SR-12-10-1985-12A
e
t;'() t/ ,-- OtO-r
e
1:2 -~
DEe 1 a 1JI5
<t ·
cjED:PC:SF:RM:nh
Counc~l Mtg: December 10, 1985
Santa Mon~ca, Cal~forn~a
TO: Mayor and C~ty Councl1
FROM: Clty Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of Plann~ng Comm~ss~on Approval of Tentat~ve
Tract Map 43805, 1220 Marlne Street and V~cin~ty,
12-Lot Rl Subd1V1S1.0n. App11cant: James K1rby.
Appellant: Councilmember Herbert Katz.
INTRODUCTION
On November 4, 1985, Tentat1ve Tract Map 43805 for a 12-1ot Rl
subdlV1S1on was approved w~th condit~ons by a 7-0 vote of the
Plannlng Cornm~SSlon.
The Commlss1on also approved a Negatl.ve
Declarat10n for the proJect (Envlronmental Impact Assessment
791).
ThlS 1.5 an appeal of the tentatlve map by Councllmember
Herbert Katz.
BACKGROUND
As approved by the Planning Commlsslon,
the proJect would
subdl v~de the Fukuhara Nursery property into 12 s~ngle famlly
homes~tes ranglng ~n s~ze between 5,100 and 5,850 square feet,
and lncorporate a 286' cul-de-sac extenslon of Ozone Avenue
accessed
from Frederlck street. t.o the east.
A detailed
descr1ptlon of the project 1S provided 1n the November 4, 1985,
Plann~ng Commisslon staff report (Attachment 2), Envlronmenta1
Impact Assessment 791 (Attachment 3) and Tentat~ve Map 43805
/;2 -t/
BEe 1 0 1985
- 1 -
e
e
(Attachment 4). The Environmental Impact Assessment l.ncludes a
traff1.c l.mpact analysls for the proJect.
The subdlVlslon meets all appllcable Zonlng and General Plan
requ1.rements. The tentative map has been approved by the City
Eng1.neer and the proJect W1.11 incorporate all requlred public
improvements as speclfled by the Department of General Servlces.
At the Plannlng COWIDlssion hearlng, publlC test1.ffiony and
Commiss1.on d1.scussion focused on the issues of the new street's
conf1.guratlon and pedestr1.an access through the subdlvlsion.
Alternatlves d1.scussed and reJected by the Comm1.ss1.on l.ncluded 1)
revers1.ng the cul-de-sac to enter the subd1.v1.Sl0n from the west
and 2) mak1.ng Ozone Avenue a through street (posslbly one-way
headlng west or posslbly blocked-off at Lincoln Boulevard). The
Comm1.ss1.on dld modlfy the proJect by prov1.d1.ng for pedestr1.an
access to the west and reduclng the helght of the wall front1.ng
the termlnus of Ozone Avenue on the tract's west slde to min1.mlZe
the pedestrian and visual separatlon between the new street and
the exist1.ng street. The Plann1.ng COmmlSS1.0n's Statement of
Off1.cial Actlon 1.S attached (Attachment 1).
Issues Ra1.sed by Nelghbors and the Appellant
Subsequent to the Plann1.ng COmmlSS1.0n's approval of the proJect,
the appellant and neighbors to the S1.te have raised a var1.ety of
issues concernlng traffic l.mpacts, pollce and f1.re safety and
proJect landscaping. Some of these concerns were cons1.dered by
- 2 -
e
e
the Plann1ng Com1ssion dur1ng its del1beratlons, others were not.
Each of the issues ra1sed are addressed below as follows:
Traff1C Issues.
Several poss1ble alternat1ves to the cul-de-sac
deslgn of the proJect were ldentif1ed.
These alternat1ves, and
the response of the C1ty Trafflc Eng1neer to them are Ilsted
below:
1. What 1S the 1mpact of revers1ng the cul-de-sac?
This would result 1n lncreased trafflc on Ozone Avenue due
to those 11vlng on the cul-de-sac belng able to use Ozone
Avenue for access. It would not lmpact trafflc
shortcuttlng (between L1ncoln Boulevard and Marlne Street,
a current problem on the street) through the ne1ghborhood
on Ozone Avenue. (An addltlonal non-trafflc problem w1th
reverslng the cul-de-sac entails dralnage. The slte
dra1ns to the east; a reverse cul-de-sac would requlre an
add1tlonal dra1nage system at the east end of the tract.)
