Loading...
SR-410-021 (2) PCD:SF:JT:AS:PF:BL:f:\plan\share\council\strpt.02\AppealLantana2 Council Mtg: November 12, 2002 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report Prepared in Conjunction with Two Proposed Entertainment Studio Projects at 3030 Olympic Boulevard and 3131 Exposition Boulevard and Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Development Review Permits 99-010 and 99-011; Reduced Parking Permits 99-003 and 99-004 Related to Both Studio Projects. Applicant/Appellant: Lantana North & South Hines Development. INTRODUCTION This report recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the proposed studio projects at 3030 Olympic Boulevard and 3131 Exposition Boulevard; and 2. Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of Development Review Permit 99-010 and Reduced Parking Permit 99-003 for the entertainment studio project at 3030 Olympic Boulevard; and 3. Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of Development Review Permit 99-011 and Reduced Parking Permit 99-004 for the entertainment studio project at 3131 Exposition Boulevard. BACKGROUND The applicant/appellant proposes two entertainment studio projects in the Olympic Corridor area of the Light Manufacturing Studio zoning district. The projects are referred to as the “Lantana East” and the “Lantana South” projects. Lantana East is located at 3030 Olympic Boulevard, consists of a 7.26 acre site with 1,370 feet of frontage on Olympic Boulevard and 128 feet of frontage on Stewart Street. The subject site is currently developed with two and three story entertainment studio buildings (Lantana 1 West and Center) containing 251,906 square feet of floor area with 632 parking spaces. Lantana South is located at 3131 Exposition Boulevard, has 726’ of frontage on the th north side of Exposition Boulevard, between 34 Street and Dorchester Avenue and contains 4.99 acres. The subject site is currently developed with a two-story, 65,007 square foot film production and distribution building (IMAX), a surface parking lot and a film equipment storage lot. The sites are separated by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (MTA) 100-foot wide, light rail transportation corridor. Both projects would replace surface parking lots with new three-story, contemporary design buildings for entertainment production/post-production studio uses. Lantana East Lantana East would contain a total of 64,105 square feet of building area (9,616 square feet of office/editing space and 54,489 square feet of production/post production space). Parking will be provided within a two level, 383-space subterranean parking garage in addition to 55 surface spaces for a total of 438 spaces. With the existing surface and subterranean parking that will be retained, the Lantana East, West and Center site would provide a total of 853 parking spaces. Lantana South Lantana South would contain 30,543 square feet of office/editing space and 122,177 square feet of production/post production space, totaling 152,721 square feet. Parking will be provided within a two level, 575-space subterranean parking garage plus 14 surface spaces for a total of 589 spaces. Including the existing IMAX surface parking, the site would provide a total of 665 parking spaces. 2 The applicant proposes to incorporate a number of Green Building standards, including maximizing natural lighting, natural ventilation from operable windows, permeable paving and the use of materials that eliminate or minimize the discharge of chemicals or gases into the environment. The following discretionary approvals have been requested for Lantana East and South: Lantana East Development Review Permits (DR) 99-010 is required to permit buildings in excess of 30,000 square feet in the LMSD (Light Manufacturing Studio District) and Reduced Parking Permits (RPP) 99-003 is required to allow 120 parking spaces to have tandem access with valet service. Lantana South Development Review Permits (DR) 99-011 is required to permit buildings in excess of 30,000 square feet in the LMSD (Light Manufacturing Studio District) and Reduced Parking Permits (RPP) 99-004 is requested to allow 57 parking spaces to have tandem access with valet service. The environmental impacts of both projects were analyzed in a single Environmental Impact Report (Attachment I). On September 11, 2002, the Planning Commission certified the Environmental Impact Report and denied the requested Development Review and Reduced Parking Permits for both projects. The Draft Statements of Official Action for the Lantana East and 3 Lantana South projects are contained in Attachment B. On September 24, 2002, the applicant appealed the Planning Commission decisions contending that the findings made by the Planning Commission were not supported by evidence in the record. The appeal statement is contained in Attachment D. Since the Planning Commission hearing, the appellant and the residents of the affected neighborhood located to the south of the projects have held discussions regarding ways in which the traffic impacts may be mitigated. It is anticipated that the appellant and the residents will address the results of these discussions in presentations to the Council during the public hearing. This hearing by the City Council is de novo. Consequently, all issues related to the project are now before the Council. Although the Planning Commission certified the EIR, the environmental document is also before the Council. Therefore, the City Council should re-certify the EIR prior to taking action on the proposed projects. While the EIR identifies significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the Council may certify the EIR with these impacts. However, before the Council could approve one or both of the projects, the Council would have to make findings related to each of the identified significant effects and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. A Statement of Overriding Considerations is a determination by the Council that the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. 