SR-402-010 (8)
lOR l Z A'1W
~T
I
'l~edw! lepueU!J JO la5pnq ou se4 lJodaJ S!4l U! palUasaJd UO!lepUawwo~aJ a41
1~VdVIIllVI~NVNI.:I/l38anS
Ipun08 ^l!8 aJoJaq MOU S! luawn~op S!4l 'pJo~aJ ~!Iqnd
a4l alaldwo~ Ol JapJO UI "le^oJdde JOJ IPun08 ^l!8 Ol paUJnlaJ Ja^au leadde S!4l JOJ
UO!PV lep!MO JO luawalelS a4lle4l MelS JO UO!lUalle a4l Ol awo~ se4 II 'UO!PV lep!MO
JO luawalelS pa4~elle a4l U! paU!elUO~ s5u!pU!J a4l uo paseq le^oJdde UO!SS!WW08
5u!UUeld a4l pa!uap pue leadde a4l Pla4dn Ipun08 a4l '666 ~ '9 ~ 4~JeVII uO
pJe^alnos
aJ!4SI!M HOH le pale~ol ^lJadoJd a4l JOJ L917 l!WJad Ma!^a~ luawdola^ao puawv Ol
~ ~O- L6 l!WJad Ma!^a~ luawdola^ao JO le^oJdde S,UO!SS!WW08 5u!UUeld a4l JO leaddv
JOJ UO!PV lep!MO JO luawalelS a4l UO!le~!J!lJa~ IPun08 ^l!8 JOJ Sl!WSueJl :J.jodaJ S!41
NOI18naO~:IlN I
'17~H le~ollueJnelsaCl Saa^0ldw3 lalOH JOJ Janv auuexo~ :luelladdv
'^lJadoJd ulo~u!l aJ!4sl!M JOJ ouaJOVII a)j!V11 :lue~!Iddv 'pJe^alnos
aJ!4SI!M HOH le pale~ol ^lJadoJd a4l JOJ L917 l!WJad Ma!^a~ luawdola^ao
puawV Ol ~ ~0-L6 l!WJad Ma!^a~ luawdola^ao JO le^oJddv S,UO!SS!WW08
5u!UUeld JO leaddv JOJ UO!PV lep!MO JO luawalelS JO UO!le~!J!lJa8 :183rsns
MelS ^l!8 : l!\JO~.:I
1!~un08 ^l!8 pue JO^eVII :01
,. l Z A'IW
~
e!uJoJ!le8 'e~!uOVII elues ~OOl "ll ^eVII :5lVIIIPun08
~OP" eOlSaJ! 4SI!MH08\seOlS\lpU nO~\aJe4S\Ueldn: S8:)i H s: 1r:.:I s: 08d
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council approve the attached Statement of
Official Action.
Prepared by:
Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning and Community Development
Jay M. Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager
Susan Healy Keene, AICP, Senior Planner
Gina Szilak, Assistant Planner
City Planning Division
Planning and Community Development Department
Attachments: A: Statement of Official Action
2
'V IN3I1\1H~'V 11 'V
..........
J
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL
ACTION
City of
Santa Moniea'"
PROJECT
CASE NUMBER: Appeal of Development Review Permit 97-013
LOCATION: 808 Wilshire Boulevard
APPLICANT: Mike Moreno for Wilshire Lincoln Property
APPELLANT: Roxanne Auer for Hotel Employees Restaurant Local 814
CASE PLANNER: Gina Szilak, Assistant Planner
REQUEST: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of
Development Review Permit 97 -013 to Amend
Development Review Permit 467 for the Property
Located at 808 Wilshire Boulevard.
CEQA STATUS: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and
certified for this mixed-use project on January 16, 1990.
The request to modify the permitted uses was determined
to be consistent with the original analysis and therefore,
no further environmental analysis is required.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
March 16. 1999 Date.
Approved based on the following findings and subject to the
conditions below.
x
Denied. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9.04.20.14.070, and Section 9.04.20.24.010 the City Council
3
upholds the appeal, thus denying DR 97-013 and
maintaining the original conditions of DR 467.
