Loading...
sr-030309-8bCity Council Meeting: March 3, 2009 Agenda Item: ~ "'~ To: Mayor and City Council From: Eileen Fogarty, Planning & Community Development Subject: Discussion of Development Agreement Concept Plans for the St. Monica Catholic Community Campus Enhancement Project at 725 California Avenue. Recommended Action Staff recommends the City Council discuss St. Monica Catholic Community's Development Agreement proposal involving a campus expansion and parking improvement plan and: 1. Direct staff to pursue the Development Agreement negotiation process; 2. Provide direction for negotiation of potential public benefits, appropriateness, and design alternatives identified by the Planning Commission and staff. Executive Summary St. Monica Catholic Community proposes that the City consider a Development Agreement to permit a campus expansion and parking improvement plan on .their property located at 725 California Avenue: The project involves two phases comprised primarily of: 1) the demolition of the existing 13,065 square foot Pastoral Center, located at the corner of California Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard; 2) replacement of the Pastoral Center with a new 30,438. square foot Community Center with two levels of subterranean parking (270 parking spaces); 3) construction of a 7,200 square foot addition to the rear of the High School East building for new classrooms; .and 4) renovation of the existing auditorium, gymnasium and other facilities. Planning staff has been working with the project applicant to improve the design and appropriateness of the proposed project. Additionally, the conceptual plans were presented at a public workshop, attended by 18 people, on November 10, 2008 and were presented to the Planning Commission for their input on January 21, 2009. Staff, the community, and the Planning Commission have provided the applicant clear design input, which they have indicated will be factored into future plan revisions. Specifically design comments have been focused primarily on the following issues: 1 • Mass, scale, and pedestrian orientation of the proposed Community Center; • Relationship of the proposed Community Center to California Avenue and the sidewalk; • Enhancing the prominence of the proposed Community Center's chapel at the corner of California Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard;. • Ensuring that the architectural style of the proposed Community Center relates to the Church and to other existing on-site buildings and respects the Pastoral Center, • Ensuring that all proposed construction is compatible with the mass and scale of -the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends the City Council direct staff to proceed in negotiating a Development Agreement addressing the design issues identified above and public benefits to be negotiated. Discussion Development Agreements are not quasi-judicial matters like Development Review Permits or Conditional Use Permits. They are negotiated contracts between the City and an applicant and are implemented by ordinance. Therefore, to avoid negotiating a project the City Council cannot ultimately accept, this "Float up" process has been initiated. This proposal was brought to the Planning Commission for discussion at its January 21, 2009 meeting and the Commission's recommendations to the City Council are included later in this report. The City Council's discussion will provide direction. to staff and the applicant about the key issues to be addressed during the Development Agreement negotiation process. Attachment C contains the applicant's project summary and concept plans. Site History St. Monica Catholic Community began as a small parish church in Santa Monica 1886. The subject property began development in the 1920s with the construction of the church and rectory at the corner of 7~hStreet and California Avenue, in 1925. In 1930 the Elementary School, originally built in 1899 at the corner of Third Street and Arizona Avenue, was moved to its present location. Since that time the following buildings have been constructed: 2 • 1938 -High School West Wing • 1946 -Gymnasium and Spirituality Center • 1956 -High School East Wing • 1960 -Pastoral Center In more recent years, and since the adoption of the current zoning ordinance, the Trepp Center was built in 1995 and the Duval Center was built in 2000. Both of these buildings required Conditional Use Permits for the new construction and Variances for parking and. height deviations. Finally, in 2000, a Conditional Use Permit was approved to change the status of the property and the buildings from legal non-conforming to legal conforming uses and allow the construction of an off-site, 26 space parking lot at 1140 7th Street, constructed in 2001 and currently used by St. Monica Catholic Community. Regarding the subject proposal, the applicant initially submitted several development applications including a Text Amendment, Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Adjustment applications. As these applications were being reviewed, it became clear that a Development Agreement would be more appropriate in order to allow the City and the applicant more flexibility to achieve a higher quality project. Project Description The applicant proposes that the City consider a Development Agreement to allow St. Monica Catholic Community to construct atwo-phase Campus Enhancement and Parking Improvement Plan ("project") on St. Monica's property. The project will also reduce the existing parking. deficit and improve the availability of parking on-site when school is in session by constructing a subterranean parking garage. For various reasons, including the fundraising necessary for St. Monica (a non-profit religious organization) to accomplish the construction and the need to minimize disruption to the on-going elementary and high school facilities, the total project is anticipated to be completed within seven to ten years from the approval of the agreement. Therefore, the Development Agreement negotiations will include establishment of the Planning entitlement permit term. The primary goals of the project are to improve the facilities and 3 programming available to the students, parishioners and the community. The project would be constructed in two phases, as described below: site Tian n s Phase I: The first phase of construction is scheduled to commence within three years of Development Agreement approval and to be completed within four years after commencement of construction. Phase I involves the following components: A. Community Center. The existing two-story Pastoral Center, located on the comer of the site along California Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard, will be demolished and replaced with a new two-story religious Community Center above a two-level subterranean parking structure. The existing 13,465 square foot building provides meeting space, parish offices, counseling and ministry resource areas, a chapel, and ancillary concession services. The 30,438 square foot replacement building will provide meeting space, parish offices, counseling and ministry resource areas, a chapel, ancillary concession services, and a .space for an elementary school classroom. The subterranean parking garage will contain 168 parking stalls. This new subterranean parking garage will provide on-site parking needed during weekday school use of the courtyard playground, which currently also serves as surface parking for weekend use. B. High School Addition. In addition to