4 DISCUSSION Planning Commission Action On September 11, 2002, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the project. Of the seventeen members of the public that spoke, six supported and eleven opposed the project. Opposition testimony focused principally on increased traffic created by the project in an already congested area of the city. Most of the opposition speakers live in the neighborhood adjacent to Lantana South and indicated that the proposed projects would exacerbate existing unacceptable traffic conditions in and adjacent to their residential neighborhood. In addition to public testimony, three speakers submitted photographs showing substantial traffic backed-up on Centinela Avenue between Exposition Boulevard and the I-10 Freeway and on Virginia Avenue and Exposition Boulevard at Centinela Avenue. In denying the project, the Planning Commission’s primary concern was the project’s impact on traffic circulation in the area. Although Planning Commissioners discussed the merits of production studio projects in the Olympic Corridor, the inability to resolve additional traffic impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood, which is already impacted with substantial traffic problems dominated their comments. The Commission also discussed the staff recommendation to approve the reduced project alternative for Lantana East. However, the applicant advised the Commission that they considered the reduced project alternative infeasible and requested that the Commission only consider both projects as proposed. 5 Based on the evidence before the Planning Commission, the Commission was unable to make the findings necessary for approval of the development review permit and Statement of Overriding Consideration for the project. Consequently, the Commission denied the project on a 5-1 vote (one member was absent). The Planning Commission voted to adopt a resolution to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR); however, since the City Council is now the decision-making body it must certify the EIR prior to taking action on the proposed project that is being considered under the appeal. The Planning Commission’s Statement of Official Action is contained in Attachment B and the hearing Minutes are contained in Attachment C. Development Review Permit / Neighborhood Compatibility Lantana East The proposal will add a third building to the eastern portion of the 7.28-acre site along Olympic Boulevard. While the overall design of Lantana East itself is generally compatible with adjacent development and uses, it will generate additional traffic and parking impacts that would adversely impact the neighborhood and area traffic. As discussed in the EIR and in this staff report, the existing collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. The project is not compatible with the neighborhood because of the increased traffic impacts. Lantana South The proposal will add a second building to the east half of the 4.99-acre site along Exposition Boulevard. Although from a design perspective, Lantana South is generally 6 compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood, the project will generate additional traffic and parking impacts that would adversely impact the residential neighborhood. As discussed in the EIR, the existing collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. Accordingly, the project is not compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. Reduced Parking Permit As shown in the following table, both projects would exceed the number of parking spaces required by City parking standards. However, some of the spaces would be provided in tandem with valet service pursuant to the request for a Reduced Parking Permit. Parking Summary Office/ Production Parking for Parking Total Editing Total Spaces + Surplus (1 sp/400 Existing Code New Spaces (1 sp/300 Provided Spaces sq.ft.) buildings Building Required sq.ft.) 633 853 for site Lantana 9,616 54,489 168 801 +52 Lantana East West & Lantana East Center438 665 for site Lantana 30,543 122,178 178 407 585 +80 South Lantana South 589 SMMC Section 9.04.20.26.030 (c) allows commercial and industrial uses to provide up to 20% of the required parking in a tandem arrangement provided the development requires 250 or more parking spaces and an attendant is on duty during business hours. Including retained parking spaces at Lantana West and Center, the site will have 853 total spaces. The applicant has requested a Reduced Parking Permit that would allow 7 120 of the parking spaces in Lantana East’s garage to be arranged in tandem. The Lantana West garage has 50 tandem spaces. Including Lantana West, the site would have 170 tandem spaces, which represents 19.9% of the 853 total spaces. Lantana South proposes 57 tandem spaces. The 57 spaces represent 8.5% of the total 665 spaces. Parking attendants are necessary to ensure that the tandem capacity is used appropriately and efficiently during business hours. Both projects comply with the Reduced Parking Permit criteria. Free Employee Parking Residential districts are located north of Nebraska Avenue and south of Exposition Boulevard. These residential streets are already impacted from overflow parking that is generated by other industrial and commercial uses in the area. Impact on these limited on-parking resources is an issue the EIR identifies as a potentially significant environmental impact for both the Lantana East and South projects. Although the City usually promotes the use of paid parking to encourage ridesharing and alternative transportation, in this case providing free parking to employees of Lantana East and South would encourage employees to use on-site parking. As discussed in Section 4.10, Transportation/Traffic and Section 4-11, Neighborhood Effects of the EIR, providing free parking to the employees of Lantana South and East to encourage on-site parking, and reserving the public street parking currently available on Exposition Boulevard in front of Lantana South for residents if a preferential parking district is adopted in the future would mitigate impacts on neighborhood parking. 