2. wbat 1S the 1mpact of mak1ng Ozone Avenue a through street
(ellffilnating the cul-de-sac)?
ThlS would result in an 1ncrease 1n traff1C on Ozone
Avenue, due to the added veh1cle trlps of the cul-de-sac
res1dents uSlng Ozone Avenue as a p01nt of access.
Addltlonally, some trafflc short cuttlng up Ozone Avenue
from L1ncoln Boulevard w111 cont1nue all the way to
Freder1ck Street, 1ncreaslng traff1c the length of Ozone
Avenue.
3. What happens If Ozone Avenue 1S made a one-way street west
to L1ncoln Boulevard?
ThlS would be effective 1n reduclng veh1cles shortcutt1ng
through the nelghborhood on Ozone Avenue. However, it
w1ll result 1n 1nconven1ence for res1dents trY1ng to get
to their homes and wlll somewhat lncrease trafflc on
portlons of Ozone Avenue as residents must travel further
east than thelr destlnatlon on Marine Street and double
back g01ng west on Ozone Avenue to reach the1r homes.
4. What 1S the 1mpact of plac1ng a fence or traff1c diverter
at Lincoln Boulevard and Ozone Avenue (Just east of a
serv1ce stat10n located on the northeast corner) 1n
conJunct10n w1th mak1ng Ozone Avenue a through street (no
cUl-de-sac)?
Traff1c diverters would
shortcutt1ng through the
ellm1nate most of the
neighborhood on Ozone
trafflC
Avenue
- 3 -
e
-
(some vehl.cles may stl.ll shortcut through Lincoln Court,
the alley parallel with Llncoln Boulevard). However, the
remalnder of Ozone Avenue, between 11th Street and
Frederlck Street would reallze a net 1ncrease 1n trafflc
as a result of the through street due to the trlps
generated by the new re sldences between Glenn Court and
Freder1ck Street.
5. What 1S the 1mpact of closlng off Glenn Court one-half way
between Ozone Avenue and Marlne Street (between the two
res1dences on Glenn Court)?
If done 1n conJunct10n wl.th the proposed cul-de-sac, this
would effectively make two addlt10nal cul-de-sacs 1.n the
area: on Glenn Court from Mar1ne Street, and on Ozone
Avenue between 11th Street and Glenn Court. These three
back-to-back cul-de-sacs create a potentl.ally hazardous
si tuat1.on for emergency vehlcle access. Thls would also
resul t in a "trap" at Ozone Avenue and Glenn Court where
travellers unaware of the Glenn Court closure must turn
around wl.thout the necessary street wldth to do so.
Motorlsts may be forced to back out l.n the Sl.tuation.
If done in con]Unctlon Wl.th makl.ng Ozone Avenue a through
street, It would 1ncrease traffic on Frederl.ck Street,
11th Street and Ozone Avenue between those two streets, as
Glenn Court would be eluninated as a pOl.nt of
access,forclng res1.dents around the adJacent streets.
6. What is the lmpact of closlng off 11th Street at Marlne
Street?
This would create a cul-de-sac on 11th Street off Ozone
Avenue. The result would be an lncrease 1n trafflC on the
stretch of Ozone Avenue to the east as shortcuttlng
trafflc would cont1nue up another block. ThlS would also
be an inconvenl.ence for neighbors who would have to use
adjacent streets, 1nstead of 11th Street, for access to
thelr homes on Ozone Avenue.
Po1ice and Fire Safety.
Issues were ral.sed regardlng publlC
safety and emergency vehicle access with the proposed cul-de-sac.
The Pollce Department has no difflculty wlth the proposed
cul-de-sac.
The Flre Department expressed several concerns as
follows:
1. If the road wldth of the cul-de-sac is Ilmlted to 32 feet,
parklng should be restr1cted to one slde of the street.