refinishing and updating portions of both the Elementary and High School facilities, a 7,200 square foot addition will. be added to the East Wing of the High School. The addition will provide six additional classrooms, 4 an expanded youth center, an improved snack bar and handicap accessibility to all levels of the existing building. No change in student enrollment is anticipated. The additional classrooms allow the High School to add a greater variety of Advanced Placement and specialty classes to the curriculum. The new classrooms will also allow the High School to move traditional academic instruction out of the specialty classrooms (e.g., lab rooms) so that the specialty classrooms can be used for their intended purposes every period. C. Trepp Center Partial Conversion. Conference rooms in the Trepp Center will be converted to a language-lab and technology lab program space for use by the elementary school D. Courtyard/Playground. The center court area will be renovated to improve outdoor eating space and hardscape play area, and to create a large natural grass zone and multiple shade trees. When school is not in session, portions of the renovated courtyard will continue to be available for surface parking, supplying 145 parking spaces. E. Interior Renovations Of Existing Gymnasium. The gym will be retrofitted to improve sound and lighting and provide storage. The existing gymnasium basement has lockers, a team room, offices and training space. The space will be completely reconfigured and renovated, although the programming will be unchanged. Phase IL Phase II is planned to commence within four years after completion of Phase 1 with a three year construction term. It includes the following: A. Auditorium. The existing. school auditorium, built in 1946, will be renovated through expanding the proscenium stage, reducing the existing audience chamber, together with acoustic and lighting upgrades. In addition, the auditorium's existing basement will be expanded by 1,500 square feet beneath the expanded stage to accommodate ancillary auditorium support areas. B. Subterranean Parking Expansion. The subterranean parking structure will be expanded north of the new Community Center on the west side of the High School East building. The two-level expansion will provide 102 additional parking spaces. C. Elementary School and High School West Wing. This aspect of the work involves utility, interior finish and deferred maintenance upgrades to the existing High School West Wing and the existing Elementary School building. 5 Design and Massing The Community Center is proposed to be 30,438 square feet, two stories, and 36 feet and the High School addition is proposed to be 7,200 square feet, three stories, and 31 feet in height. The proposed plan maintains the existing neighborhood context in that the proposed Community Center will be two stories, built with a similar footprint, oriented, and used similarly as the Pastoral Center it replaces. However, the building is larger and designed in a contemporary architectural style in contrast to the Pastoral Center's Spanish Colonial Revival style. Since the submittal of the Development Agreement application, planning staff and the design team have been working with the applicant in an effort to address key negotiation points, including consistency with the General Plan and compatibility with the LUCE concept; public benefits; and transportation demand measures. Furthermore, planning staff and the Planning Commission identified issues related to mass, scale, pedestrian orientation and open space and have relayed these issues to the applicant. Specifically, the issues listed below need further design consideration: • Mass, scale; and pedestrian orientation of the proposed Community Center; • Relationship of the proposed Community Center to California Avenue and the sidewalk; • Enhancing the prominence of the proposed Community Center's chapel at the corner of California Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard, • Ensuring that the architectural style of the proposed Community Center relates to the Church and to other existing on-site buildings and respects the Pastoral Center; • Ensuring that all proposed construction is compatible with the mass and scale of the surrounding neighborhood. St. Monica Catholic Community and their representatives are receptive to the above listed issues and are. currently considering all options and alternatives to be further refined with Council's input. The graphics below illustrate the areas of concern identified by the Planning-Commission and staff: 6 neighborhood. 7 1. Enhance prominence of proposed Chapel 2. Ensure architectural style relates to the Church and other existing buildings. 3. Ensure that mass, scale, pedestrian orientation are appropriate to the the sidewalk Public Benefits The proposed Community Center is inconsistent with R2 zoning standards including setbacks and height limitations, but the proposal conforms to the General Plan Medium Density Housing land use designation which allows for greater building height (3 stories, 40 feet) than the R2 zoning (2 stories, 23 feet). Additionally, due to the need for fundraising, the- construction schedule is anticipated to occur within 7 to 10 years, a longer than typical permit term. Therefore, the applicant proposes to offer the following public benefits to support the Development Agreement approval: 1) Increased parking to reduce on-street parking demand by expanding the off- street parking from 201 parking spaces to approximately 425 parking spaces. 2) Opportunity for City use of parking spaces for Parks department staff through a lease arrangement; 3) Public access to a new bookstore and coffee bar, and a community meeting space; 4) Design compatibility with existing neighborhood scale and massing. 8 4. Ensure pedestrian orientation is appropriate and relates to California Avenue and If a Development Agreement is initiated, the negotiations between the applicant and the City should achieve: 1) A design and land uses that contemplate the LUCE vision while being consistent with the adopted General Plan., Specifically, an emphasis on the mass and scale of new construction should be considered; 2) Public benefits such as open space, pedestrian amenities, and streetscape design; 3) Transportation Demand Management measures to reduce single-occupant vehicle trips; Comprehensive design plans will be further developed during the Development Agreement process based on direction from the Planning Commission and City Council. As discussed in the General Plan section below, the project must be consistent with the current General Plan and the Agreement negotiation will also anticipate the new Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE). General Plan Consistency The subject property is located in the Low Density Housing District which allows for structures to be 2 stories and up to 30 feet in height. Additionally, the property is located in the Low Density Multiple Residential (R2) zoning district which permits places of worship and schools with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Therefore, the proposed plan is consistent with the General. Plan in that the new Community Center and High School additions both comply with height and number of .stories requirements and are permissible uses. The Community Center is proposed to bd approximately 36 feet, two stories while the High School addition is proposed to be three stories, approximately 31 feet. Furthermore, the City is actively engaged in developing