8 Consistency with the General Plan Both projects are located in the Light Manufacturing and Studio District (LMSD) Zone. The underlying Land Use Element designation of the General Plan for the LMSD Zone is “Special Office District.” Both projects are consistent with the criteria of the LMSD Zoning Ordinance. Both buildings minimize the use of surface parking and provide landscaping along the street frontages. This design concept is consistent with General Plan Policy 3.3.15, to reduce the visibility of surface parking by requiring that buildings or landscaping form a specified percentage of the street façade on major arterials and Policy 3.4.9 to require landscaped open space visible from the street, including landscaped setbacks from the street, in order to create a “garden office” or “campus” environment. Encourage usable open space. The proposal will replace two surface parking lots with contemporary buildings. The proposed buildings would become the final buildings on each of the Lantana studio campuses. The proposed campus buildings are compatible with the existing building and would further improve the “garden office / campus” environments of both sites. Lantana East Traffic from Lantana East will not impact the residential neighborhood in the same way, or to the degree of significance as Lantana South because vehicle access to Lantana East is limited to Olympic Boulevard and does not have convenient access to the residential neighborhood south of Exposition Boulevard. Since significant traffic incursion into the residential neighborhood from this project is unlikely and providing free employee parking will mitigate potential employee parking impacts, Lantana East is 9 consistent with General Plan Objective 3.2, which calls for the protection of the scale and character of residential neighborhoods that are adjacent to commercial areas and Circulation Element Objective 4.2 to protect the environment on local residential streets by minimizing the intrusion of vehicular traffic and parking into residential neighborhoods. Lantana South Unlike Lantana East, Lantana South is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood. The only street access to Lantana South is Exposition Boulevard, which also provides access to residents along its south frontage and four local streets into the residential neighborhood. During peak traffic periods it is more convenient to drive through this residential neighborhood and avoid traffic congestion at the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard. There are no feasible mitigation measures to prevent Lantana South traffic from driving through the residential neighborhood. Since additional traffic incursion into the residential neighborhood from this project is likely, Lantana South is inconsistent with General Plan Objective 3.2, which calls for the protection of the scale and character of residential neighborhoods that are adjacent to commercial areas and Circulation Element Objective 4.2 to protect the environment on local residential streets by minimizing the intrusion of vehicular traffic and parking into residential neighborhoods. CEQA STATUS An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Notice of 10 Availability of the Draft EIR (DEIR) was distributed to affected agencies, surrounding cities, counties, and interested parties for a 45-day review period in accordance with Section 15087 of the CEQA Guidelines. Copies of the Draft EIR were made available on February 25, 2002 for the public review period, which closed on April 15, 2002. A total of 11 comment letters on the draft EIR were received. These comment letters, as well as the response to comments, are included in Appendix E of the Final EIR (Attachment I). The California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) submitted a second comment on the Draft EIR after the submittal deadline prescribed by CEQA. The response to the CALTRANS comment letter is contained in Response to Late Comment section in the Planning Commission Staff Report, Attachment A. This EIR addresses the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The scope of the EIR includes environmental issues determined to be potentially significant by the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation (NOP), responses to the NOP, and scoping discussions with CALTRANS, Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LA DOT) and City staff. The environmental study determined that the proposed project would have minimal, or no impacts on eight environmental categories. Because potential effects on these impacts were found not to be significant, extensive analysis of these impacts is not required or provided in the EIR: Biological Resources Mineral resources Cultural Resources Public Services Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities Hydrology and Water Quality Agricultural Resources The IS/NOP identified potentially significant impacts on the following issue areas 11 associated with the construction and/or operation of the proposed project, which are addressed in detail in the EIR: Aesthetics/Light & Glare Population and Housing Air Quality Recreation Construction Effects Shadow Geology, Soils, and Hydrology Transportation/Circulation Land Use Neighborhood Effects Noise The EIR analyzed the issues referenced above and identified potentially significant environmental impacts, including site-specific and cumulative effects of the project in accordance with the provisions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines. The EIR also recommends feasible mitigation measures, where possible. To be feasible, the mitigation measure must eliminate or reduce the adverse effect so that its impact would be considered less than significant pursuant to City and CEQA significance criteria. The EIR recommends mitigation measures that will reduce impacts to less than significant levels for the following impact areas: Aesthetics Noise Construction Effects Transportation/Traffic Geology Neighborhood Effects Land Use However, as discussed below, not all of the significant, unavoidable and adverse impacts in the areas of Traffic/Circulation and traffic related Neighborhood Effects can be mitigated. Traffic/Circulation The project site is bordered on the north by Olympic Boulevard (an arterial), and is generally bordered on its other three sides by Stewart Street (a collector), Exposition Boulevard (a local street), and Centinela Avenue (a collector). Major freeways near the 12 site include Interstate 10 (Santa Monica Freeway) to the south and Interstate 405 (San Diego Freeway) to the east. The proposed projects would generate approximately 1,967 average daily trips. The increase in vehicles traveling on the surrounding roadway network would result in significant and unavoidable impact to 4 intersections and two street segments in the project vicinity while impacts to 7 intersections