SR-402-006
PCD:SF::F:\PLAN\SHARE\COUNCIL\STRPT\2003\Appeal BonusCW.doc
Council Mtg: August 12, 2003 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal 03APP-008 of the Planning Commission’s Denial of Zone Change
02-036, Text Amendment 02-007, and Conditional Use Permit 02-009 to
Rezone an OP2 Lot to an OP2A Designation and to Amend Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.38.050 to Allow Canopy Structures,
Temporary Parking and Wipe-down Areas in Support of Existing Car
Wash Operations in the “A” Overlay District, Subject to a Conditional Use
Permit. Applicant/Appellant: RTK Architects
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission’s denial of Zone Change 02-036, Text Amendment 02-007, and
Conditional Use Permit 02-009. The Planning Commission, at its April 23, 2003
meeting, voted 5-0 to deny the project. The appeal statement is contained in
Attachment A and the Planning Commission staff report is contained in Attachment B.
BACKGROUND
The applicant/appellant proposes to re-zone an OP2 parcel to an OP2A designation and
amend the provisions of the “A” Overlay District to conditionally permit accessory
structures up to 14 feet in height and wipe-down areas in support of a car wash
operation. As proposed, this amendment would only apply to a car wash business that
is directly adjacent to an “A” zoned parcel and that has been in operation for at least 15
years. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is also requested to entitle the project,
consistent with the proposed text amendment, and is required for the proposed
expansion and intensification of a legal non-conforming use. The CUP is required for
the main car wash operation and would also apply to the OP2A lot, if the project were
approved.
1
The Planning Commission at its April 23, 2003 meeting denied these requests. On May
7, 2003, the applicant appealed the Planning Commission’s decision. The appeal,
included with this report as Attachment A, is based on the contention that the proposed
project does not result in an intensification of use, and that the proposed canopy
structure be approved. Despite requests for project plans, the applicant failed to
provide plans for the Planning Commission and no plans or additional information was
provided for the City Council’s review.
DISCUSSION
Project Description
The project involves applications to expand a legal non-conforming car wash to allow
parking and vehicle wipe-down services under an accessory canopy structure on a
residentially zoned, OP2 lot. The project includes applications for a zone change, text
amendment, and conditional use permit.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission’s determination to deny the project was based on the
anticipated impacts that would result from increased vehicular activity and support
operations on the residential lot and the project’s inconsistency with the General Plan.
Specifically, the Planning Commission believed that the proposed commercial
expansion into the residential neighborhood and intensification of use would impair the
integrity of the surrounding neighborhood. The surrounding neighborhood consists of
modest single and multi-family residences with minimal commercial intrusions from
nearby Lincoln Boulevard. It was believed that the proposed project would further
expand commercial operations westerly toward the residential neighborhood causing
2
disruptions to the quality of life and neighborhood integrity. Anticipated disruptions
include increased vehicular traffic and noise associated with active vehicle cleaning on
a parcel that has historically been used as a passive parking lot and is residentially
zoned. Noise from car alarms, the multiple closing of car doors, horns and employees
yelling to attract customer attention are activities and noises that would frequently be
generated on site.
The Planning Commission also cited inconsistencies with the General Plan. Specifically,
Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to
highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use
or public open space on the surface”. Further, the Planning Commission cited an
inconsistency with Land Use Objective 1.1, which seeks to protect the quality of life in
all residential neighborhoods. The Planning Commission believed that the project did
not provide a proper transition between the commercial and residential land uses and
that increased activity on the OP2 lot was an unnecessary intrusion that would
undermine the character and enjoyment of the residential district.
Appeal Analysis
The subject car wash is a legal non-conforming use since it does not possess a CUP,
which is now required for the use, and fails to meet certain property development
standards such as landscaping, access and circulation. The car wash has historically
used the adjacent residential lot (OP2) as a ten-space parking lot, which is also a legal
non-conforming use of that parcel. As such, the OP2 lot has been and may continue to
be used as a ten-space parking lot in support of the adjacent car wash business,
subject to the nonconforming use provisions of the Municipal Code.
3
The applicant proposes to expand the car wash operation to include wipe-down activity
on the OP2 parcel, and requests that an existing canopy to shelter cars and employees
be authorized.
