to the existing structure. 13. Pub 1 ic access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that the subject site is adequately served by an existing public street and alley. 14. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the sur- rounding neighborhood, in that the setbacks provide buff- ers from the adjacent residential structures. 15. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, in that this is a low density multiple family project. 16. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that residential use is allowed for the site and will provide needed housing. 17. The proposed use conforms precisely to the applicable per- formance standards contained in Subchapter 6, Section 9050 and special conditions outlined in Subchapter 7, section 9055 of the city of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, in that it complies with the development standards and other requirements in the Zoning Ordinance. - 18. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that it com- plies with the Zoning Ordinance for multifamily residen- tial use, which is the site's intended use. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. Access to the subterranean garage shall be from the alley at the rear of the site. 2. The den shall not constitute a third floor and shall be a 10ft which is open and unenclosed to the room below. - 4 - , . CONDITIONAL USE PER~IT CONDITIONS Plans 3. This approval is for those plans dated September 20, 1989 a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the C1ty Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified 1n these conditions of approval. 4. The Plans shall comply with all other provisions of Chap- ter 1, Article IX of the Municipal Code, (Zon1ng Or- dinance) and all other pertinent ordinances and General P~an policies of the City of Santa Monica. 5. Final parking lot layout and specifications shall be sub- ject to the review and approval of the Parking and Traffic Engineer. 6. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the approved concep't. shall be subject to Planning Commission Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board or Director of Planning. 7. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash en- closures, and signage shall be subject to review and ap- proval by the Architectural Review Board. 8. The Architectural Review Board, in its review, shall pay particular attention to the project's pedestrian orienta- tion and amenities; scale and articulation of design ele- ments; exterior colors r textures and materials; window treatment; glazing; and ~andscaping. Fees 9. The City is contemplating the adoption of a Transportation Management Plan which is intended to mitigate traffic and air quality impacts resulting from- I:loth new and existing development. The Plan will likely include an ordinance establishing mitigation requirements, including one-time payment of fees on certain types of new development, and annual fees to be paid by certain types of employers in the City. This ordinance may require that the owner of the proposed project pay such new development fees, and that employers within the project pay such new annual em- ployer fees related to the City'S Transportation Manage- ment Plan. 10. A Park and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per residential unit shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the construction or placement of the residential unit(s) on the subject lot, - 5 - . \. General Services. Approval for this work shall be ob- tained from the Department of General Services prior to issuance of the building permits. . 18. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the site shall cover any open load with a tarpaulin or other secure covering to minimize dust emissions. 19. street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as re~~ired 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- p~oval of the Department of Recreation and Parks. 