could be reduced to less than significant levels by improving roadway capacity. The proposed projects, taken individually or as a whole, will generate traffic impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable to the following intersections and street segments: Intersections ? Centinela Ave. at Exposition Blvd. (L.A. intersection) ? Centinela Ave. at I-10 westbound on/off ramp (S.M. & L.A. intersection) ? Centinela Ave. at Pico Blvd. ? Olympic Blvd. & Bundy Dr. (L.A. intersection) Local Streets ? Exposition Blvd. between Centinela Ave. & Stewart St. ? Warwick Avenue between Exposition Blvd. & Virginia Ave. Although operational traffic from either project would adversely impact the residential neighborhood to the south of Exposition Boulevard, traffic from Lantana East would not have the same impact as Lantana South due to its location on Olympic Boulevard. There is no vehicle access between Lantana East and South because they are 13 separated by the MTA right-of-way. Traffic incursions from Lantana East would be minimal because vehicle access to and from Lantana East is limited to Olympic Boulevard and access to the residential neighborhood south of Exposition Boulevard is less than convenient. Accordingly, traffic impacts from Lantana East would be at a much lower intensity compared to impacts from Lantana South, which is adjacent to Exposition Boulevard, Warwick Avenue and the residential neighborhood. However, Lantana East and South would have similar impacts on other intersections and collector street segment. These impacts are significant and unavoidable because inadequate right-of-way width makes mitigation measures that would increase capacity infeasible. In the case of the roadways that are in the City of Los Angeles or under CALTRANS jurisdiction, those agencies will not allow the improvements and the City does not have the ability to implement such improvements outside the City of Santa Monica’s jurisdiction. Some significant intersection impacts within the City, could be mitigated by adding a turn lane to one or more intersection approaches; however, this type of improvement would require the removal of on-street parking and/or narrowing of the sidewalk to accommodate physical widening of the street. As detailed below, these measures would result in negative impacts to the area, including impacts to the residential neighborhood context, and to pedestrian access through and around the area. Narrowing sidewalk widths adversely affects the pedestrian environment by reducing the area where pedestrians may walk and potentially forcing pedestrians into the street. The removal of on-street parking reduces the number of available public parking spaces 14 in an area where parking is at a premium for nearby residents and businesses. The widening of streets to accommodate additional vehicle trips, particularly in residential areas, is contrary to City policy where the preservation of neighborhoods and the pedestrian environment is highly valued. Therefore, the impacts resulting from an increase in project-related vehicle trips are considered significant and unavoidable. The full discussion of the extent and scope of traffic impacts and mitigation measures can be found on pages 4.10-1 through 4.10-22 of the EIR. Additional traffic analysis is provided in the Response to Comments from the public on the Draft EIR (includes the comment letters) which is contained in Appendix E of the Final EIR. Neighborhood Effects Both the proposed Lantana East and South projects may result in short-term effects on surrounding neighborhoods during the construction period in the areas of air quality, noise, and truck parking and queuing. These are considered to be significant, but mitigable. Long-term effects to surrounding residential neighborhoods from traffic and employee parking are considered to be significant. As discussed in the parking section of this report, providing free employee parking would mitigate impacts that are related to employees parking in the residential neighborhood. The project trip assignment identified by the traffic report is primarily to the east and almost exclusively on the arterial and collector roadways. However, vehicle access to Lantana South is limited to Exposition Boulevard, which is a local street. Residential land uses exist to the south of the Lantana South site and project traffic from Lantana 15 South would use the residential streets to gain access to and from the regional arterial and freeway system. There are four north/south residential streets between Stewart Street and Centinela Avenue that provide access to the adjacent residential th neighborhood: Yorkshire Avenue, Dorchester Avenue, Warwick Avenue and 34 Street. Additional residential areas lie further south on Stewart Avenue, along direct traffic routes that connect the project site to Pico Boulevard and Ocean Park Boulevard. The Lantana South building would use two of the three existing driveways onto Exposition Boulevard. The west driveway would primarily serve the existing Verizon/GTE maintenance yard and IMAX building and is aligned with Dorchester Avenue. Cars exiting the new parking garage from this driveway could then conveniently use Dorchester Avenue and other residential roadways for freeway access. This increased use of residential streets would occur during peak traffic periods when the intersection of Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue is most impacted. To mitigate this potential impact, on-site circulation at Lantana South could be redesigned to restrict vehicles exiting the new parking garage from using the westerly driveway. The existing driveway at the middle of the lot is proposed to be removed and traffic to and from the new building would use the east driveway, which is relatively close to Centinela Avenue (approximately 320’). Since most employees and visitors would approach the site from the Santa Monica Freeway via Centinela Avenue, the proximity of the east driveway would encourage drivers to use Exposition Boulevard to reach Centinela Avenue, rather than cutting through the residential neighborhood. However, heavy cross traffic makes it difficult to enter Centinela Avenue from Exposition Boulevard during peak traffic periods. As a result, additional traffic would cut through the 16 residential neighborhood to avoid excessive stacking