Consistent with SMMC Section 9.04.18.030 (e), staff believes the proposed project is a
change to the existing character of operation. Specifically, the request to change the
use of the OP2 lot from a passive vehicle parking area to a use that will involve
employee activity, vehicle drying and detailing, represents an intensification and
expansion of use. The referenced code section states that a legal nonconforming use
shall not be permitted to change in mode or character of operation. A legal
nonconforming use may intensify and expand provided the use is made to conform with
all applicable regulations, including approval of necessary land use entitlements. As an
expansion and intensification of use, the entire site must be made to conform to
appropriate development standards and obtain CUP approval. The applicant filed all
necessary applications to expand the car wash operation with the intent to bring the site
into compliance with applicable codes, however, as previously noted, there remains
outstanding compliance with some development standards.
The appellant challenges the Planning Commission and staff’s determination that the
project represents an intensification of use. The appellant believes the request to
construct a canopy on the OP2 lot is not an intensification of use and, provided it
complies with applicable development standards, that it should be permitted on the site.
This statement, however, mistakenly focuses the appeal on the construction of the
canopy and not the applicant’s request to provide car wash support activity, the
proposed vehicle wipe-down area, on the OP2 parcel . Moreover, the appeal does not
address the larger issues expressed by the Planning Commission concerning the
4
anticipated impacts to area residents and the appropriateness of the proposed text
amendment.
As specifically stated in the project application, it is the appellant’s intent to use the OP2
lot as a vehicle wipe down area. This action represents an expansion and intensification
of use because it would extend commercial operations to the residential lot and
significantly change the mode and character of operation of the existing car wash use.
The project does not include adequate protections to preserve the quality of life for area
residents and incorporates a text amendment that specifically allows commercial activity
on a residentially zoned parcel. Although the OP2 lot is legally allowed to have cars
parked on the lot in support of the car wash, it was never anticipated or authorized that
the car wash operation would expand to the adjacent residential parcel. Allowing wipe-
down activities to shift to this location would result in unnecessary impacts to immediate
residential properties and the neighborhood in general.
CEQA ANALYSIS
The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), pursuant to Section 15601 (b) (4) of the State Implementation Guidelines in
that environmental review is not required for projects that will be rejected or disapproved
by a public agency.
Should the City Council determine that the project merits approval, an assessment of
project-related impacts to the environment would be necessary prior to final action.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050, notice of the public hearing was
5
mailed to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property located within a
500-foot radius of the project at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing.
A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment D.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact.
CONCLUSION
The proposed project is not consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan
or the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, permitting the car wash to expand
further into the residential neighborhood is not consistent with General Land Use Policy
1.2.2 or Objective 1.1. The impacts associated with the intrusion into the residential
neighborhood would impair the integrity of the residential neighborhood and, therefore,
does not warrant a recommendation of approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission’s decision to deny Zone Change 02-036, Text Amendment 02-007, and
Conditional Use Permit 02-009 to rezone an OP2 lot to an OP2A designation and to
amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.38.050 to allow canopy
structures, temporary parking and wipe-down areas in support of existing car wash
operations in the “A” overlay district, subject to a Conditional Use Permit, based upon
the following findings:
FINDINGS
ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
6
1. The proposed zone change is not consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted General
Plan in that the proposed use of the OP2 lot, along with the proposed
applications to allow for such use, conflicts with City-wide objectives and policies
established in the Land Use and Circulation Element. Specifically, Objective 1.2
which is to ensure compatibility of adjacent land uses, with particular concern for
protecting residential neighborhoods and Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface
parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors when
redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use or public open space on the
surface”. Furthermore, the rezoning of the OP2 parcel to an OP2A designation
would not be consistent with the City-wide Objectives, specifically 1.1 that seeks
to protect the quality of life in all residential neighborhoods in that the rezoning
along with the proposed text amendment would allow expanded auto related
commercial activities directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Anticipated
impacts include increased vehicular traffic and noise associated with active
vehicle cleaning on a parcel that has historically been used as a passive parking
lot and is residentially zoned. Noise from car alarms, the multiple closing of car
doors, horns and employees yelling to attract customer attention are activities
and noises that would frequently be generated on site.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare does not require the adoption of
the proposed zone change in that the proposed zone change would extend
commercial use of land further into a residential neighborhood thereby creating
a situation where residential uses would be further impacted by noise, negative
aesthetics, minimal setbacks, and lack of transition. This action would be
counter to Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned
residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should
be reserved for residential use or public open space on the surface”.