20. A construction period mitigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant for approval by the Department of General Services prior to issuance of a building permit. As ap- plicable, this plan shall 1) Specify the names, addresses, telephone numbers and business license numbers of all con- tractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and architect; 2) Describe how demolition of any existing structures is to be accomplished; 3) Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erection/construction: 4) Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or side- walk is proposed to be used in conjunction with construc- tion: 5) Set forth the extent and nature of any pile- driving operations; 6) Describe the length and number of any tiebacks which must extend ~nder the property of other persons: 7) Specify the nature and extent of any dewater- ing and its effect on any adjacent buildings; 8) Describe anticipated contruction-re1ated truck routes, number of truck trips, hours of hauling and parking location; 9) Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling; 10) State whether any construction activity beyond normal- ly permitted hours is proposed; 11) Describe any proposed construction noise mitigation measures; 12) Describe con- struction-period security measures including any fencing, 1 ighting, and security personnel; 13) Provide a drainage plan; 14) Provide a construction-period parking plan which shall minimize use of public streets for parking; 15) List a designated on-site construction manager. 21. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consis- tent with the public hearing sign requirements which shall identify the address and phone number of the owner and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and complaints during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours of permissible construction work. 22. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily visible and accessible location at all times during con- struction at the project siteA The pages shall be lami- nated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy. - 7 - . \.. . , Env1ronmental Mit1gation 23. Ultra-low flo~ plumbing fixtures are required on all new development and remodeling where pluIwing is to be added. (Maximum 1.6 gallon toilets and 1.0 gallon urinals and low flow shower head.) Miscellaneous Conditions 2~. The building address shall be painted on the roof of the building and shall measure four feet by eight feet (:3 2 square feet). 25 . I f any archaeo1og ica1 remains are uncovered dur ing excavation or construction, work in the affected area shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be contacted to conduct a survey of the affected area at project's owner's expense. A determination shall then be made by the Director of Planning to determine the sig- nificance of the survey findings and appropriate actions and requirements, if any, to address such findings. 26. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter SB (Landscaping Standards) of the zoning ordinance including use of water-conserving landscaping materials, landscape maintenance and other standards contained in the Subchapter. 27. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall screened in accordance with SMMC Section 9040.13-9040.15. Refuse areas shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site need, including recycling. The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the screening of such areas and equipment. 28. 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. 29. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the re- quired front yard setback area. .The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the location and screening of such meters. 30. Any lofts or mezzanines shall not exceed 99 square feet unless appropriate required parking is supplied. Such areas shall also not exceed 33.3% of the room below unless compliance with the district's limits on number of stories can be maintained. Validity of Permits 31. The conditional use permit shall be of no further force or effect if the Tentative Map expires prior to approval of a Final Map for said tract. - 8 - . . 