and delays at this intersection. A traffic signal at the Exposition/Centinela intersection is recommended to mitigate this impact.Signalization of this intersection would allow for more efficient access to and from the Lantana South site via Centinela and Exposition. However,Centinela Avenue is in the City of Los Angeles and they must approve any right-of-way improvements. This proposal was reviewed with the City of Los Angeles. The LADOT indicated that they would not allow implementation of the proposed mitigation measure. Accordingly, these impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. Commenter’s on the Draft EIR suggested blocking residential streets to resolve the cut- through traffic problem. Exposition Boulevard is a local street; it is intended to provide access to residents along the south side of the street and other neighborhood streets. Restricting access from Exposition Boulevard into the residential neighborhood would prevent cut-though traffic. However, the City’s neighborhood traffic program specifically discourages the use of street closures to divert traffic. While these measures reduce traffic on some local streets, they also redistribute traffic to other local streets. Such measures can benefit some residents, but can also negatively impact others. Allowing turns onto and off of Exposition Boulevard only at Stewart Street and Centinela Avenue would also block convenient access points to some residents. This would increase traffic at the remaining open intersections, as well as increasing vehicle miles traveled. Changing street circulation requires additional traffic study and amendment of the General Plan Circulation Element. 17 Although operational traffic from either project would adversely impact the residential neighborhood to the south of Exposition Boulevard, traffic from Lantana East would not have the same impact as Lantana South due to its location on Olympic Boulevard. There is no vehicle access between Lantana East and South because they are separated by the MTA right-of-way. Traffic incursions from Lantana East would be minimal because vehicle access to and from Lantana East is limited to Olympic Boulevard and access to the residential neighborhood south of Exposition Boulevard or north of Nebraska Avenue is not convenient. While any cut-through traffic is considered significant, traffic impacts from Lantana East would be at a much lower intensity compared to impacts from Lantana South, which is adjacent to Exposition Boulevard, Warwick Avenue and the residential neighborhood. The full discussion of neighborhood impacts and mitigation measures can be found on pages 4.11-1 through 4.11-10 of the EIR. Project Alternatives CEQA also requires that an EIR evaluate alternatives to the proposed project, including a “No Project” alternative. Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment, the discussion of alternatives focuses on changes to the project or the project location which are capable of achieving the objectives of the proposed project while avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects associated with the project. However, only feasible alternatives need be studied. Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability 18 of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site. In compliance with CEQA, the EIR analyzed the following alternatives: ? No Project ? Reduced Project Size ? Mixed Use Project ? Alternative Site ? Environmentally Superior Alternative Environmentally Superior Alternative The No Project Alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed project on the basis of the minimization or avoidance of physical environmental impacts. However, the CEQA Guidelines require that if the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative, “the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” In terms of physical effects on the environment, the environmentally superior alternative (other than the No Project) is the Reduced Project Alternative, which results in a reduction in adverse impacts with respect to transportation/traffic effects, but does not reduce them to a level where they are less than significant. Reduced Project Size This alternative would have the same basic development footprint as the proposed project, but would reduce the total floor area by approximately 40%. Under this alternative, overall building area of both buildings would be reduced from the proposed 19 project size of 216,826 square feet to approximately 130,000 square feet. The Lantana East building would be reduced to two-stories. Under this alternative, Lantana East would contain 5,775 square feet of office space and 32,725 square feet of production space for a total of 38,500 square feet. Lantana South would also be reduced to two-stories. The first floor would contain 52,500 square feet and the second floor would be reduced to 39,000 square feet. Lantana South would contain approximately 18,300 square feet of office space and 73,200 square feet of production space for a total of 91,500 square feet, a reduction of 60,500 square feet over that of the proposed project. This project alternative would result in reduced impacts, however significant and unavoidable traffic and neighbor effects would remain for both, or either project, but to a lesser degree. Statement of Overriding Considerations Public benefits derived from the project include: a prominent, well designed project that implements City urban design policies to create an architecturally distinctive gateway along one of the City’s prominent boulevards; payment of a parks mitigation fee; and development of a project that exceeds Green Building standards to qualify as a Lead Pilot Project. However, as proposed, staff cannot support a Statement of Overriding Considerations for approval of the projects as required by CEQA since the proposed projects (together, or individually) have significant and unavoidable environmental 20 impacts that outweigh these benefits. Staff does believe that, because of its location on Olympic Boulevard, the reduced project alternative for Lantana East would not have the same traffic impacts on Exposition Boulevard and the residential streets to the south as would the Lantana South project. Although traffic impacts would still be significant at 4 intersections, the magnitude of these impacts would be greatly