The mlnlmum wl.dth of the street to provlde parklng on both
sldes lS 36 feet.
- 4 -
e
e
2. The m~n~mum clear turnaround rad~us ~s 32 feet.
3. An add~tional f~re hydrant 1S necessary.
4. Ideal access for f~re protection is precluded by the
nature of a cul-de-sac hav~ng only one p01nt of entry.
However, the Flre Department belleves ~t can stlll provlde
necessary protectlon wlth th~s deslgn if lt meets the
standards outl1ned above.
Landscaping.
The nelghbors expressed a concern for the visual
access where the cul-de-sac abuts Glenn Court and Ozone Avenue.
They also want th~s area to be free of obstruct~ng walls and to
be properly landscaped, lncludlng berrning lf poss~ble to lrnprove
the aesthetlcs of the neighborhood.
AnalYS1S
After conslderat~on of the above noted concerns, staff recommends
the cul-de-sac concept for the proJect be reta1ned.
Other
traff1c configurations have m~xed advantages and disadvantages
WhlCh on balance argue agalnst them.
The recommendations of the
Flre
Department regard1ng flre
hydrants and street and turn-around wldths should be followed.
Addi tionally, the landscaping and visual access recommendations
of the nelghbors and the appellant would lmprove the proJect and
are recommended by staff for lncluslon.
These would be:
1. Ellmlnatlon of the wall across the end of the cul-de-sac
between the front yard setbacks of the lots on either
slde. ThlS will broaden the vlsual access from Glenn
Court and Ozone Avenue ~nto the cul-de-sac.
2. Bermlng and landscaplng for the end of the cul-de-sac,
lnclud1ng a pedestr~an walkway connectlng Ozone Avenue and
the cul-de-sac no less than 3 feet lD wldth.
3.
The proJect should
Comrnisslon to ensure
above.
be revlewed again by the
compl1ance Wl th po~nts one
Plann1ng
and two
- 5 -
e
e
To faCl11tate these recorrrrnendatlons, the area to be landscaped
should be dedlcated to the Clty as a r~ght-of-way. Thus the City
would be respons~ble for mainta~ning thl.s property over tlme.
The developer, however, would have the inltlal responslbillty of
landscaplng the property to standards set by the Archl tectural
Revlew Board.
Councll Consideratl.on
In actlng on this appeal, the Clty Counell may uphold the appeal
by denYlng the tentatlve map and dlrectlng staff to return with
speclflC flndlngs; remand the map back to the Plannlng Comrnlssion
for s1-ecifled deslgn changes: modlfy the COffiffilssion' s flndlngs
and/ or condl tlons and approve the map: or deny the appeal by
acceptlng and adoptlng the Cornmlssion's flndlngs and condltlons
as thelr own.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendatlon contalned 10 thlS report would result In a
negllg1ble budget/financlal lmpact on the Clty due to the
malntenance of the landscaped rlght-of-way.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully recommends that the City council:
1.
Approve the Tentatlve Tract Map Applicatlon
submitted wlth the f~ndings and conditlons
withln the Plannlng COffiffilSSlon Statement of
Actlon.
43805 as
contalned
Offlclal
- 6 -
e
e
2. That the 4 foot wall proposed along the west tract
boundary where lt abuts Ozone be deleted and replaced wlth
landscaping materlals lncluding berm treatment.
3. That the street shall be at least 36 feet in wldth wlth a
clear turn around of at least 32 feet. At least two flre
hydrants shall be located on the street.
4. That the area at the termlnus of the cul-de-sac be
landscaped by the developer accordlng to standards set by
the Archltectural Review Board, and dedlcated to the City.
The preclse dlmensions of the area shall be determlned by
the Plannlng COnunl SSlon upon thelr reVlew of the Flnal
Tract Map.
5.
That a revised subdlV1Slon map return to
Conunlss1on prlor to Councll approval of the
Map.
the Plannlng
Final Tract
Prepared by:
Peggy Curran, Actlng Communlty and Economlc
Development Dlrector
Suzanne Frlck, Actlng Prlnclpal Planner
Rlchard Mllls, Asslstant Planner
Community and EconomlC Development Department
Attachments:
1. November 4, 1985, Planning Commisslon
Statement of Offlclal Actlon.