32. In the event pennittee violates or fails to comply with any cond~tions of approval of this permit, no further per- mits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy shall be issued unt~l such violation has been fully remedied. 33. Within ten days of Planning Division transmittal of the Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall 51gn and return a copy of the Statement of Official Action prepared by the Planning Division, agreeing to the Condi- tions of approval and acknowledging that failure to comply with such conditions shall constitute grounds for poten- tial revocation of the permit approval. By signing same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights appli- cant may possess regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall be returned to the Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds for potential permit revocation. 34. This determination shall not become effective for a period of fourteen days from the date of determination, or, if appealed, until a final determination is made on the ap- peal. Any appeal must be made in the form required by the Zoning Administrator. TENTATIVE PARCEL/TRACT MAP CONDITIONS 35. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed. Plans and specifications for off site improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil en- gineer and approved by the City Engineer. 36. Before the City Engineer may approve the final map, a sub- division improvement agreement for all off site improve- ments required by the city Engineer shall be prepared and a performance bond posted through the City Attorney's office. 37. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval, except as provided in the provisions of California Govern- ment Code Section 66452.6 and Sections 9380-9382 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. During this time period the final map shall be pres~nted to the City of Santa Monica for approval. 38. The developer shall provide the Engineering Department of the City of Santa Monica with on,~ Dizal Cloth print reproduction and microfilm of each sheet of the final map after recordation. 39. Prior to approval of the final map, Condominium Associa- tion By-Laws (if applicable) and a Declaration of CC & R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The CC & R I s shall contain a non-discrimination clause as - 9 - . . presented 1n Section 9392 (SMMC) and in the case of con- dominiums, contain such provisions as are required oy Sec- tion 9122E (SMMC). 40. The developer shall provide for payment of a Condominium Tax of $1,000 per saleable residential unit per the provi- S10ns of Section 6651 et seq. of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. 41. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final subdivision map shall conform to the provisions of sections 9330 through 9338 (SMMC) and the Subdivision Map Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall be paid p;rior to scheduling of the Final ~fap for City Council approval. 42. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final parcel map shall conform to the provisions of Sec- tions 9350 through 9357 (SMMC) and the Subdivision Map Act. 43. The final map shall be recorded with the Los Angeles Coun- ty Recorder prior to issuance of any building permit for a condominium proj ect pursuant to Government Code Section 66499.30. 44. Pursuant to Section 9366 (SMMC), if the subdivider or any interested person disagrees with any action by the Planning Commission with respect to the tentative map, an appeal or complaint may be filed in writing with the City Clerk. No appeal or complaint may be filed after a ten day period from the Commission's decision on the tentative map. Prepared by: Kathryn Foster, A~sistant Planner Attachments: A. Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance B. Radius Hap c. Statistical Information Sheet D. Summary of CC & R's E. Project Plans F. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 21511 KF:kf pc/fcup9079 01/29/90 - 10 - . 