TEXT AMENDMENT FINDINGS
1. The proposed text amendment is not consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted General
Plan in that the proposed use of the OP2 lot, along with the proposed
applications to allow for such usage, is counter to the City-wide Objectives and
policies established in the Land Use and Circulation Element. Specifically,
objective 1.2 which is to ensure compatibility of adjacent land uses, with
particular concern for protecting residential neighborhoods and Policy 1.2.2
which states, “surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway
commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use
or public open space on the surface”. Furthermore, the proposed text
amendment would not be consistent with the City-wide Objectives, specifically
1.1 that seeks to protect the quality of life in all residential neighborhoods in that
the proposed text amendment would allow expanded auto related commercial
activities directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare does not require the adoption of
the proposed text amendment in that the proposed text amendment would
extend commercial use of land further into a residential neighborhood thereby
creating a situation where residential uses would be further impacted by noise,
negative aesthetics, minimal setbacks, and lack of transition. This action would
be counter to Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned
7
residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should
be reserved for residential use or public open space on the surface”.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
1. The proposed use is not conditionally permitted within the subject district and
does not comply with all of the applicable provisions of the City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the requested
expansion and intensification of the existing legal nonconforming car wash use
requires a Conditional Use Permit for the entire site, pursuant to the standards
contained in the nonconforming chapter of the Zoning Ordinance. However, the
requested expansion to the adjacent OP2 lot is not a permitted use in this
residential district. The applicant filed a Zone Change and Zoning Ordinance
Text Amendment to allow commercial use of the residential property, subject to
a Conditional Use Permit. The City Council, in its review of the proposed text
amendment and zone change, denied this request based upon the detrimental
impacts it would cause to the adjoining residential neighborhood and
inconsistency with the General Plan. Therefore, the request for a Conditional
Use Permit must be denied.
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director
Jay M. Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager
Amanda Schachter, Principal Planner
Jonathan R. Lait, AICP, Senior Planner
Bradley J. Misner, AICP, Associate Planner
City Planning Division
Planning and Community Development Department
Attachments: A. Appeal Statement
B. Planning Commission staff report dated April 23, 2003
C. Planning Commission Statement of Official Action, dated April
23, 2003
D. Public Notice
E. Planning Commission Minutes
8
ATTACHMENT A
APPEAL STATEMENT
Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for
review at the City Clerk’s Office.
9
ATTACHMENT B
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED APRIL 23, 2003
10
CP:JT:AS:JL:BM:f:\plan\share\pc\strpt\02\02TA007.doc Santa Monica, California
Planning Commission Mtg: April 23, 2003
TO: The Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: Zone Change (02-036), Text Amendment (02-007), and Conditional Use
Permit (02-009)
Address: 2800 Lincoln Boulevard
Applicant: RTK Architects
INTRODUCTION
Action: Applications for a Zone Change, Text Amendment, and a Conditional Use
Permit to rezone an OP2 lot to an OP2A designation and to amend the conditionally
permitted uses section of the “A” overlay district to allow canopy structures, temporary
parking and wipe-down areas in support of a car wash operation.
Recommendation: Deny based on findings.
Permit Streamlining Expiration Date: Not applicable to projects that involve legislative
action.
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The property upon which the car wash operation is located, consists of 21,650 square
foot and is located on the west side of Lincoln Boulevard between Ashland Avenue and
Raymond Avenue having approximately 211.46 feet of street frontage along Lincoln,
102.88 feet of frontage along Ashland Avenue, and 70.31 feet along Raymond Avenue.
Surrounding uses consist of commercial uses in the C4 district to the north and south, a
mix of residential and commercial uses in the C4 district to the east, and residential
uses in the OP2 district to the west. Existing on-site uses include the car wash
structure, which totals approximately 3,928 square feet.