2. November 4, 1985, Plannlng CommlSSlon
Staff Report.
3. Envlronmental Impact Assessment 791.
4. Tentatlve Tract Map 43805.
5. Letter from Nelghbors.
6. Councll Hearlng Public Notlce.
CC49
- 7 -
......
e
e
A/?cA TRAFFIC VOL.!..h#vfc5
~- /;i,~OJecr
:5/rG
ClCNN cr.
- ...
/6?
II Il~
2:1
';tt;
t-tl
Kl .5$,
"'I
--
IlrH J1,
r _
QJ! /65
<!
,I
~l
~I ~il~
t\t ! I\}
'" I I ".., !
. I
I '
L_~
/ i I fl.
_______ /?;; L. '/ j'"
~caL.!..J. . ~
1-1 ( /_______ --; r i
~ .
/
i
. u.,q,...f'J-
I -
!
I
1
I
I '
; ~1
\c\t ......:
\() ~ i
I I
........ '-tJ1
<!
c),
. N:
I \y
"\
I
~J'
c-.. t '
\Q:
I
~
NO lCALE.
~
I
j - - 24 HI( 'T'N'O WA Y 1../01.(/1'1 IE:
i
-...- '24 H,f' O/Vc J,v:4Y VOt.thJ..tG
Trio,....
."
. \\
ce
t'
I'
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
A ITAC H tVllS tilT I
PROJECT.
NUMBER: TTM 43805, EIA 791
LOCATION: 1220 Marine Street
APPLICANT: James Kirby
REQUEST: l2-Lot Land Subdivision
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
ll-4-85
Date.
............
x
Approved based on the following findings and
sUbJect to the cond~tions below.
_..
- -~;-r~>-
.....-.....
: ~;lt~:;: ~ ~---r
, ... .-
Denied.
Other.
Finding s .
1. The proposed subd~vis~on, together with ~ts prov~sion for
its des~gn and improvements, is consistent with applicable
general and spec~fic plans as adopted by the Clty of Santa
Monlca based on the reVlew and analysls presented ~n th~s
report, which are ~ncorporated hereln by reference. It is
in the publlC interest to provide publ~c pedestr~an access
through the subdlvision to the west.
2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density
and type of development based on the items reviewed and
conclusions drawn ~n Environmental Impact Assessment 791
and in this report, which are lncorporated here~n by
reference.
3. The design of the subd~vis~on or the proposed improvements
will not cause substantial env~ronmental damage or sub-
stantially and avo1dably injure fish or w1ldl~fe or thelr
habitat and wlll not cause ser10US publ1C health problems
based on the items reviewed and conclus10ns drawn 1n En-
vironmental Impact Assessment 791 and in this report.
WhlCh are incorporated herein by reference.
4. The design of the subd~vis~on or the type of improvements
wlll not conflict wlth easements, acqulred by the publlC
at large, for access through, or use of, property w~thin
the proposed subd~vislon.
- 1 -
. .
. }
~
~
5. The deslgn of the subdlvislon prov~des for future pass~ve
or natural heating or coollng opportun1ties in the sub-
dlvlsion to the extent feaslble short of reducing allow-
able dens1tles or standard yard setback requirements.
Cond1tlons.
1. The tentatlve map shall explre 24 months after approval,
except as provlded in the provls1ons of Callfornla Govern-
ment Code Sect~on 66452.6 and Sections 9380-9382 of the
Santa Monlca Munlcipal Code. During thlS tlme perlod the
final map shall be presented to the City of Santa Monlca
for approval.
2. The form, contents, accompanYlng data, and fillng of the
final subdlvision map shall conform to the provislons of
Sections 9330 through 9338 (S~lC) and the Subdivlsion Map
Act.
3. Prior to approval of the final map, a Declaration of CC &
R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
The CC & R' 5 shall contain a nondiscrimination clause as
presented ln Section 9392 (S~~IC).
4. The developer shall provide the Engineerlng Department of
the C1ty of Santa Monlca with one Dlzal Cloth prlnt
reproduct~on and mlcrof~lrn of each sheet of the final map
after recordatlon. If a Dizal Cloth prlnt 1S unob-
tainable, a mylar prlnt may be substituted.