'I.. . ATTACHMENT A MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE category Municipal Code Permitted Use 1 Unit/1500 sq. ft. = 5 units Project 4 units Height 2 stories/30' 2 stories/30' Setbacks Front yard 20' 20' 7' 71 15' 15' 50% 50% 10 spaces 12 spaces 650 sq. ft. 2,550 sq. ft. Sideyard Rearyard Lot Coverage Parking Landscaping - 11 - . . ATTACH:.IENT A MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Category Municipal Code Permitted Use 1 unit/lSDD sq. ft. = 5 units Project 4 units Setbacks Height 2 stories/3D' 2 stories/30' Front yard Sideyard Rearyard Lot Coverage Parking Landscaping 20' 20' 7 ' 7' 15' 15' 50% 50% 10 spaces 12 spaces 650 sq. ft. 2,550 sq. ft. - 11 - ~k:~f-??t, ~f~', , , ~ I ~, ~ - [. rJ~;1 j -: . 01!~~ 01 i W K ~ ~ i "'" I v: ~ I 'D.~' I.I~~'~< ! - < < < 16.~14', I~"JE~ -' .: ~I ~ _ . b (f~ no f' "'.., tro" ~ ; I' . ~ I ~ ~. ~e. ":':.':~"I r'~ri ~:. :~T~<:~", 1 n n, u 1 rl .~ ~: u T S,. WL!: : 0 to' , '! . n~ 1 . i '!Ill "; 'It i '10" If rSOt liD I ~.e- I .,., . V; : yo I ." : WI ,~1oC : vi'" K ISDt i ~. ~ 15th Street So ._; I ~ ~: : ! : i ~ ,': : ~ : : < :: 0 I: r~9'?f ~~! ~~' ~ ~~~~" ~,. ~'I ~. r ~ s ~M" I'" I" ~ < <' ~ 0 r< ~." ' I'" .. " :i ~\fu':," '.filU.~~f ,':.;t Cl ,..., '.: ~:fitID'i" ..01. W1~,'ICIIIJl~" "<'I'Iot ... 'II-'~"'It'- .02' r.rl~ <:(' '.Il'.t" ~I~ UN I I ~ I ., I '__-. ._.::::"""""~ FOURTEENTH ST 1 . rr I ~f I , t. "', .;:". . AAOIUSMAPFOR'~:'. . .- I -.. . . . ~ .' :_.t~. PLANNING".DEPARTNltrn.,A ."l . 1..l.'~ ~ '... . ..-' ,.' ..f-':~ .". .... :~. +;( . ..II.~-'. .~'...;.,T:._ '. c ..-.CatyO"';( ._1,".:'.,... ....".:: '<;Y:'>"," ,': -'SaIita'Moriica~::'. ,',' .>-/ C^UfORNIA.:.>:'" : - ~.~ "[J"- .......... ~ { -...- '1 i .. I _ I W il, ;; " ~ ~ . ':1 . . ~: .E.~~ Iml -~.' '0 :3.. 2 ~ ", - ~ " .. . I; s ~ I Ii ,. " , ,,\ ~ t.: " Ii ~I . I~ I'. ~a I t':.[ . No :!IC i .. I' .. i" .. J . ,~ 6 r 5 ;~ z, I · ,t@ 1., .. I.. l!GAL DeSCRIPTION STREET ADDRESS APPlICANT . . ~Vv~+~ '""'\ t - . ~ . .:.:... :-...-.. , - , I' r ~ ~ > ~ - ~il ,~ 1 ~~'c' " .. ~ ,~ . ,I I 1- ... S ., ., "' ......,:--_... ~ "to ~ ~.... '-....... ! .. 1 c;; 00 ..... o - ...., ~11 ) 01: ' 11101 ! ~ S on S "" .~ -~2l ~ · JQ;;' 5 ,~~~ 0 ,I :">. . ~ ~ - \.. "- J I ~{ :' J~Q · IliiOI - ; .,\,. : ,- tn..~" : SIXTEiNTH ST .... I I: 1 r ~. I' ~ · , ~~ ' J 1 ;., ~ U. jT li\.ll ~1 . .' t ! . I; ! ~ :>>: ..u~ ~ . " '" . ;.' - ;.:: - 0.:: l , .~ D. ~ ~2l ~'I ..... ..... . I,C C(' "(" I '= 1'- w: . 3 ~ ~~ ?!J ~ i :- ; I.- 1- . rr-~m ~.v a~ -' .. ~ .. ~ ~ .hc.l . M9" ~, .~ ........... 1<) ~i~ ' ~ :: !. .. Town of Santa MOnica . CASE NO UA P €A -07-'1 Blk 11 Lot 0 R~ ZONE _ 8.3.1 15th Street DATE 8L22/89 PUBLIC ~~~~l~G ;j r/ct.O Mafia Blase rILl. f' '" " ^,I,l~ rl III _ _11l.. 15_ SIICLI n> ReQUlI1!d RadiUS 500' . -- . "' ~ . ~~c ?~::e: vap =2_::1 ;ddress 83~!:39 15~h ~~:==: 5 T _~ "!" ! :5 .... -:-- ~ ~. ~ _..?~:::_'~~_--:-!:>'; -:::.J"::"';'''T'' -.~....- ... ~ :::-a.:::e r ~xt;r:Q= ~a~:s. =x~ 5~~=S ~! ex,erlor ?~a5:er ~oc::~~. ::~y "IS" t~~e {T1ss1or style} :~5~:3::~~ :1~er~:a5s R-l: & R-30 Xe~~her 3tr:?;lng: C3~1~ln~, vl~yl a~d metal s~rl95 3~tter5~ ~ON~SPOU~s: Galvaolzec :ro~ Ga~den ~alls/~e~ces: COncrete block ~:a5~~red, pa1~ted ~e~aL ga:e Balcon1es, DeC~5, ?at1os. Elastoner:c tOpplLg (~alconle5) r :118 ~~:o-atlc Irrl~atlon Sprlnkler5 a,d ~rl? on :lners l?atlOS) I"'Lter:or. Ro~;h Floors: Concre~e .1th ply~ood Floorlng: Tlle and Carpet ~alls. 5/8 gypsu~ board Cellln;s 5/6 g~psum board CablnetS Ralsed panel oak Jecoratlng. By owner Flreplaces: Metal Box ~ltchen Equlpment. Kltchenald or equlvalent: Cls~~as~err ra.;e, tras~ compactor, refr1gerator, ~lcro~ave III.Sou"'Ldprcoflng: Party ~alls: 50 STC walls, 2x4 staggered st~ds on 2x6 p13te ~lth ~esll:lant channel Celllngs: ~oQd fra~e wl~h 5/8" gyp. IV: Plumblng Hot water lInes: Copper COld water Ilnes: CODDer Waste lines. CastIron and Plastlc Vent lInes: PlastlC SoundproofIng methods: CastIron at Rlsers V. Heatlng and Alr Condltlonlng: Rooftop heatlng and Ale for eac~ :Jnlt VI. Trash Management: City of Santa Monica PiCk-Up at alley VII.SecurIty Provlsions. Pre-wlred for alarm VIII. Speclal Featu~es: Three car garages and prIvate stair to eac~ UnIt. Roof deck Signed: 'if;4&- ~~ I (a' Ie - d 3 - f" . ;1ffJ.d~.v'b1,t-(f') . ....., ?;r'CE::" ~o.: ~lS:"l ADDRESS: 8~'1 o:"::~-':...- S-:=2e': RESUME . (this should be a brief Sl!