Zoning District: C4 (Highway Commercial District) and OP2 (Ocean Park Low
Density Multi-family Residential)
Land Use District: Service and Specialty Commercial and Low Density Housing
Parcel Area: 21,650 square feet for the parcels located in the C4 district
5,650 square feet for the parcel located in the OP2 district
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the following requests:
11
1. Zone Change application to re-zone an OP2 parcel to an OP2-A parcel. This
action would allow the parcel to be zoned as a parking overlay parcel rather than
strictly a residentially zoned parcel;
2. Text Amendment application to change the provisions of the “A” Overlay District
to allow: 1) temporary parking and wipe-down areas in support of a car wash
operation if the car wash is directly adjacent to an “A” zoned parcel and the car
wash has been in operation for at least 15 years, and 2) to allow canopy
structures (not to exceed 14 feet in height) used to protect/shield any temporary
parking/wipe-down area in support of an existing car wash. Both uses would be
subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit;
3. Conditional Use Permit application to authorize temporary parking of wipe-down
areas and canopies and to change car wash from a nonconforming use to a
conforming use.
Note: Applicant failed to provide project plans and other application materials as
requested by staff for Planning Commission review.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The subject property is nonconforming with respect to several aspects of the Municipal
Code and General Plan. The applicant has submitted the subject applications as a
means to remedy these nonconforming conditions.
CEQA STATUS
The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (4) of the State Implementation Guidelines in
that environmental review is not required for projects that will be rejected or disapproved
by a public agency.
Should the Planning Commission determine that the project merits approval, an
assessment of project-related impacts to the environment would be necessary prior to
final action.
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY STATUS
The existing building on the project site is not identified on the Historic Resources
Inventory and is not proposed for demolition.
RENT CONTROL STATUS
Exempt; commercial property
FEES
The project is not subject to any special City Planning related fees.
12
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080 and in accordance with the posting
requirements set forth by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant posted a sign on the
property regarding the subject application prior to application filing. At least eight (8)
weeks prior to the public hearing date, the applicant is required to submit a photograph
to verify the site posting and to demonstrate that the sign provides the following
information: Project case number, brief project description, name and telephone
number of applicant, site address, date, time and location of public hearing, and the City
Planning Division phone number. The applicant has been advised of the site posting
requirement by phone and in writing. As of the date of this report, the site continues to
not be properly posted. The failure to post does not prevent the hearing from
proceeding since the notice requirements of SMMC 9.04.20.20.050 have been met and
staff recommends that the project be denied
In addition, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050, notice of the public
hearing was mailed to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property
located within a 500 foot radius of the project and published in the “California” Section of
The Los Angeles Times at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. A
copy of the notice is contained in Attachment C.
The applicant was notified by phone on January 30, 2003 and by writing on February 3,
2003 and March 25, 2003 of the subject hearing date.
ANALYSIS
Background
Bonus Car Wash was established at the subject property in approximately 1972. The
car wash operation occupies five parcels along Lincoln Boulevard between Ashland
Avenue and Raymond Avenue. A ten-space parking lot, in support of the car wash, was
established on a 50 x 113 foot parcel located directly adjacent (to the west) to the car
wash property. This parcel, with 50 feet of frontage along Ashland Avenue, was
established in the 1960s as a surface parking lot for the adjoining commercial use. At
that time, automobile parking lots in multi-family residential districts were permitted,
provided the parking lot served an adjacent business and did not extend into the
residential district more than 150 feet. The parcel was zoned R2 and subsequently was
re-zoned to OP2 in 1989 when the Ocean Park Zoning District was adopted.
Code Compliance
In July of 2001, the City received complaints about excessive noise being generated
throughout the neighborhood by the car wash operation. Upon investigation, the City’s
Code Enforcement Division discovered that a canopy structure, a mechanical
equipment shed, portable storage containers, and an employee break area covering
had been placed upon the parking lot in the OP2 zone without permits. They also
determined that the canopy was being used to shelter cars while they were being
vacuumed, wiped-down and detailed. Accordingly, two notice of violation orders were
issued. Both orders, issued three weeks apart, directed the removal of the canopy and
all portable storage containers, and the return of the OP2 lot to its original condition as a
ten-space parking lot. Because the applicant did not voluntarily comply with the notice
13
of violation orders, nuisance abatement hearings were conducted on February 21, 2002
and March 6, 2002. The Nuisance Abatement Board determined the operation of the
car wash constituted a nuisance and ordered its abatement. Among other actions, the
Nuisance Abatement Board ordered the property owner to obtain City approval or
remove the outdoor storage container, canopy/ lean-to, and small shed located on the
OP2 parcel. A copy of the Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance is included with this
report as Attachment A. The Nuisance Abatement action is currently subject to
litigation.