reduced, and consequently, staff can support a Statement of Overriding Considerations for approval of the environmentally superior, reduced Lantana East project alternative. As previously discussed, the applicant informed the Planning Commission not to consider the reduced project alternative considered. Staff notes that the applicant/appellant forwarded to staff findings for a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Appeal Analysis The appeal statement of the applicant/appellant, which covers the appeals of the Planning Commission denial of both the Lantana East and Lantana South projects states that “the findings made by the Planning Commission in denying the application were not supported by the evidence in the record.” Staff disagrees. The EIR, Staff Report and testimony and photographic evidence submitted by the public supports the Planning Commission’s decision. The applicant/appellant believes that the proposed projects provide benefits that outweigh the adverse environmental impacts that would be generated by the projects and have submitted a list of project benefits with their 21 Appeal Statement that they believe would justify a Statement of Overriding Considerations that would allow the City Council to approve both projects. The appeal statement of the applicant/appellant is contained in Attachment D. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080, within 15 days after the subject application was deemed complete, the applicant posted a sign on the property stating 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. It is the applicant's responsibility to update the hearing date if it is changed after posting. 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 all recognized neighborhood groups at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing and published in the “California” section of the Los Angeles Times. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment E. Additionally, the applicant held at least three meetings in the IMAX building to present the projects to the neighbors. Conclusion Both projects are consistent with the intent and purpose of the LMSD area. Both buildings are setback from the street and incorporate “Office Garden” design features. Their shape and overall mass are compatible with adjacent development and land uses. A number of 22 Green Building standards, including maximizing natural lighting, natural ventilation from operable windows and permeable paving are proposed. With the approval of Reduced Parking Permits, both projects comply with all city Zoning Ordinance regulations and are consistent with the policies of the General Plan. However, the proposed projects, taken individually or as a whole, will generate traffic impacts that would adversely impact a number of streets and intersections. As discussed in the traffic and neighborhood sections of the EIR, the project is within an area of the City already heavily impacted by traffic. Traffic impact would be particularly acute on Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard. As a result, many drivers stuck in traffic on Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard would cut-through the residential neighborhood to avoid the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard and traffic backed up on Centinela Avenue at the I-10 westbound on and off ramps. All traffic impacts cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. As discussed in the EIR, the existing collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by these projects. There is inadequate right-of-way width or other constraints that do not allow additional traffic lanes or signal improvements to mitigate anticipated impacts. Traffic impacts would be particularly acute on Centinela Avenue between Olympic Boulevard and the I-10 freeway, which is the route that employees and visitors to Lantana East and South would use to and from the freeway. Implementing potential improvements on Centinela Avenue is further complicated because Centinela Avenue is located in the City of Los Angeles which has determined that potential improvements that could reduce impacts are not acceptable to them. As a 23 result, there are no feasible measures to reduce traffic impacts on Centinela Avenue and four other intersections to acceptable levels. Both the proposed project and reduced size alternative would result in unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, neither project can be approved unless a Statement of Overriding Considerations is adopted. The public benefits derived from the project would be that: the project is well designed and will use Green Building standards. Weighed against the fact that the projects would have significant traffic impacts which affect the nearby arterial, collector and local streets and the adjacent residential neighborhood, the Planning Commission and staff cannot support adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and approval of the projects as proposed. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council conduct a public hearing and take the following actions: 1. Adopt the Resolution contained in Attachment E certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report; 2. Deny Development Review Permit application 99-010 and Reduced Parking Permit application 99-003 for the Lantana East; and; 3. Deny Development Review Permit application 99-011 and Reduced Parking Permit 99-004 for the Lantana South project. 