~~~ry not an index to the complete set) CONDCMINr~ ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION BYlAWS AND CC&Rs 1. Type 0 t Or;anization: ~.;::,r-;:=:;::.-: -~t.U.3..!. te:"e::. ': ~cr;:c=at:'C:l ;':C'::L:"::;' ;':5 a ~c~car~-~~ ~~-~~en~t aSSOCl~~~C~ 2. Me~ership: Each~",-e.::, :..rclu::.:..."1::; s...6:t:::ncer, c: a cc;,::;:.a-...l-:':,:..lr 3 . Me~ership TerMination: .:'.;j:.::r.a::1C ter-.ll"at.:.c~ '......en tl:.e "'e-= -c :"c-:.-;er lxJ.:...':::s any :........teres'C. L"1 ar:- UY'.:.t.. 4. Voting Rights :C:.;':S5 .; - a:~ O'Nr',ers o,::"er ::-..a.'1 Declar=rrt (eme "ate ea.;:]:-). Cl.ass B - )ec:..arart. {t.."-.ree VOt60S ~ '.m::..t). C:ass B ceases arrl =~:erts tc Class A on ~:le5t of (1.', t.C::al Class P. vct.es equal Class 3 votes, cr (11) seccr.d 3..rln::.versar. 5. Management: T::1.e ~SOC1at10!'1. :':'ay not cor.::ract for ?rc:ess10nal mar.aqa-.e.."lt se:::".'l:: fer a ta.'""'! exceed.:...."'g ore year ~'1.trcUt Ma]Or1ty appreval. ;..r--y S'..lch AgreE!"'e!"': ray be ter."'.L -ated by el.ter ;;::.arty, '..::.t... or W1L'1out cause on 30 days I wrlt'::er. not:.ce. Yi1t..'1cJ..::t 6. Project Life: penalty or ~ee. ~roXJ.!:1ately 60 years. 7. Effectivity Term ot and Amendments to CC&.Rs: u:-ul partl.t::.on cf P=o:ect c unt11 Declarat10n revoked. l\l:1enC:nents req\l1re 75% a~proval of each class, qererally, plus any ot.~er a;:prc;:n.ar.e persons or ertlt1es. 8. Ma~ntenance Provisions: a. Units: Each owner 1S respor.s~le. b. CCDJIl.on Areas: AsSOC1a t.J.on 1S re5iXlIlsb~le, except each owner Ma1.'1t..al!' S heaung/alI condJ.tlOm.ng system. 9. Damage - Repair or abandonment provisions: T~ed to ~nsura~ce proceec subJect to vote not to rebw.ld. Costs of repcur CNer and atove msurance proceeds aro:. apport~oned bet"~ owners on the bas~s of ~ fCXltage of thelr l.:.-~ts. 10. Description and ownership ot condollliniWll uni ta: ElerlEl"lt.s of -:.:-.e ;:rcject. - are.oot ~...~ o:mron w~t..h the ather :-enbers as descn.bed 1I1 tl".e CCI'.dcmJ..~~:.lI'l Plan a:- CleeC1S. !i1clu.....s oarlu.na s--..aces and pat~os/balcon~es. * (ccntJ.:"ued) 11. Description, ownership and .use ot C01lUll.on areas: '!be entJ.Ie cro,ect, exce:: the UlUts. Each owner has an Ul1d.J.v~ded lJ'lterest 1n t.~ camcn a=ea. Each c....ner has ~ non-exclus::.ve e.asare..'1t as to the o::I'l1l'On area. 12. Parking Space Assiqnment: At least ~ off-street parkL"1g spaces ;Jer ~_l."l~t. 'i may not be sold, rented. or leased to anyone ot.'1er than 0I0ner or t.enant or ot.'1e= ov.ne~s 13. Restrictions: a. OWner'. Financial/Leqa1 Status: None b. u._. ReS:1.dent1a1 purposes only. c. Any Restrictions on Age ot Occupants: None. d. Pets: Reasor.able household oets pemu. tted. . u.wFlENCE .. H;\PJ)~JG *Any person or ent1ty may purchase a wut. Prepared by: ~< :t.. ~~ ONners do not U'lClude oersons WJ.th -"""Kel'.n€t:n ..... ,,\,;c:::-,er securl.ty lJ'lterest 1.."1 the uru.ts. Ti~le: Attorneys for Sulxilv1cer hp/resum8 11/16/88 Date: Septatt:er2~, 1989 ~ . \.. .-----, -- --r 1- ~/ 7Y ~~ J-; - _ February 2, 1990 Kathryn Foster Santa Monlca Plannlng Dlvlslon Room 212 1685 Maln Street Santa Monica~ CA 90401 Dear Kathryn: In response to our phone conversatlon yesterday (and the "notlce of development" proposal I recelved in the mail), I'm wrlting to express concerns about the building proJect under consideration at 837~9 15th St. The condltional use permlt number is 89-079. c ~ :J " "1 some I'm a resident of a five-unlt townhouse buildlng at 818 15th St. Our parklng access is from the alley behlnd. You lnformed me that~ despite a Santa Monlca City ordinance, the applicants have asked to place garage/parking access at the front of the bUllding, rather than in the alley. That poses some deflnlte problems, I think. 1. Safety: twice each weekday, chlldren going to and from the nearby school (Washington St. between 14 and 16th streets) use the East 15th St. sldewalk. Street access for up to 12 cars 1n the new complex means that a lot more cars will cross the k1ds' path than currently do. 2. Aesthetics/noise: garages and dr1veways at the front of a building, open to the street, are often ugly; use extremely br1ght l1ght1ng that glares out onto an otherwlse serene ne1ghborhood; and feature au~omatlc doors and/or gates that screech loudly every time a car goes inrr out. It's better to confjne this kind of disturbance to the alley. 