In accordance with the nuisance abatement order, the applications now being
considered by the Planning Commission were filed to legalize the existing conditions.
Neighborhood Compatibility
The neighborhood in the general vicinity consists of commercial uses fronting on Lincoln
Boulevard with single and multi-family uses to the west and east of the commercial
zoned parcels. Due to the historic use of the subject property, one 50' x 110' residential
parcel is used to support parking for the existing car wash. This is a legal
nonconforming condition. However, while previously used as off-street parking, the site
has also been illegally converted into a wipe-down and detailing area, and has served
as an employee break area. This expansion of the commercial use to the residential
property expands the operational boundaries of the site and results in significant
adverse impacts to the neighborhood. Area residents have complained of significant
noise being generated at the site. Specifically, noise in the form of car alarms, vacuum
and wax/buffing machines, and employees yelling has contributed to these complaints.
While these are typical characteristics of car washing facilities, it was never anticipated
or authorized that the car wash operation would expand to the adjacent residential
parcel. Such expansion has a direct adverse impact on the immediate residential
property and generally negatively impairs the character of the Ocean Park district. The
intensity of uses and encroachment into the residential neighborhood does not serve to
protect or maintain the residential neighborhood, does not minimize traffic hazards on
residential streets, or keep adjacent uses free from disturbing noise.
Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Review
Bonus Car Wash is considered a legal non-conforming use since its establishment
predates current regulations that require conditional use permit approval. Legal non-
conforming uses cannot change in mode or character of operation, or expand unless
such changes are in accordance with code requirements. The filing of the
aforementioned applications to legalize the current conditions of the OP2 zone would
constitute a change in mode and character of operation of the car wash in that the
commercial activities would be expanded (i.e. wipe down, vacuuming, detailing).
Therefore, approval of a CUP for the car wash operation is required. Pursuant to
SMMC Section 9.04.14.130, car wash operations that require a CUP must comply with
special standards designed to help ensure they operate in a harmonious manner with
the neighborhood. As submitted for the Planning Commission’s review, the plans do
14
not comply with these special standards, including landscaping, access and circulation,
and location of activities such as vacuuming.
In addition to non-compliance with special development standards, the proposed use of
the OP2 lot, along with the proposed applications to allow the lot to be used in support
of the existing car-wash, is counter to the City-wide objectives and policies established
in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Specifically, Objective 1.1 aims to protect
the quality of life in all residential districts and Objective 1.2 aims to ensure compatibility
of adjacent land uses, with particular concern for protecting residential neighborhoods.
Policy 1.2.2 states, surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway
commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use or
public open space. Furthermore, the purpose of Policy 1.2.2 is to ensure that
commercial uses in residential zones should transition back to residential to preserve
and enhance residential neighborhoods and protect housing from commercial
intrusions. Accordingly, staff believes the project is not consistent in principle with the
goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. Specifically, the impacts of noise,
insufficient landscaping, minimal setbacks, and the lack of proper transition between
commercial and residential land uses significantly degrade the quality of life for nearby
residents.
Zone Change/Text Amendment
The applicant proposes to add the following language to SMMC 9.04.08.38.050
pertaining to conditionally permitted uses in the A-Overlay district:
(e) Temporary parking and wipe-down area in support of a car wash operation if the
following conditions are met:
1. The car wash is directly adjacent to the “A” lot.
2. The car wash is existing and has been in operation for at least 15 years.
(f) Canopy structure (not to exceed 14'-0" in height) used to protect / shield any
temporary parking / wipe-down areas in support of an existing car-wash
operation.
In addition to the text amendment, the applicant requests extending the A-overlay
district to the subject OP2 parcel, making it an OP2-A parcel, and thus subject to the
proposed text amendment.
A-overlay districts are intended to provide adequate parking facilities to support
important commercial corridors, while ensuring the parking facility does not adversely
impact the environment of nearby residents or diminish the integrity of the subject
residential district in a manner inconsistent with the General Plan. The subject OP2
property is currently legal nonconforming with respect to its surface parking lot. The
parcel is also illegally nonconforming with respect to the canopy structure, break area
and the wipe-down/detailing activities, as noted above. It is these structures and
activities that the applicant is attempting to legalize with the submitted applications. As
previously stated, staff is concerned that proposed use of the residential parcel would
adversely impact adjacent residents and is inconsistent with the General Plan. The
proposed use of the parcel in a manner other than its historic use, parking, would result
in deleterious impacts to adjacent residential property owners and impair the integrity of
the Ocean Park district.