new General Plan goals and policies for the City through the LUCE efforts which seek to ensure compatible design to preserve and enhance neighborhoods. Accordingly, .the Development Agreement for this project needs to contemplate the LUCE goals so that 9 the project that ultimately returns to the Planning Commission and City Council will address community concerns, appropriate design, uses, and features identified through the LUCE process. A key neighborhood issue for this area of the City, as identified in the LUCE, is to provide adequate parking to residents and visitors by better managing the supply and/or providing additional parking opportunities in areas with a parking shortage. Additionally, the proposed uses of the project are consistent with the property's R2 zoning and Medium Density Housing land use designation. However, places of worship and schools are only permissible through a Conditional Use Permit in the R2 district. Due to the filing of a Development Agreement application project compliance is limited to the General Plan, while other aspects of the project such as height, setbacks, parking and. other standard zoning requirements do not apply and will be established by the Development Agreement. Previous Council Actions There have not been .any previous City Council actions regarding the proposed Development Agreement. Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this proposal on January 21, 2009. Based on input from the applicant and the public, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council: • Begin Development Agreement negotiations; • Support making community meeting rooms available to the public as a potential public benefit; • Consider the proposed 7-10 year timeframe for the Development Agreement in the same context as similar cases; • .Require better pedestrian orientation to California Avenue and the sidewalk; • Support enhancing the prominence of the proposed Community Center chapel located at the corner of California Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard;. • Require that an adequate drop-off and pick-up circulation plan for students is provided; • Ensure that Transportation Demand Management measures are incorporated to reduce single-occupant vehicle trips; • Support enhancing the proposed building entry along California Avenue; 10 • Ensure that the architectural style of the proposed Community Center relates to the Church and to other existing on-site buildings and respects the Pastoral Center; • Ensure that the all proposed construction is compatible with the mass and scale of the surrounding neighborhood. A copy of the January 21, 2009 Planning Commission minutes is contained in Attachment A. Alternatives In addition to the recommended action, the City Council could continue the discussion for analysis of additional options with agreement from the applicant or decline to negotiate a Development Agreement. Environmental Analysis CEQA review is not required for the purpose of a preliminary discussion of the feasibility of a potential project and the appropriateness and potential public benefits of a Development Agreement for the site (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15262). Environmental analysis will be completed prior to considering approval of the Development Agreement. Public Outreach Both the applicant and city staff conducted public outreach meetings to inform the neighborhood and general public about the proposed project. Specifically, on November 10, 2008 Planning staff held a community workshop at the Main Library, where there were 18 members of the public in attendance, to discuss the overall design. Comments from the public at that meeting were primarily focused on ensuring that the proposed Community .Center relates architecturally to the Church and other existing buildings and respects the existing Pastoral Center, scheduled for demolition. The project applicant also held two meetings with the neighborhood. The first meeting was held on July 10, 2008 with surrounding neighbors and the second meeting was held 11 with the Wilmont Neighborhood association in early January 2009. Both meeting were lightly attended. Additionally, notices for the January 21, 2009 Planning Commission hearing were mailed to all owners and residential tenants of properties located within a (500 foot) radius of the project and published in the Santa Monica Daily Press at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. The same noticing was also given for this hearing. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions Staff costs for the Development Agreement process are paid from application fees. There. is a wide range of public benefits that the developer could be required to provide pursuant to the Development Agreement negotiations. The associated fiscal impact will be determined prior to the Development Agreement returning for City Council consideration. Prepared by: Bradley J. Misner, AICP, Principal Planner Approved: Forwarded to Council: Development ATTACHMENTS: A. January 21, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes B. Public Notification C. Proposal Summary & Plans 12 ATTACHMENT A January 21, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes 13 Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 WEDNESDAY, January 21, 2009 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. ROOM 213, CITY HALL 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair O'Day called to order the regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 9:16 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Jay P. Johnson Hank Koning, FAIR Gerda Newbold Terry O'Day, Chairperson Gwynne Pugh, AIA, ASCE Jim Ries Absent: Gleam Davis Also Present: Grace Cho,. Associate Planner Kyle Ferstead, Commission Secretary Eileen Fogarty, Director of Planning / PCD Brad Misner; Principal Planner Steve Mizokami, Associate Planner Barry Rosenbaum, Senior Land Use Attorney Amanda Schachter, City Planning Manager Jing Yeo, Senior Planner 3. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Ms. Fogarty gave the Directors Report. She reported that the City Council will be hearing about the proposed Expo Light Rail on February 24, and this time should also come to the Commission in March. She noted that the Draft Environmental Impact Report. has yet to be released for staff or the public to review. She also reported that at least three workshops are being planned for the spring on such topics as conservation and protection for neighborhoods. 4. PLANNING COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS: Commissioner Pugh disclosed he was absent-from the Joint Meeting due to a potential conflict of interest as his architectural firm is working on the redesign of the Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 City parking structures adjacent to Santa Monica Place. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consent Calendar 5-A. Commissioner Koning made a motiori to approve the minutes for December 17, 2008, as submitted. Commissioner Johnson seconded the .motion, which was approved by voice vote. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Consent Calendar 6-A. Conditional Use Permit 08-009 and Variance 08-012, Ocean View Hotel, 1447 Ocean Avenue The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit (08CUP009) to increase the number of guestrooms from 65 rooms to 70 rooms by converting Michael Farzam. PROPERTY OWNER: Siroos Farzam. Commissioner Ries asked to remove this- item from the Consent Calendar. The Commission had no ex pane communications to disclose. Associate Planner Grace Cho gave the staff report. Commissioner Newbold asked Ms. Cho who prepared the parking .study for this project. Ms. Cho stated it was prepared by the applicant. Commissioner Newbold asked if this is typical.'Ms. Cho stated that the applicant took it upon himself to do the study. Commissioner Ries asked Ms. Cho if staff had made any site visits. Ms. Cho stated that the Transportation Management Division staff had reviewed the plans and she has not made a site visit. Commissioner Ries asked for the number of employees at the hotel. Ms. Cho stated she did not know. Commissioner Koning asked Ms. Cho if the hotel parking was strictly valet. Ms. Cho stated that this is her understanding. Commissioner Pugh commented on the former linen storage room being converted to a hotel room and asked about its location in relation to the roof and parking ramp. His concern was regarding light and ventilation. The applicant, Michael Farzam, was present to discussion the application. Commissioner Koning asked Mr. Farzam when his operation had the greatest demand for parking. Mr. Farzam stated the greatest demand is at night as most CUP is required to modify the operations of an existing Hotel use in the rcv~ aistnct Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 guests leave by 10:00 a.m. and check-in in the late afternoon. Commissioner Koning asked about trash pick-up for the hotel. Mr. Farzam stated he has an arrangement for City pick-up twice a week, usually around 10:00 a.m. Commissioner Koning expressed concern that the valet service may use the alley trash pick-up area for parking vehicles. Commissioner Newbold asked Mr. Farzam if the hotel's parking is used by people other than hotel guests. Mr. Farzam stated that it is a complimentary valet service and self-parking is also available to hotel guests. He further sated that some nearby restaurants also use the hotel parking at night. Chair O'Day asked if the adjacent residential building uses the hotel parking. Mr. Farzam stated he is unaware of this occurring, but he did see the letter to the Commission regarding this issue. Commissioner Pugh expressed concern about the laundry room, which currently has no window to the outside. Mr. Farzam stated the room is viable for a guest room. Commissioner Pugh asked Mr. Farzam forthe average room rate atthe hotel. Mr. Farzam stated rooms range in price from $160-$170 per night, with rates going as low as $69 in the winter to over $200 per night in summer. Commissioner Pugh stated he is very opposed to this one new room based on a number of quality of life issues. Mr. Farzam stated that a new window will be installed in the room in question and the new rooms will be dedicated to walk-in guests who have not made prior reservations and the guest will have the right to refuse them. Commissioner Koning expressed concern that there may be emergency egress issues for the room in question and the room does not appear to meet minimum requirements. He stated it would probably need air conditioning. Dr. Farzam, Mr. Farzam's father, came to the podium and explained how the laundry room would work as a bedroom. Commissioner Koning asked if the room has an existing bathroom. Mr. Farzam answered in the affirmative and added that all the proposed new guestrooms have bathrooms. Chair O'Day asked Mr. Farzam whafisustainable elements he is adding to qualify his building as a "green business" building. Mr. Farzam explained that his hotel has been refitted with low flow shower heads and faucets, pressurized water flow, signage for linen reuse and reminders to save energy by turning off lights not in use, a recycling program and use of recycled products among other things. As there were no request to speak forms submitted by the public, Chair O'Day closed the public hearing. Commissioner Ries expressed concern with granting the parking variance as it does not meet the Commission's requirementfor a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. He expressed the opinion that there should be a standard condition requiring a TDM program. He asked if some of the parking spaces could not be converted to bicycle parking spaces. Commissioner Johnson thanked Commissioner Ries for his thoughtful 9 Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 recommendations. He stated he is satisfied with the parking arrangements and is confident the Building and Safety Division will make sure the converted rooms are habitable. He noted that no members of the public came to speak on this item. He then made a motion for approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Variance request and with a condition regarding parking and traffic conditions. Commissioner Koning commented that the Building and Safety Division staff is diligent, but no building permits are required for the proposed room conversions since the bathrooms already exist. He stated he would want a condition to require the applicant to obtain a building permit to review handicapped access, fire access and the like. Commissioner Pugh stated that Building and Safety staff should be made aware that it is approximately 80-feet to daylight and open air from said window. Commissioner Johnson accepted the friendly amendments. Commissioner Koning seconded the motion Ms. Schachter commented. that it is an interesting idea to convert parking spaces to bicycle spaces, however the public notice did not include mention of reducing the number of parking spaces, and it is Code required parking, so it cannot be part of the motion. She suggested revised wording for the room habitability condition as follows: that Building and Safety review the plan to ensure appropriate habitability, ventilation, etc., rather than requiring a building permit. Ms. Cho stated that the Certificate of Occupancy for the hotel would need to re-granted to update the number of hotel rooms to 70. Commissioner Pugh stated he would particularly want to alert Building and Safety staff to the fact that this converted laundry room is under an overhang that is 80-feet long. Commissioner Johnson accepted the friendly amendments to his motion. He asked .that the hotel owners be advised to explore accommodation of bicycle parking on- site. Commissioner Ries stated he could support this if the condition "has teeth." He stated he does not agree with the noticing issue raised by Ms. Schachter. Mr. Farzam stated he has plenty of storage space and may be able to add bicycle parking in the trash room, which is enclosed, locked and adjacent to the alley. He explained that since he uses the City's trash service, his private trash area is not used for trash bins. Commissioner Pugh agreed if he still complies with the City requirements for a trash area. Commissioner Newbold expressed support for the direction of Commissioner Ries' but expressed concern that it would be a meaningless condition. Commissioner Ries stated he would hope that the bicycle issue would be tied into any transportation demand management [TDM] program they would have. Commissioner Pugh suggested rephrasing the condition to have the applicant work with staff to provide TDM and should consider bicycle and parking sharing on-site and as would be appropriate. The motion, as amended, was approved by the following vote: AYES: Johnson, Koning, Newbold, O'Day, Pugh, Ries; ABSENT: Davis to Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 The Statement of Official Action will return for approval. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7-A. Development Review Permit 06-005 and Environmental Impact Report 06-006, around floor retail space and 33 421sf of office space The Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project have been prepared. The Statement of Overriding Considerations will be necessary to approve the project because the EIR has significant level. (Planner: Jing Yeol APPLICANT: David Forbes Hibbert, AIA. PROPERTY OWNER: SM Partners Ltd. .The Commission made the following ex parte communication disclosures: Commissioner Ries disclosed he spoke with the applicant's attorney ten days ago regarding traffic issues; Commissioner Pugh disclosed that he and Commissioner Koning met with the project architect regarding the historic nature of the existing building and he spoke with the applicant's attorney just prior to this hearing also regarding the historic aspects of the building; and Commissioner Koning disclosed he and Commissioner Pugh met with the project architect on Tuesday, January 20, 2009. at 10:30 a.m. There were no other disclosures made. Senior Planner Jing Yeo gave the staff report. She stated that the City Consultants, Neti Basu and Joe Powers of Rincon Consultants were presentto answerquestions about the environmental document. Commissioner Pugh commented on .his understanding of the Secretary of the Interior Standards for a historic district and questioned how it pertains to this project. Ms. Yeo responded that the condition referred to is meant to allow the project design while respecting the historic nature of the building and potential historic district where it is located. Commissioner Koning asked for an explanation of how the parking district assessment works if the new building provides its own parking: Ms. Schachter stated she would need to research the question for certainty, however she believed the fee is waived. Commissioner Johnson asked Ms. Yeo ingress and egress for the project site and expressed concern regarding the alley and adjacent new construction. Ms. Yeo stated that the Transportation Management Division have reviewed and approved the driveways for both projects. Commissioner Newbold asked staff why the inclusion of parking for this project is a benefit to the City. Ms. Yeo stated that providing parking on-site is a benefit because it reduces the use of street parking. ii Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 Chair O'Day asked Ms. Yeo for the parking requirement for this building were it not in the assessment district. Ms. Yeo stated that the requirement would be 1/300 for the retail and office components. Commissioner Pugh commented on parking presentations the Commission has seen during the Land Use and Circulation Element update process and asked if the building tenants will be charged for parking per the City's Transportation Demand Management [TDM] program. Ms. Yeo answered in the affirmative and stated they must also be offered alternative transportation information. Commissioner Koning expressed curiosity about the historic district aspect cited in the staff report and asked why this is not being considered by the Landmarks Commission. Ms. Yeo explained that the area is not currently designated as a historic district. Commissioner Ries commented on the TDM and asked whether changes in the project would require a new Development Review Permit. Ms. Schachter stated that a minor amendment (Condition #7) can be done administratively, however anything larger requires review by the Commission. Commissioner Johnson asked staff about the request for a tvvo-year permit instead of an one-year permit and the staff's ability to extend permits for one-year. Ms. Schachter stated that asix-month administrative extension is permitted by Code, not one year. She added that the applicant is asking for atwo-year permit with the ability for asix-month extension. The applicant team included attorney, Chris Harding; a general partner for the project, Jack Jakosky; and project architect, David Forbes Hibbert. Following the applicant teams' presentation, Commissioner Ries asked the project architect about the increasing the prominence of the retail entrance and reducing the scale of the commercial entrance. Mr. Hibbert stated that it could be done, but at present the front entry design is very symmetrical. Commissioner Johnson for the permitted height limits on Fourth and Fifth Streets. Mr. Hibbert stated the project is proposed at 56-foot height limit for Fourth Street. Chair O'Day asked Mr. Hibbert to comment on the staff recommendation to change the upper level fagade, which was described as "abrupt." Mr. Hibbert stated that the design submitted was changed per the request of the City's Urban Designer. Chair O'Day commented that the front columns do not fit the architectural style of the building. Mr. Hibbert stated they can be changed. Chair O'Day noted that the ground floor is intended for retail, but no space has been left-for signage. Mr. Hibbert explained that it is difficult to predict the signage requirements for national chains. He noted that the adjacent retail space, West Elm, utilized the existing facade for their signage. As there were no request to speak forms, Chair O'Day closed the public hearing iz Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 Commissioner Ries asked staff about Condition #g, the fee for open space, and how the fee will be applied when the use of the second floor is not known. Ms. Yeo directed the Commission's attention to the Supplemental Staff Report, Condition #9, and that the fee could be adjusted prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Commissioner Pugh made a motion to adopt the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) "with the clear understanding that the language regarding the mitigation for the historic aspects of this project are included as was in the discussion with staff that it comply with the Development Standards for the Bayside District, that it be compatible ih form and massing and such like that it is not related necessarilyto any historic period." Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum asked for clarification that the second portion of the motion has fo do with the conditions setforth as a condition of approval and is not part of the EIR. Commissioner Pugh stated his issue is that the language is specifically setforth in the Resolution of Intention certifying the EIR and he wanted it clearly noted that the language does not refer to the EIR. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated the issue is part of a mitigation measure. The motion on the EIR was approved by the following vote: AYES: Johnson, Koning, Newbold, O'Day, Pugh, Ries; ABSENT: Davis. Commissioner Koning commented on the proposal to achieve Silver LEED certification for the project and noted there is no way to guarantee the certification will be granted at that level. Ms. Yeo stated that the applicant was willing to accept removal of the LEED certification requirement as a condition. Commissioner Koning commented that the LEED list for this project he just reviewed does not specify which areas they are doing. Commissioner Ries asked. ifthe applicant could provide the LEED checklist as part of the plan check process. Commissioner Pugh agreed to such a provision, provided the list also details how the project will achieve the certification. He also stated that overall he supports the Statement of Overriding Consideration although he does not consider the parking aspect as a benefit to the City: Commissioner Koning made a motion to adopt the Statement of Overriding Consideration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motioh. The motion on the Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Plan was approved by the following vote: AYES: Johnson, Koning, Newbold, O'Day, Pugh, Ries; ABSENT: Davis. Commissioner Newbold asked staff why they do not support the extension of the .permit term. Ms. Schachter stated that staff wants the project to move forward expeditiously and remain compliant with current development standards for the 13 Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 area. Commissioner Ries asked about incorporation of Mr. Hibbert's comment regarding changing the front entries. Commissioner Pugh noted that the design of the building has yet to go through design review and the issues raised by staff are valid. He suggested a preference for changing the bay windows and expressed discomfort with the serrated shapes being proposed. He stated that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) can handle these matters. Commissioner Koning expressed agreement with Commissioner Pugh regarding the building's prominent entry and stated the building needs to be more retail oriented on the ground floor. Commissioner Pugh expressed concern-with the "rich" materials being proposed and stated this does not "feel right." Commissioner Ries expressed concern with the condition requiring the change to the entry. Commissioner Pugh stated that the ARB shall consider these items as is their purview. Commissioner Koning commented on the point raised about providing space for signage. on the. building for the retail use and stated it needs to be considered as part of the ground floor fagade design. Ms. Yeo stated that Condition #1 in the staff report raises issues for ARB review. Chair O'Day asked if there are other issues besides the bay windows, entry doors and signage to be added to the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Ries asked about the bicycle parking. Ms. Yeo stated there is a condition to modify the. required signage for bicycle parking. Commissioner Pugh asked that item five on page 19 be consistent regarding massing, forms and shapes and conforming with the Bayside District development standards. Ms. Schachter asked if the motion will include a condition regarding LEED Silver certification. Commissioner Pugh made a motion for approval of the project with the following conditions: that the project will achieve LEED Silver certification; that the two year permit term be granted; and with the other issues previously discussed. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The motion on the Development Review Permit was approved by the following vote: AYES: Johnson, Koning, Newbold, O'Day, Pugh,. Ries; ABSENT: Davis. Ms. Schachter stated that the Statement of Official Action, as amended, will return at a future meeting. The Commission made a motion to begin another hearing item after 11:00 p.m., which was approved by voice vote. The Commission then took a break from 11:17 p.m. to 11:23 p.m. 14 Planninq Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 7-B. Development Agreement 08-002, 725 California Avenue. The applicant is requesting Planninq Commission consideration and recommendation of a Development Agreement for a campus improvement project located at 725 California Avenue (St. Monica Catholic Community). The subject property the existing Pastoral Center (13 065 sg ft) located at the corner of California Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard construction of a new 30,438 square feet Community Center in the demolished area of the Pastoral Center, with two levels of subterranean parking (250+ spaces) construction of a 7 200 square foot classroom addition to the rear of the High School East surface level parking improvements, and the renovation of the existing auditorium gymnasium and other facilities. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.48.130 the Planninq Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposed development agreement and shall make its recommendation to the City Council for review. IPlanner: Brad Misnerl APPLICANT St Monica Catholic Community. PROPERTY OWNER: Archdiocese of Los Angeles. This item is a "float up" presentation and does not require any ex parte communication disclosures. Principal Planner Brad Misner gave the staff report. Commissioner Newbold asked about a coffee bar being cited as a "public benefit" and if the coffee bar would be a permitted use in a residential area. Mr. Misner stated that the Church complex already has a bookstore in the pastoral center and this will be rebuilt as an ancillary use with the coffee bar as an amenity to the bookstore use. He stated that bookstore and coffee bar would be open to the public and the applicant can elaborate further. Commissioner Pugh commented on the public benefit of community meeting rooms, which are always in demand, and asked if the Church would consider offering these rooms for a reduced fee for community meetings as is done at the new main library. Mr. Misner stated his understand that the community meeting room will be available for reservation. Commissioner Pugh asked about public outreach for this project. Mr. Misner stated that there was a community meeting in November 2008 at the Main Library, which was noticed with the 500-foot radius mailing and advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press. He added that approximately twenty people attended, half of whom were associated with the project. He also stated the central theme of the meeting was how the new building would relate to the existing buildings architecturally. Commissioner Pugh asked if correspondence was received. Mr. Misner stated several letters received in the last twenty-four hours with the areas of concern being construction impacts, noise, and traffic. He stated these issues will be addressed as part of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process. The applicant team included Tom Zanick, chairperson for the Master Plan Site Committee for Saint Monica's; Mike Matola, chief administrator of Saint Monica's; is Plannina Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 and project architect Joe Pica. The team made a presentation to the Commission on the proposed changes to the Saint Monica's campus. Commissioner Pugh asked if the addition of square footage to the community center will result in a greater occupancy level. Mr. Zanick stated that the intent is to make the facility more comfortable, not increase the people on-site. Commissioner Pugh asked about the addition of classrooms. Mr. Zanick stated that the classrooms are an adjustment to what is already being provided and the student population will not be increasing. Commissioner Pugh commented that the new chapel on the corner has not access from the street. Mr. Zanick explained the new chapel will be replacing an existing multi-purpose room and will be used as choir room and meeting space. He stated the space is to be private. Commissioner Pugh asked if there are other places being used for small religious services. Mr. Zanick answered in the affirmative and these all have interior access only. Commissioner Pugh asked Mr. Zanick to consider activating the sidewalk with people accessing the site from various locations. Commissioner Newbold commented on the. amount of new parking spaces being provided and asked how it will be used. Mr. Zanick stated that most of the new parking will be used for non-school related uses, such as funerals and weddings, and for the school faculty and Sunday