3. Increased residential traffic: the high-dens1ty commercial development along Montana Ave. has already brought a lot more cars, and parkers, to 15th St. Cars assoc1ated w1th this new building shouldn't be allowed to add to the problem. Our building features alley access~ so we're well aware that it's a perfectly good solutlon to the park1ng problem, causes no hardshlps for us and, ln fact, means that the front of our buildln~ 1S much more attractlve, appealing, without a garage loomlng in eVldence. Please feel free to contact me if you have any quest1ons. I'm available at 213/785-0515 (office) or 213/451-0248 (even1ngs.) a;.n erely, ~ / ,I ~.'~ i ,L~~ .;!", tG.7-<; 1stine Thomas ---- . \- . (jf) Plannmg DIVI~lOn. Room 212 1685 Nlam Street Santa ~Ionica CA 90401 A un. Kathryn Foster l -.' ~ - - ( . - -, , , , -..1 . - ~ Dear Comm1ssioners, I hve at 848 16th Street, Apartment E. dIagonally across the alley from the 837 -83.-9 1 Sth Street SIte of COndItIOnal Use Permit 89-079 Although 1 am unable to attend Your hearing on February 7th. I wish to VOIce my strong OpposItIOn to this condo development. Upon receIving your Notice of Development Proposal. I walked over and personally mspected the lot. It now contams two rather charmmg one-story SpanIsh-style UnIts. apperently well mamtamed and cared for A large fruH- laden orange tree graces the back yard The oroposed two-story structure would 100m over the adJa€ent lot on 15th Street {across from mv resIdence L and would compromIse the pnvacv of mv balcony and mv bedroom. We can Ill-afford to cut down vet another tree In my neIghborhood, a lovely p10e and a grand old sycamore have been lost on lots adjacent to mille 10 just the last two months, r al~o protest the Impact on traffIC 10 our neIghborhood. already overburdened by the commerCIal development of Montana Avenue. less than a block away. Whde the provision ot off -street parkmg mav be seen as a plus by your commISSIOn. It tnevitably means twelve cars comIng and gOlllg. The current use of the lot at 837-839 15th Street IS in keepmg With the nature of the surrounding neIghborhood We don't need more condo Ufins We don t need the dirty, nOlSY mconvemence of ,unnecessary construchon, We don t need thIS proJect I Slllcerely. fL.~~ KeVIn McKeown 848-E 16th Street Santa Monica. CA 90403 . . " (~Y 'lanning I... - .; 1011 , ~1ain Sf:" Lli Mon~L I -..);-nl_.1. 'J:) + I, i .:~ L Ln: Kathryn "; - .er -- ~ r-"'" ..... i I ~ . From Beverly Sokol 833 15th Street # 6 Sdnta Monica, California 90403 '-. I February 5. 1990 DedT Good People at the Planning Dlvision, I've been an Engllsh teacher in the public school for fifteen years, ~o I'm no stranger to how shabbily this society orders its priorities. ] 've been a resldent of the city of Santa Monica since 1975--fifteen years. T1:H.::,(c' 1 wo realities are not unrelated. I know I am able to return to the uiffLcult and stressful job of teaching in a large urban high school be- cause I am renewed and refreshed every slngle evening of my life when I return to the city of my choice; speclflcally the qUlet, perfect, green neighborhood that is 15th Street...just south of Montana. I read the articles about the declining quallty of life 1n L.A. I hear the talk on the streets about the same almo5t everywhere I go. Funny, I Just don't think thlngs are all that tough in my beloved Santa Monica. One can still breathe here. One can stllI walk here. Not too long ago I decided to go out for a walk in my neighborhood. ^~ r stepped out of the front door of my one room apartment with full ~Ilchcn and bath, I not1ced a change that upset me greatly. The tree, a h".HJt lfully full grown majestic one that once stood on the property at 837-839 15th Street had been cut down. The logs from that old frlend had been neatly stacked near the stump. NO ONE CARES! As I continued TIY daily walk in the neighborhood, I learned the reason why the tree J~ed. l'lle