15
Conclusion
The proposed project is not consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan
or the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and therefore does not warrant a recommendation
of approval.
ALTERNATIVES
Other than the recommended action, the Planning Commission may:
1. Direct staff to prepare environmental analysis in order to consider project approval;
2. Deny Zone Change (02-036), Text Amendment (02-007), and Conditional Use Permit
(02-009) based upon revised findings and conditions;
3. Deny Zone Change (02-036), Text Amendment (02-007), and approve Conditional
Use Permit (02-009) to establish the legal, conforming use based upon revised
findings and conditions.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the proposed Zone Change,
Text Amendment and Conditional Use Permit based on the following findings.
FINDINGS
ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
1. The proposed zone change is not consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted
General Plan in that the proposed use of the OP2 lot, along with the
proposed applications to allow for such use, conflicts with City-wide
objectives and policies established in the Land Use and Circulation Element.
Specifically, Objective 1.2 which is to ensure compatibility of adjacent land
uses, with particular concern for protecting residential neighborhoods and
Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to
highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for
residential use or public open space on the surface”. Furthermore, the
rezoning of the OP2 parcel to an OP2A designation would not be consistent
with the City-wide Objectives, specifically 1.1 that seeks to protect the quality
of life in all residential neighborhoods in that the rezoning along with the
proposed text amendment would allow expanded auto related commercial
activities directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare does not require the adoption
of the proposed zone change in that the proposed zone change would
extend commercial use of land further into a residential neighborhood
16
thereby creating a situation where residential uses would be further impacted
by noise, negative aesthetics, minimal setbacks, and lack of transition. This
action would be counter to Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface
parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors
when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use or public open
space on the surface”.
TEXT AMENDMENT FINDINGS
1. The proposed text amendment is not consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted
General Plan in that the proposed use of the OP2 lot, along with the
proposed applications to allow for such usage, is counter to the City-wide
Objectives and policies established in the Land Use and Circulation Element.
Specifically, objective 1.2 which is to ensure compatibility of adjacent land
uses, with particular concern for protecting residential neighborhoods and
Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to
highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for
residential use or public open space on the surface”. Furthermore, the
proposed text amendment would not be consistent with the City-wide
Objectives, specifically 1.1 that seeks to protect the quality of life in all
residential neighborhoods in that the proposed text amendment would allow
expanded auto related commercial activities directly adjacent to residential
neighborhoods.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare does not require the adoption
of the proposed text amendment in that the proposed text amendment would
extend commercial use of land further into a residential neighborhood
thereby creating a situation where residential uses would be further impacted
by noise, negative aesthetics, minimal setbacks, and lack of transition. This
action would be counter to Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface
parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors
when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use or public open
space on the surface”.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
1. The proposed use is not conditionally permitted within the subject district and
does not comply with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa
Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that the OP2 zone
does not allow auto washing uses and would require a Zone Change and
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to allow them subject to a Conditional Use
Permit and that the car wash site does not comply with the special standards for
automobile car washes.
17
Prepared by: Bradley J. Misner, AICP, Associate Planner
Attachments:
A. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance
B. Radius and Location Map
C. Notice of Public Hearing
BJM
F:\PLAN\SHARE\PC\STRPT\02\02TA007.doc
July 5, 2007
18
ATTACHMENT C
PLANNING COMMISSION STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION,
DATED APRIL 23, 2003
19
City of Santa Monica
City Planning Division
PLANNING COMMISSION
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT
CASE NUMBER: Zone Change 02-036, Text Amendment 02-007, and
Conditional Use Permit 02-009
LOCATION: 2800 Lincoln Boulevard
APPLICANT: RTK Architects
PROPERTY Dipu Haque
OWNER:
CASE PLANNER: Bradley J. Misner, AICP, Associate Planner
REQUEST: Applications for a Zone Change, Text Amendment, and a
Conditional Use Permit to rezone an OP2 lot to an OP2-A
designation and to amend the conditionally permitted
uses section of the “A” overlay district to allow canopy
structures, temporary parking and wipe-down areas in
support of a car wash operation.