5. All off site improvements requ~red by the Clty Englneer
shall be installed. All lmprovements in the Clty of Santa
Mon~ca publ~c rlght-of-way shall conform wlth the Standard
Drawings for PubllC Improvements on fl1e in the offlce of
the City Eng~neer of the Clty of Santa Mon1ca. Plans and
speclficatlons for off s~te lmprovements shall be prepared
by a regl stered civil englneer and approved by the City
Engineer.
6. Before the Clty Englneer may approve the flnal map, a sub-
div1slon lmprovement agreement for all off slte lmprove-
ments requlred by the Clty Englneer shall be prepared and
a performance bond posted through the City Attorney's of-
fice. The costs of all required publlC lmprovement work
shall be borne by the subdivider.
7. One flre hydrant with 6" 0.1. lateral shall be supplied by
the subdivlder and installed per Clty of Santa Monlca
standard s. .
8. All water and sewer utilitles shall meet current Santa
Mon~ca Water/Wastewater Divislons standards.
- 2 -
. \.
~
(it
~
9. The water serv1ces shall be supp11ed by the subd1v~der (to
the property 11ne). The proposed water ma1.n shall be 8"
ACP. Connections of the proposed water ma1.n to the eX1.st-
ing water main shall be approved by the Water/Wastewater
Div1sion.
10. The proposed sewer main shall be 8" vep maintaining a 1%
grade w1th 1nstallation to be as approved by the Water/
Wastewater Dlv1sion.
11. A 4 foot wide easement behind the proposed property llne
around the cul-de-sac shall be ded1.cated to the City for
landscap1.ng and utility purposes.
12. Street trees shall be 15 gallons in size, supplied by the
subd1.vider, planted approx1.mately every 40 feet along the
street in parkways and easements. Species shall be ap-
proved by the Recreation and Parks Department.
13. Trees along the street shall provide a minimum separation
of 6 feet from sanitary sewer and water serV1.ce lines.
14. Trees shall be located a m1.nlmUm of 25 feet from street
l1.ghts.
15. The roadway width of Ozone Avenue shall be 36 feet l.n a 54
foot w1.dth rlght-of-way.
16. All lots shall dra1.n towards the street gutter except that
approximately 30% of the lots on the southeast slde of
Ozone Avenue may be dra1.ned to the alley.
17. Unless access 1.5 totally prevented and precluded l.n the
future between the subd1.vision and each of its lots and
the Los Angeles City alley borderl.ng the slte on the
south, the subdivider shall provide l.mprovements 1.n the
alley southeast and adjacent to the proposed tract
development to the sat1. sfaction of the City of Los An-
geles, City Engineer.
lB. The subdlvlder's engineer shall set boundary monuments as
required by the Subd1.v1.s1.on Ord1.nance of the Clty of Santa
Mon1.ca.
19. All new ut1.1ities shall be underground and ~nstalled prior
to the flna1 pav~ng of the street.
20. The f1.n~ shed grade shall be made even with the ex~ stJ.ng
adjacent grade along the southwesterly tract boundary
where it abuts the eX1.st1.ng stub of Ozone Avenue.
21. A three to six foot w~de pedestrlan access easement con-
nect~ng the bulb of the new cul-de-sac to Ozone Avenue to
the southwest shall be dedicated to the C1.ty of Santa
Monica. F1nal w1.dth and placement of the easement shall
- 3 -
~~
~
~
,
.
be approved by the Director of General Serv~ces and ~ncor-
porated ~nto the F~nal Map.
22. A wall not to exceed four feet ~n he~ght shall be prov~ded
along that portion of the southwesterly tract boundary
where it abuts the ex~sting stub of Ozone Avenue, except
on the pedestrlan access easement. Final des1gn of th~s
wall and the pedestr~an accessway shall return to the
Planning Commlss~on for approval pr~or to Pinal Map
approval.
Date
/5/ Chalrperson
Plann~ng CowmlSS10n
Clty of Santa Monica
RM:nh ST4380S
- 4 -