sign now posted at 837-839 15th Street says that Willlam and Mary Blase want to build something where the tree once stood. Now, through proper notification, I learn that these people wnnt pcrm1ss1on to build a four unit condominimum w1th twelve parking spaces within twenty feet of my kitchen window. I suppose all the fruit trees I see as I do my dishes will have to go also. So, we make room for more people and more cars. Incidentally, I don't have a parking space on the premises at 833 15th. So far, with my attitude.. ."I'll-put-up-with-damn- . . -near-any thing-just -to-continue-to-live-in-Santa-Monica" has sustained me. Presently, I have no trouble findlng a spot to park on the street, day or night, ln a city where I feel absolutely safe. That feeling lS no small feat ln this troubled world. I stlll want to grow old in this town, one of the few on the westside where old people stlll have a place. I don't know Willlam and Mary Blase. I'm sure, as the saying goes, they are nice enough people. But,I do know after forty-one years of living in the real'world that their project falls into the "Let's-make-lots-of money-while-we-still-canH category. I cannot state this bel1ef too strongly. Money talks. I'm a very generic Amerlcan. My father and stepfather bot~ fouGht in WWII. My stepfather was decorated for his bravery at Pearl Harbor. I grew up ln the Midwest where values like hard work still count for GOmethlng. I went to college--teacher's college, the sensible career for a young woman of my upbringing. I was lucky enough to get to go to coLlege because of humanistic government programs. I'm still ]dealistic enough to belleve that my quiet fight for a better world through public education wl11 stlll make a difference. Folks give lipservice to notions like hard work and concern for the environment, but the flrst cb~nce they get they try to make qULck. easy money wlth property investments that require cutting down trees that have been around for yearsand will take that long to totally replace. The tree at 837-839 is already gone. I guess I have spoken for that old friend since lt can no longer defend itself. I speak also for the children I face everyday of my l~fe. I could not face them tomorrow ~f I did not write tb~s ]ptter an~ appe~r here tonight Please do not approve the plan for 837-839 15th Street. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, :;c.verly Sokol ;-333 15th Santa Mon~ 'u403 Ph . Ii t. 58- , . ", "/ c ( l i ty Cc j 11 ( ....-/ ....... J , ,--- - I ..... ~~ :-\0. / lUll J) f I J (,-, I ~.i1 0, 1 ';" 5. I c. I) or ,.f an(;;'Jl:t-/)r (fJ... ,.- - --...... -.... L. _ _ f ,;' - ..__ I /"-,'1" ~ I -' .' ! L /1::... n /'-/ ...J ,.' 1 j II : I .. J'" r {I",'"..../ I:? /1 fr r j) /1 .F /1:' i LJ / J I} 5/2 ~ Ky [( /7 t' i;?j~ I~ Q n CJCC/JJ/JJC ,C/l 'l~c'.:..~ , I( e . Co /) D L LI 0/) (l!.. LI r c::- r) e tC ()7 t -c g 7 - 0 7 Y . S '; 7 - 8 3 '1 / s' tJ./ .5 t R€ c2 t / S /i fJ t fJ J }/c /' / C ;4 IkCl'( Sir? ' Ille a ^ f; i-ll e u /J.I /? t: /z ~ 0 t E _3 'J ~ / _.;- ttl S t ^-' e ~ t- / /)'} /'7 d"lrJl b/J a t{J aCe I,' t- ;L to _f i/ 'iI f? L c r J:. D'p ~ l2t:j 8 e C h}/ s. e, 0. /' tlll2 Iv (( (; (}/ (~) (; /; fia 5 0 I~ s;, /..J e /( ~ L t.j <-5:,' i:- t- fie CI e /} / Q L 0 /' L C ~1 c{ i C I C /J (L L u 5 r.2 f' t' r~ Jr L t S c; - ~ 19_ ( (j) E,J1 t!< C I.Y'e.~ 0 f ellt'" .S (J f, t ~ A;; (j /1 cc. 11 t? () ~ j(/ ~ ~<1 9 J /,' {~ ~' ~ SHr..ctLO ~<:, (I?OIi' cH~ CLL(t::.j 't):~R:(cf Dr rXDi'r v t /-1 f / ~ -- 1.11 J !:-I<' i:'i:! t S I):) <.. G.-! 7/ti<. F ^ C('0Sf'LI .Det ( C L J)/ it J S lie li (d J":>~ CC {-,Ij'~ .r C l( f:. H 5./ f) ~ 0 t ~ If Ic2 r /(' or- A. 6 tj if tL f j-/.It! ^ t /-; (( /J Lc t:- H .,: /) o~tJl S 11-!e J c/ s {-I/~.!/. ld {. It t:: {( 1J7 I/) a r--e ~/ie jJ.RI?lQC)j Of'l:-h'2 cccu./'UI?C:.S of :;:;.3 _ /~~ tH S~tl2el.Lt, (j) TIle /l12.((5II[ of ;1t~j)~ of'1 tH'i. f3r.Lt'LD/I) cS Of) [He. J'to c I( ('! ;7 C {(;< c{ll) G !5 -32> - J ,c; tit ,St!: ec t) e ^ c ~E- d' .:2.1 G . j> eec / /} fie I Gill: Ci /7/-' SI.2I/<2/~ Q t. C; k' ~ C' /} t.;J. L c; 6 c V /// 6// /-oJ f?S I /Je /)t I Cl L LI /)( i:s. L ;#f" jJllujJOj.