24 FINDINGS : DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS – Lantana East (DR 99-010) 1. The physical location, size, massing, and placement of the proposed structure on the site and the location of the proposed uses within the project are not compatible with and does not relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods, in that the proposed 3-story, 64,105 square foot entertainment production facility, with 438 parking spaces, is located on Olympic Boulevard, an arterial street, between Stewart Street and Centinela Avenue. The project is within an area of the City already heavily impacted by traffic. The project itself would generate approximately 513 daily vehicle trips. Approximately 78 trips would occur during the AM peak hour, and 72 trips would occur during the PM peak hours. The project’s traffic would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to five intersections and two street segments. Four of the intersections are projected to be at level of service (LOS) F, (failure, where backups in traffic may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches). As identified in the EIR, the existing local, collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. There is inadequate right-of-way width and other constraints that do not allow additional traffic lanes or signal improvements to mitigate anticipated impacts. Traffic impact would be particularly acute on Centinela Avenue and at the intersection of Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue, and Centinela Avenue and the I-10 Freeway. This is the route Lantana East traffic would use to access the Route I-10 freeway and other arterial streets. Implementing potential improvements on Centinela Avenue is not feasible because Centinela Avenue is located in the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Transportation has determined that potential improvements that could reduce impacts are not acceptable. As a result, traffic on Centinela Avenue and connecting streets including Exposition Boulevard and Virginia Avenue would be adversely impacted. 2. The rights-of-way cannot accommodate autos and pedestrians, including parking and access, in that the proposed project is located within an area of the City already heavily impacted by traffic. Four of the seven intersections are projected to be at level of service (LOS) F, (failure, where backups in traffic may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches) without the addition of the proposed project. In addition to these existing conditions, the EIR estimates that the proposed project would generate approximately 513 daily trips. Approximately 78 trips would occur during the AM peak hour, and 72 trips would occur during the PM peak hour from Lantana East. As identified in the EIR, the existing local, collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. This impact is particularly acute on Centinela Avenue and at the intersection of Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue. This is the route Lantana East would use to access the Route I-10 freeway. There is inadequate right-of-way width or other constraints that do not allow additional traffic lanes or signal improvements to mitigate anticipated impacts. Implementing potential improvements on Centinela 25 Avenue is further complicated because Centinela Avenue is in the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles DOT has determined that potential improvements that could mitigate impacts are not acceptable. 3. The Lantana East project would result in significant effects on the environment which cannot be eliminated or substantially lessened and these significant environmental effects are not acceptable due to overriding considerations. More specifically, this project has significant, unavoidable traffic impacts. Although the public benefits from the project would include a prominent well designed project that implements City urban design policies to create architecturally distinctive gateway and development of a project that exceeds Green Building standards to qualify as a Lead Pilot Project, the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts outweigh these benefits. Consequently, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15092(b), the project cannot be approved. Reduced Parking Permit Findings – RPP 99-003, Lantana South 1. Approval of the Reduced Parking Permit is contingent on the production studio project being approved pursuant to Development Review Permit 99-010. Since Development Review Permit 99-010 is denied, Reduced Parking Permit 99-003 is also denied. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS – Lantana South (DR 99-011) 1. The physical location, size, massing, and placement of the proposed structure on the site and the location of the proposed uses within the project are not compatible with and does not relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods, in that the proposed 3-story, 152,721 square foot entertainment production facility, with 665 parking spaces, is located on Exposition Boulevard, a local street, adjacent to a residential neighborhood. The project is within an area of the City already heavily impacted by traffic. The project itself would generate approximately 1,453 daily vehicle trips. Approximately 214 trips would occur during the AM peak hour, and 171 trips would occur during the PM peak hours. The project’s traffic would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to five intersections and two street segments. Four of the intersections are projected to be at level of service (LOS) F, (failure, where backups in traffic may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches). The proposed project would also have significant and unavoidable adverse impacts on two street segments, increasing Average Daily Trips (ADT) by 20.8% on Exposition Boulevard, 66.7% on Warwick Avenue and 22.2% on Virginia Avenue. As identified in the EIR, the existing local, collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. There is inadequate right-of-way width and other constraints that do not allow additional traffic lanes or signal improvements to mitigate anticipated impacts. Traffic impact would be particularly acute on Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue and at the intersections of Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue and Centinela Avenue and the I-10 Freeway onramp and off-ramp. This is the route Lantana South would use to access the Route I-10 freeway and 26 arterial streets. Implementing potential improvements on Centinela Avenue is not feasible because Centinela Avenue is located in the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Transportation has determined that potential improvements that could reduce impacts are not acceptable. As a result, traffic on Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard would be adversely impacted, causing many drivers to try to access or leave the Lantana South site by cutting- through the residential neighborhood to avoid the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard. 2. The rights-of-way cannot accommodate autos and pedestrians, including parking and access, in that the proposed project is located within an area of the City already heavily impacted