CEQA STATUS: The project is exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to
Section 15601 (b) (4) of the State Implementation
Guidelines in that environmental review is not required
for projects that will be rejected or disapproved by a
public agency.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
4/23/03 Date.
Approved based on the following findings and subject to the
conditions below
X Denied.
20
Other.
EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS IF NOT APPEALED:
5/8/03
EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS GRANTED:
N/A
LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION DATES:
Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City
Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit.
N/A
ZONE CHANGE FINDINGS
1. The proposed zone change is not consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted
General Plan in that the proposed use of the OP2 lot, along with the
proposed applications to allow for such use, conflicts with City-wide
objectives and policies established in the Land Use and Circulation Element.
Specifically, Objective 1.2 which is to ensure compatibility of adjacent land
uses, with particular concern for protecting residential neighborhoods and
Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to
highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for
residential use or public open space on the surface”. Furthermore, the
rezoning of the OP2 parcel to an OP2A designation would not be consistent
with the City-wide Objectives, specifically 1.1 that seeks to protect the quality
of life in all residential neighborhoods in that the rezoning along with the
proposed text amendment would allow expanded auto related commercial
activities directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare does not require the adoption
of the proposed zone change in that the proposed zone change would
extend commercial use of land further into a residential neighborhood
thereby creating a situation where residential uses would be further impacted
by noise, negative aesthetics, minimal setbacks, and lack of transition. This
action would be counter to Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface
parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors
when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use or public open
space on the surface”.
21
TEXT AMENDMENT FINDINGS
1. The proposed text amendment is not consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted
General Plan in that the proposed use of the OP2 lot, along with the
proposed applications to allow for such usage, is counter to the City-wide
Objectives and policies established in the Land Use and Circulation Element.
Specifically, objective 1.2 which is to ensure compatibility of adjacent land
uses, with particular concern for protecting residential neighborhoods and
Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface parking lots zoned residential adjacent to
highway commercial corridors when redeveloped, should be reserved for
residential use or public open space on the surface”. Furthermore, the
proposed text amendment would not be consistent with the City-wide
Objectives, specifically 1.1 that seeks to protect the quality of life in all
residential neighborhoods in that the proposed text amendment would allow
expanded auto related commercial activities directly adjacent to residential
neighborhoods.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare does not require the adoption
of the proposed text amendment in that the proposed text amendment would
extend commercial use of land further into a residential neighborhood
thereby creating a situation where residential uses would be further impacted
by noise, negative aesthetics, minimal setbacks, and lack of transition. This
action would be counter to Land Use Policy 1.2.2 which states, “surface
parking lots zoned residential adjacent to highway commercial corridors
when redeveloped, should be reserved for residential use or public open
space on the surface”.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
1. The proposed use is not conditionally permitted within the subject district and does not
comply with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica Comprehensive
Land Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that the OP2 zone does not allow auto washing uses
and would require a Zone Change and Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to allow them
subject to a Conditional Use Permit and that the car wash site does not comply with the
special standards for automobile car washes.
VOTE
Ayes: Clarke, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson, Olsen
Nays: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Brown, Moyle
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land
Use and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is
22
governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the City
pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1.16.010.
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final
determination of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Monica.
_____________________________ _____________________________
Darrell Clarke, Chairperson Date
23
ATTACHMENT D
PUBLIC NOTICE
24
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Appeal 03-008
2800 Lincoln Boulevard
APPLICANT: RTK Architects
APPELANT: Bonus Car Wash
PROPERTY OWNER: Prince Investment Inc.
A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request:
Appeal 03APP-008 of the Planning Commission’s Denial of Zone Change 02-036, Text
Amendment 02-007, and Conditional Use Permit 02-009 to Rezone an OP2 Lot to an
OP2A Designation and to Amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.38.050
to Allow Canopy Structures, Temporary Parking and Wipe-down Areas in Support of
Existing Car Wash Operations in the “A” Overlay District, Subject to a Conditional Use
Permit.
DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2003 AT 6:45 p.m.
LOCATION: City Council Chambers, Second Floor, Santa Monica City
Hall
1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California
HOW TO COMMENT
The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. You may comment at the City
Council public hearing, or by writing a letter. Written information will be given to the City
Council at the meeting.