-en )/+:/6/(6- (JI' :5Cl jJ~e6- /vYCL/(c./ .e{/ml/)ole t)/t' cyc!a/,l V/elf/ Stl/) c1/Jd l/c/-/t- ,.., J / t1.J . ;- t1 A tnti ()CC ap t/f) S (1 J /}7j E ill. L 1) //7 C ,. (i) T /If? ct (/0 W /? /}l ~ c /' (( ..{ [J /} R. 60 j? h.Y ( It j? L/...e f: I/~' I<. [I/~?/~/~II t-ij"e- ;o~e.J:(}/Jt:- C'CCU/,t7n{.!-,' el7j'o!J1nt'l1{ cf /~/f/tlcy cI/'d !1,1C;et:::ose t;Ye //Clse '1..'2 veL , &&/)-vudb- ;J ~~ iLfsjJc?ci f!u.IL//) ~ 'Hq~~'-7-1t . . \. -----... (JFj ?ebruary 03, 1990 - \} ......:- I - -' Anne-Marte & Thor-as Heaney 843 15th Street Sar.ta Monlca, CA 904~3 ~ ~ - Clty of Santa Mon1ca Plann1ng D1vls1on, Roo~ 212 1685 :V!a1n Street Santa ~on1ca, CA 90401 Attn:. Kathryn Foster Dear ~~ss Foster: Re: 837 - R-2 Blase Cond1tional Use Perm1t 89-079 39 - 15th Street CondoM1n1urn ProJect I am wr1t1ng In reference to the above proposed Condofll1nlum proJect. In prlnc1ple we agree wlth th1S proJect, Wh1Ch 15 dlrectly North of the slngle family home where we have res~ded for Many years. I understand that the project Cd~JS :or a front access off of 15th Street, as proposed ln t~la 'j 1 lie "?rints, lnstead of an alley access. The proposed front access ~111l not 1nterfere wlth our property and park1ng and we therefo~e support ltA Further~ore, wlth the proposed front access the condomlnl~m project wlll have 12 oarklng spaces, lnstead of 9 WhlC~ result from alley access. Each property on 15th Street has ample garage parklng for residents, as requlred by law, and street parklng is I1mited to Vlsltors for the most part, due to commerclal towlng vehicles and customer parklng for the surroundlng merchants. We feel therefore, that a front access from 15th Street for the Blase project lS well deslgned and should be an asset for the nelghborhood parking sltuatlon. Slncerely, ~~~~~n~.L~ . Ifdd/7/0N 7D /p1..B tltruary, 25, 1990 Mr. and Mrs. A. Hamidi 1948 Skyline Terrace Escondido, CA 92027 (619) 747-1474 Members of City council City of Santa Monica, CA Re: CUP 89-079, 837-39 15th Street 2 story, 4 unit condominium project. Honorable Mayor Zane and Council Members: On February 7, 1990 the city Planning Commission approved the plans of a four unit condominium project at 837-39 15th Street without requiring the access to the subterranean garage from the alley as it is the present City code and the condltion set forth by the planning staff. ' We are the owners of 833-15th since 1971. We and the majority of the occupants of the building attended this meeting and voiced our objections. Also several occupants who could not attend wrote to the members of the planning commission stating their objections. Our utmost objection to this project is the access to the subterranean garage from 15th Street. The street access will eliminate parking off the street and also eliminate and/or severely damage a beautiful tall pine tree. The site is one and a half blocks from Lincoln Junior High school and it will be a further safety and health hazard to the children and the general public. The nine foot slope as projected by the builder is not accurate. Furthermore, all accesses of the properties south of 833-15th Street to Idaho are from the alley, inclUding one with far more slope than the project in question. The proposed driveway access from the street is immediately next to the driveway of 833-15th street and will cause excessive fumes, traffic and safety hazards. We lived, raised and schooled our three children in Santa Monica and plan to return to Santa Monica upon retirement. We are writing to you seeking your help to prevent the builder from proceedlng with this proj ect which 15 in violation of the present Santa Monica City Code. The construct~on of a thlrty feet high 2 story building wlth balconies on the north side facing balconies of our build~ng will cause nOlse and eliminate light, sun and privacy for our tenants. It is our request that the access to the subterranean garage should not be allowed from 15th street and cause even further damages and reduction of value to our property. Henriette A. Hamidi / J./ -2V---. / .' /~ ... , 1;.;(..//I2ri/lJ.k.:.- i- r7 '~/G;f /)(--<.dI...' Respectfully, ~.. \~) ~ '" 7 A. Hamidl