Other.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF ACTION: March 16. 1999
FINDINGS
1. On January 16, 1990 the City Council approved Development Review
Permit 467 with specific findings and conditions intended to lessen any
adverse impacts on the surrounding area resulting from construction of the
building. The permit prescribed certain uses and the applicant has not
made a good faith effort to abide by the existing conditions of approval.
2. Development Review Permit 467 required the building owner to comply
with the following conditions:
a) Work with City staff and neighborhood representatives to identify
appropriate tenants and uses for the ground floor street frontage
area along Lincoln Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard. The
pedestrian uses shall extend to a minimum depth 'of 30 feet along
both the Wilshire Boulevard and Lincoln Boulevard street frontages.
b) A minimum of 50% of the ground floor shall contain retail uses
consistent with the category of retail uses permitted in the C6
District and General Plan Districts.
c) The gas station design and layout for lighting, ingress/egress and
mechanical exhaust systems are specifically addressed in Council's
approval of the project. A service station was located on the site
prior to the proposed redevelopment project. The placement of a
service station use on site became an important part of the project
approval due to Council's concern over the elimination of service
stations in Santa Monica during the late 1980's and the early
1990's.
d) As per the condition of DR467, which requires that the Planning
Commission review the proposed hours for ground floor retail uses,
on March 7, 1990, the Planning Commission approved the retail
and service station hours as follows: 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Monday through Saturday and 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Sunday
4
e) Special conditions were attached to the DR permit to ensure the
building design would specifically consider the pedestrian elements
of design that include landscaping, lighting, access and relationship
to the street.
3. A public hearing was held by the City of Santa Monica City Council on
March 16, 1999 as part of the appeal of the decision of the Planning
Commission, amending DR467. Evidence was presented by the
developer of the proposed project and interested members of the public.
In addition, written communication was submitted by the public including
letters in opposition to the project and public testimony by 24 members of
the public and neighborhood residents who opposed the project.
4 The public testimony and actions by the building owner, found the building
owners ignored the prevailing conditions of approval and signed two lease
agreements with ground floor tenants without the input of neighborhood
groups to determine if these uses were appropriate for the area. In
addition, one of the uses was for a general office, in violation of the
development standard requiring a pedestrian-oriented use. The property
owner violated the approved condition of the development review permit
and filed a DR amendment to modify those standards.
5. A gas station was approved as part of the original project (DR Permit 467).
The applicant has not established that a good faith effort was made to
locate a tenant or that the operation of a service station was infeasible.
Thus, an important part of the development project has never come to
fruition. The service station has never had a tenant since 1997 when the
building was substantially completed. In addition, the gas station was
permitted to count towards the requirement that 50% of the ground floor
maintain a pedestrian-oriented use. The loss of ground floor activity as a
result of the space remaining vacant has been a detriment to the
neighborhood.
6. The proposed modifications to the existing development review conditions,
the physical location, size, massing, and placement of proposed structures
on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project are not
compatible with and do not relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and
neighborhoods, in that the original conditions of approval were designed to
make the building accommodate ground floor pedestrian uses along the
street frontages. The request to modify the permitted ground floor uses
would be detrimental to the neighborhood in that the concern and care
taken in reviewing the original project would be ignored without a good
faith effort on the part of the building owner to secure tenants.
7. The public testimony indicated that the building owners have not
conducted the operation at all times In a manner not detrimental to
surrounding properties as per a condition of approval in that the owners
have allowed the use of the loading dock for customer parking thereby
blocking the alley when deliveries do occur and by locking the
underground parking on weekends. Thereby this violates a condition of
approval that requires on-site parking to be provided without charge to
tenants and employees at the project site unless and until such time as a
preferential parking district is established in the project area.
VOTE
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Feinstein, Holbrook, McKeown, O'Connor, Rosenstein, Genser
None
None
None
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 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
fisnal dtetennination O~ity C. ouncil of the City of s:n_ta, :on_ ioCa,"
Igna ure ; - l.J.J , 0-
MARIA M. STEWART, C y Clerk Date
F:\PLAN\SHARE\COUNCIL \STOAS\808WILSHIRESTOA.DOC
6