services. He stated that the at-grade parking cannot be used during school hours as the area doubles for student use. Commissioner Koning asked if the 620 student figure is for the high school only. Mr. Zanick stated the 620 figure includes the 280 elementary school students. The following members of the public submitted requestto speak forms, butwerenot present when their names were called: Victor Newlove, Don and Ann Oarlock. One member of the public, Michael Hanaway, was present and addressed the Commission. The applicant team waived their response to public comment time. Chair O'Day closed the public hearing, then asked the Commission for their input to be forwarded to Gity Council. Commissioner Ries expressed support for moving forward with a Development Agreement as it will be a benefit for the community. He agreed with Commissioner comments that the Lincoln Boulevard/California Avenue corner needs to be more active and suggested switching the location of the chapel and bookstore. He suggested an added public benefit would be allowing the public to use the new parking when Church activities are not occurring. He also strongly suggested the Church obtain an approved drop-off plan for students as well as a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan. He commented that the site will have urban run- off issues and suggested landscaping should be added where there are currently parking spaces adjacent to the rectory. Commissioner Pugh concurred with the comments made by Commissioner Ries. He stated that a student pick-up/drop-off plan needs to be reviewed. He stated he is not 16 Plannina Commission Minutes __ January 21, 2009 in favor of recreating the historic architecture and the new structures need to address the street by being welcoming. Commissioner Newbold commented that she does not disagree with any of the comments made so far. She expressed concern regarding traffic around the site and whether the project will generate more traffic. She asked for specific requirements for students driving to the campus and carpools. Commissioner Koning commented on the significance of the location across from Reed Park with nice wide sidewalks which are not being taken advantage of. He stated the project should be sustainable and the building design should indicate a sense of importance and relate to the neighborhood scale. Commissioner Johnson agreed with the comments made. He asked that traffic issues be addressed for the Lincoln Boulevard/California Avenue intersection and recommended new traffic counts be done, including on Sundays. He suggested that the campus have something like crossing guards during high occupancy days. He expressed concerns about setbacks and street trees. Chair O'Day commented that the project proposal is extremely well developed and well presented as opposed to other float-ups the Commission has seen. He noted that the comments have centered on parking concerns-and the building design to be more engaging from the street. He acknowledged that the. Commission always desires. more interaction with the .street and neighborhood, however as a counterpoint, this is a school and religious institution. He agreed with the Commission's desire for more sustainability, the TMD requirements, the drop-off issue, the more coherent design with other buildings on-site, the parkway being of value to the urban pattern and that the buildings should be better addressed. Commissioner Johnson asked about the request for the seven to ten year span for the Development Agreement. Chair O'Day reminded Commissioner Johnson that .this is just a recommendation to the City Council on whether to proceed with negotiating a Development Agreement. Commissioner Pugh asked that the recommendation include allowing community access to the meeting rooms. Commissioner Pugh made a motion to recommend the City Council open negotiations for a Development Agreement for 725 California Avenue.. Commissioner Koning seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: Johnson, Koning, Newbold., O'Day, Pugh, Ries; ABSENT: Davis. Chair O'Day thanked everyone for their participation: 8. DISCUSSION: 8-A. Input discussion and possible action on policies process materials timeline, 17 Planning Commission Minutes January 21, 2009 action on policies process materials timeline participation strategies and related issues pertaining to the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plans. This item was continued. 9. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 9-A. Planning Commission Caselist 9-B. Current Case List 9-C. Cumulative Projects List 10. FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS: None. 11. PUBLIC INPUT: None. 12. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:19 p. m. 1 /28/2009 la ATTACHMENT B Public Notification 27 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Discuss a Development Agreement proposal to construct a campus enhancement and parking improvement plan for St. Monica Catholic Community. Address: 725 California Avenue APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: St. Monica Catholic Community/ Archdiocese of L.A. A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request: Discuss the applicant's Development Agreement proposal for a campus enhancement and improvement plan involving the demolition and replacement of the Pastoral Center with a new 30,438 square foot Community Center with atwo-level subterranean parking garage, a 7,200 square foot addition to the high school east wing, and renovations of the existing auditorium, gymnasium and physical upgrades and improvements to existing facilities. DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 2009, 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: St. Monica Catholic Community 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 contact Principal Planner Bradley J. Misner at (310) 458-8341, or by e-mail at brad.misner@smgov.net. The Zoning Ordinance is available at the Planning Counter during business hours and on the City's web site at www. sa nta-mon ica. oro. 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. 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. ESPANOL . Esto es una noticia de una audiencia publica para revisar applicacibnes proponiendo desarrollo en Santa Monica. Si deseas mas informacion, favor de Ilamar a Carmen Gutierrez en la Division de Planificacion al nt"amero (310) 458-8341. APPROVED AS TO FORM: AMANDA SCHAC TER Planning Manager F:\CifyPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\NOTICES\2009\St. Monica DA.doc ATTACHMENT C Proposal Summary & Plans Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's office and the libraries. 