by traffic. Four of the seven intersections are projected to be at level of service (LOS) F, (failure, where backups in traffic may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches) without the addition of the proposed project. In addition to these existing conditions, the EIR estimates that the proposed project would generate approximately 1,453 daily trips. Approximately 214 trips would occur during the AM peak hour, and 171 trips would occur during the PM peak hour from Lantana South.The proposed project would increase Average Daily Trips (ADT) by 20.8% on Exposition Boulevard, 66.7% on Warwick Avenue and 22.2% on Virginia Avenue. As identified in the EIR, the existing local, collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. This impact is particularly acute on Centinela Avenue and at the intersection of Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue, and Centinela Avenue and the I-10 Freeway. This is the route Lantana South would use to access the Route I-10 freeway. There is inadequate right-of-way width or other constraints that do not allow additional traffic lanes or signal improvements to mitigate anticipated impacts. Implementing potential improvements on Centinela Avenue is further complicated because Centinela Avenue is in the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles DOT has determined that potential improvements that could mitigate impacts are not acceptable. As a result, many drivers trying to access or leave the Lantana South site would cut-through the residential neighborhood to avoid the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard. 3. The Lantana South project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code, but is not consistent with the General Plan, in that Lantana South is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood. The only street access to Lantana South is Exposition Boulevard, a local street which also provides access to residents along its south frontage and four local streets into the residential neighborhood. The project is within an area of the City already heavily impacted by traffic. The project itself would generate approximately 1,453 daily vehicle trips. Approximately 214 trips would occur during the AM peak hour, and 171 trips would occur during the PM peak hours. The proposed project would increase Average Daily Trips (ADT) by 20.8% on Exposition Boulevard, 66.7% on Warwick Avenue and 22.2% on Virginia Avenue. As identified in the EIR, the existing local, collector and arterial roadway system cannot accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by this project. There is inadequate 27 right-of-way width and other constraints that do not allow additional traffic lanes or signal improvements to mitigate anticipated impacts. Traffic impact would be particularly acute on Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue and at the intersections of Exposition Boulevard and Centinela Avenue and Centinela Avenue and the I-10 Freeway on and off ramps. This is the route Lantana South would use to access the Route I-10 freeway and arterial streets. Implementing potential improvements on Centinela Avenue is not feasible because Centinela Avenue is located in the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Transportation has determined that potential improvements that could reduce impacts are not acceptable. As a result, traffic on Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard would be adversely impacted, causing many drivers to try to access or leave the Lantana South site by cutting-through the residential neighborhood to avoid the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard. There are no feasible mitigation measures to prevent Lantana South traffic from driving trough the residential neighborhood. During peak traffic periods it will be more convenient to drive through this residential neighborhood to avoid traffic congestion at the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Exposition Boulevard. Since a significant level of traffic volume will intrude into the residential neighborhood from this project, Lantana South is inconsistent with General Plan Objective 3.2, which calls for the protection of the scale and character of residential neighborhoods that are adjacent to commercial areas and Circulation Element Objective 4.2 to protect the environment on local residential streets by minimizing the intrusion of vehicular traffic and parking into residential neighborhoods. 4. The Lantana South project would result in significant effects on the environment which cannot be eliminated or substantially lessened and these significant environmental effects are not acceptable due to overriding considerations. More specifically, this project has significant, unavoidable traffic impacts. Although the public benefits from the project would include a prominent well designed project that implements City urban design policies to create architecturally distinctive gateway and development of a project that exceeds Green Building standards to qualify as a Lead Pilot Project, the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts outweigh these benefits. Consequently, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15092(b), the project cannot be approved. Reduced Parking Permit Findings – Lantana South (RPP 99-004) 1. Approval of the Reduced Parking Permit is contingent on the production studio project being approved pursuant to Development Review Permit 99-011. Since Development Review Permit 99-011 is denied, Reduced Parking Permit 99-004 is also denied. Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director Jay M. Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager Amanda Schachter, Principal Planner Paul Foley, Senior Planner 28 Bruce Leach, Associate Planner City Planning Division Planning and Community Development Department Attachments A. Planning Commission staff report, dated September 11, 2002 B. Draft Planning Commission Statements of Official Action C. Minutes of the September 11, 2002 Planning Commission Hearing D. Appeal Statements E. Public Hearing Notice F. Resolution certifying the FEIR G. Correspondence H. East and West Project Plans with Photographs of Project Sites and Surrounding Properties I. Final Environmental Impact Report bl:jt:SF F:\Pland\Share\Council\Strpt\02\AppealLantana1 July 5, 2007 29