Address your letters to: City Clerk
Re: Appeal 03-008
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
MORE INFORMATION
If you want more information about this project or wish to review the project file, please
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Senior Planner
contact at (310) 458-8341, or by e-mail at
jonathan-lait@santa-monica.org. The Zoning Ordinance is available at the Planning
Counter during business hours and on the City’s web site at www.santa-monica.org.
The meeting facility is wheelchair accessible. For disability-related accommodations,
please contact (310) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in advance. All
written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue
Bus Lines numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 serve City Hall.
25
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if this matter is
subsequently challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues
raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Santa Monica at, or prior to, the public hearing.
ESPAÑOL
Esto es una noticia de una audiencia pública para revisar applicaciónes proponiendo
desarrollo en Santa Monica. Si deseas más información, favor de llamar a Carmen
Gutierrez en la División de Planificación al número (310) 458-8341.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
JAY M. TREVINO, AICP
Planning Manager
F:\PLAN\SHARE\COUNCIL\NOTICES\03APP008.doc
26
ATTACHMENT E
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
27
8-C.Zone Change 02-036, Text Amendment 02-007, and Conditional Use Permit
02-009, 2800 Lincoln Boulevard.
Applications to allow a Zone Change, Text
Amendment and a Conditional Use Permit to rezone an OP2 lot to an OP2A
designation and to amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.38.050
to allow canopy structures, temporary parking and wipe-down areas in support of
existing car wash operations in the “A” overlay district, subject to a Conditional
APPLICANT: RTK Architects.
Use Permit. [Planner: Bradley J. Misner, AICP]
PROPERTY OWNER: Dipu Haque.
Prior to the Commission’s disclosures on this project, the applicant’s attorney,
Jeffrey Aaron Cohen, asked the Commission to continue this project for reasons
cited in his letter to the Commission.
Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum read the Zoning Ordinance code section
pertaining to requests for continuance. He also stated that there is, as Mr. Cohen
stated, a law suit pending between the property owner and City regarding a
Nuisance Abatement Order, however that suit has no bearing on the land use
issues addressed in the staff report.
The Commission had nothing of substance to disclose on this matter.
Associate Planner Bradley J. Misner gave the staff report.
Commissioner Olsen asked Mr. Misner if he understood the applicant’s request
correctly that they wanted to change the OP2 portion of their property to an “A”
overlay zone, which is a designation the City tries not to use, and then permit the
applicant to add a permanent structure to that parcel. Mr. Misner answered in the
affirmative, adding that the structure would require a Conditional Use Permit.
The applicant’s team spoke in the following order: Jeffrey Aaron Cohen
(attorney), project architect, Steve Bacchetti of RTK Architects; and Caleb S.
Grodsky (attorney). During the testimony, the timer was stopped and a brief
break was taken from 12:53 a.m. to 1:03 a.m. Testimony resumed with Mr.
Grodsky’s comments.
Commissioner Olsen asked Mr. Grodsky about the covered parking. Mr.
Grodsky stated that there will be a parking area, but not covered parking.
Chair Clarke expressed concern regarding the parking history of the property.
Mr. Misner clarified for the record that in 1987 the Architectural Review Board
approved a site plan for the car wash with ten parking spaces on-site.
Photographic evidence shows that a covered structure was in place in 1961 and
it was subsequently demolished. In 1968, surface parking was permitted,
providing that it did not encroach into the residentially zoned portion of the
28
property. He concluded by stating staff’s belief that a “wipe down area”
constitutes an expansion of the car wash use.
Chair Clarke asked staff about the car wash’s parking entitlements. Mr. Misner
stated that they are approved for ten parking spaces.
Commissioner Dad commented on the thoroughness of the staff report and
presentation and thanked staff for providing information on the entire process
for this application.
Commissioner Olsen made a motion to deny the applications per staff’s
recommendation.
Commissioner Hopkins seconded the motion.
Commissioner Olsen commented that the parcel in question is a residential lot,
but he will not oppose staff’s contention. He stated that the zoning cannot be
changed to intensify the use and he could not make the necessary findings to
approve the project. Commissioner Olsen stated for the record that the Text
Amendment finding regarding the welfare of the community must be made. He
stated that the only choice is with the staff report recommendation.
The motion to deny the applications was approved by the following vote:
Clarke, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson, Olsen; ABSENT: Brown, Moyle.
29