29 Project Address: 726 California Avenue (and related addresses) Applicant: St. Monica Catholic Community PROJECT DESCRIPTION St. Monica Catholic Community's proposed project is a two-phase Campus Enhancement and Parking Improvement Plan ("project") for several existing facilities on St. Monica's property. For various reasons -- including the fundraising necessary for St. Monica (a non-profit religious organization) to accomplish the construction, and also including the need to minimize disruption. to the on-going elementary. and high school education -- the project will be implemented over the next seveh to ten years, The project will improve the facilities and programming available to thestudents, parishioners and the community. The project will also reduce the existing parking deficit and improve the availability of parking on-site when school is in session by constructing an expensive subterranean parking garage. St. Monica intends to incorporate features in the proposed construction that emphasize sustainability. To this end, the project will address Indoor Environmental Quality (e.g., ahigh-efficiency mechanical system, controllability of systems, an air filtration system that will provide a cleaner indoor air quality, use of low-emitting materials, constructing an exterior envelope that significantly reduces heat gain and heat loss, and provisions for day lighting and views); Local and Rapidly Renewable Materials (through use of indigenous landscaping); and, Water-Efficiency (e.g:; - plumbing fixtures that assist in reducing water consumption). St. Monica wilt also be employing Sustainable Sites practices such as Stormwater Management and,1_ight Pollution Reduction. The. two project phases are described below. Phase L - The first phase involves (A) replacing the existing Pastoral Center with a new Community Center and subterranean parking garage, (B) upgrading both the -, Elementary and High School facilities by retrofitting much of the existing facilt)es and incorporating a minor addition to the east wing of the High School, (C) converting- portions of the Trepp Center into specialty lab classrooms, {D) renovating the campus courtya~diplayground, and (E) interior renovations to gymnasium. This $25,000,000 phase. will be commenced within three years of submittal of this. application and-will be completed within four years after commencement of construction. A. Community Center. The existing two-story Pastoral Center at 725 California .Avenue will be demolished and replaced with a hew two-story religious Community Center that will be constructed above atwo-level subterranean parking structure. The existing building provides meeting space, parish offices, counseling and ministry resource areas, a chapel, and ancillary concession services. The replacement building will provide meeting space, parish offices, counseling and ministry resource areas, a chapel; ancillary concession services, and a space for an Elementary School classroom. The subterranean parking garage will contain 168_ parking stalls. This new subterranean parking garage will. provide on-site parking needed during school use of the courtyard playground (which currently also serves as surface parking) for weekday use. B. Minor High School Addition. In addition to refinishing and updating portions of both the Elementary and. High School facilities, a minoraddition will be added to the East Wing of the High School. The addition will provide six additional needed classrooms, an expanded youth center, an improved snack bar and handicap accessibility to all levels of the existing building. No change in student enrollment is anticipated. This is because these additional classrooms allow the High School to offer a greater. variety of Advanced Placement and other specialty classes that do not attract a large number of students due to their specialized subject matter. Moreover, the new' classrooms will allow the High School to move traditional academic instruction out of the specialty classrooms (e.g:, lab rooms) so that the specialty classrooms can be used for their intended purposes every period. C. T_repp Center Partial Conversion. Conference rooms in the Trepp Center will be converted to a language-lab and technology lab program space for use by the elementary school. D. Courtyard/Playground. The center court area-will be renovated#o improve outdoor eating, hardscape play area, a large natural grass zone and multiple shade trees. When school is not in session, portions of the renovated courtyard will continue to be available for surface parking, supplying 145 parking spaces. E. Interior Renovations Of Existing Gymnasium. The renovation of the' gymnasium is intended to take place within the gym as well as in the basement level below the gymnasium. The gym will be retrofitted to improve acoustics, sound,.. lighting and some general use storage. The existing basement below the gymnasium currently has the lockers, a team room, offices and training space. The space will be completely reconfigured and renovated, although the programming of the space will remain. the same. Phase II; The second, phase involves (A) modernizing the existing out-of-date school auditorium, (B) expansion of the subterranean parking garage (constructed during Phase 1) by 102 spaces, and (C) updates to the Elementary School and High School West Wing as described below. This phase will be commenced within four years after completion of Phase 1 and will be completed within three years after commencement. A. Auditorium. The existing out-of-date school auditorium-will be renovated through expanding the proscenium stage (and subsequent reduction of the existing audience chamber), as well as through acoustic, sound and lighting upgrades. In addition the auditorium's existing basement will be expanded by 1,500 SF (beneath the portion of the expanded stage) to accommodate ancillary. auditorium support areas. B. Subterranean Parking Extension. An extension to the parking structure will occur north of the new Community`Center on the west side of the High School East building between the High School East and the vacated alley. The extension is two levels of parking arranged in a one double-loaded parking row. The northernmost end of the parking extension will have a ramp connecting the two levels to accommodate - circulation. C. Elernentary School and High School West Winq: This aspect of the work involves utility, interior finish and deferred maintenance upgrades to the existing High ,School West Wing and the existing Elementary School building (1039 Seventh Street). ..CAMPUS FACILITIES Rather than facilitate expansion, this project will serve St. Monica's existing parishioners and students in better facilities. It will also supply more parking and improved outdoor play area. Existing Facilities Currently the St. Monica property includes the following. facilities, in addition to the Church, Rectory, High School East, High School West, Gymnasium, Elementary School and Auditorium: Pastoral Center Church offices and multi-purpose meeting rooms. - Spirituality :Center _ Youth center and offices, plus meeting rooms for retreats and prayer groups. Trepp Center School library (first floor) and multi-purpose meeting rooms for school and parish (second floor} Duval Center Multi-purpose meeting rooms for school and parish; ancillary classrooms; and restrooms for the parish. Proposed Facilities After the proposed work is completed, the St. Monica property will be improved with the following facilities, in addition to the Church, Rectory, High School East, High School West, Gymnasium, Elementary School and Auditorium: Community Center The Community Center will have the same functions as the Pastoral Center -- with the addition of a classroom and subterranean parking garage. Spirituality Center The entire building will be mostly meeting rooms for retreats and prayer groups/counseling sessions. The youth center and one. youth office-will be shifted to the new extension of the High School. East. The other youth offices will be shifted to the Community Center. Treop Center Second floor will include two classrooms (language and tech labs) to replace two of the four multi-purpose rooms. No change on first floor. Duval Center (No change) Multi-purpose meeting rooms for school and parish,. ancillary classrooms, and restrooms for the parish. Additional documentation available for review in City Clerk's Office.