Loading...
sr-102709-1hc7® c;~YOr City Council Report Santa bionica~ City Council Meeting: October 27, 2009 Agenda Item: To: Mayor and City Council From: Eileen P. Fogarty, Director of Planning and Community Development Subject: Statement of Official Action Denying Appeals of the Planning Commission's Approval of a Variance and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map for the Property Located at 1012 Second Street Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached Statement of Official Action denying Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006 and upholding the decision of the Planning Commission to approve Variance 08-022 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 08TM-008 to allow the construction of a four-unit condominium project that includes retention and rehabilitation of an existing City Landmark designated Turn-of- the-Century Victorian Cottage and construction of three new condominium units on the rear of the parcel located at 1012 Second Street. Executive Summary and Discussion This staff report transmits for City Council certification of the Statement of Official Action for Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006. After holding a public hearing on September 22, 2009, the City Council denied Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006 and upheld the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed project. The City Council's decision was based upon the findings and conditions contained in the attached Statement of Official Action. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact. Prepared by: Tony Kim, Senior Planner Attachments: A. Statement of Official Action B. Notice of Exemption ATTACHMENT A STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION 2 PROJECT INFORMATION CASE NUMBER: Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006 LOCATION: 1012 Second Street APPLICANT: Howard Laks Architects APPELLANTS: Coalition to Protect Zoning on Second Street David Green Scott Taylor PROPERTY OWNER: 1012 Second Street LLC CASE PLANNER: Tony Kim, Senior Planner REQUEST: Appeals of Planning Commission approval of Variance 08-022 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 08TM-008 for the property located at 1012 Second Street CEQA STATUS: The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15303 (b), Class 3 and Section 15331, Class 31 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Class 3 consists of projects located in and urbanized environment designed for not more than six dwelling units. The. proposed project consists of a request to create a four- unit subdivision in an urbanized environment. Class 31 consists of projects limited to maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995), Weeks and Grimmer. The Landmarks Commission designated the sut~ect Turn-of-the-Century Victorian 3 Cottage as a City Landmark in September 2005 in conjunction with their review of a proposed demolition permit for all structures on the parcel at 1012 Second Street. The proposed project retains and rehabilitates the Landmark; the rear apartment building located at the rear of the parcel proposed for demolition is not a historic resource and was specifically excluded from the Landmark Designation. The bases for the determination that this project is categorically exempt is more fully detailed in the Notice of Exemption filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk's office on September 24, 2009, incorporated herein by reference. CITY COUNCIL ACTION September 22, 2009 Determination Date . Appeals denied and Planning Commission approval of Variance 08-022 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map O8TM-008 upheld based on the following findings and subject- to the X conditions below: Appeals upheld and Planning Commission approval reversed based upon the following findings: Other: EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS Se tember 22, 2009 EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS September 22, 2011 GRANTED: LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE 12 months for Variahce 08VAR-022 EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION DATES*: Three (3) years for Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 08TM-008 Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit. Each and all of the findings and determinations are based. on the competent and. substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based ih part on that fact. 4 VARIANCE FINDINGS 1. There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, or to the intended use or development of the property that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning classification. Specifically, the existing improvement on site is a designated City Landmark building and its retention on site creates special circumstances related to available parcel area for new construction when compared to similarly sized lots under the same zoning classification in the immediate area, and the design compatibility requirements of complying with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties that would not be present if the building were not a designated City Landmark and could be removed to accommodate new, by- right development of up to six residential units on the entire site. 2. The granting of such variance will not be detrimental nor injurious to the property or improvements in the general vicinity. and district in which the property is located in that the proposed four-unit condominium project is consistent with multi-family residential uses that are permitted in the R-3 (Medium Density Multiple Residential) Zoning District and High Density Housing Land Use Classification of the area. The proposed project includes retention of a designated City Landmark Turn-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage on site and does not exceed the maximum unit density permitted in the R-3 District (four units are proposed where six units are permitted). The requested modifications to development standards have been reviewed individually and will not be detrimental to the property or improvements in the- general vicinity and district because the scale, massing, and design of the new construction on is compatible with the scale and character of the existing Landmark residence on site and the surrounding neighborhood. More specifically, the site is adjacent to multi-story buildings in all directions and is therefore generally consistent with the scale of surrounding properties: the adjacent condominium building to the south is 4- stories, approximately 45' in height, and 13,600 square feet; the adjacent apartment building to the north is 3 '/z stories, approximately 38' in height, and 15,600 square feet; and the adjacent condominium building directly across the alley is five stories, 50'-0" in height and 38,800 square feet. In addition, the project site is directly adjacent to the R-4 Zoning District across 1st Court alley where five stories and 50'-0" are permitted. Furthermore, the additional 3'-8" of height and additional story requested will not be detrimental or injurious to surrounding properties when analyzed in the context of the typical, by-right development of a maximum 6-unit, 3-story plus-mezzanine, 40'-0" tall building permitted in the R-3 District for the following reasons: the proposed project incorporates less. square footage than would be permitted if the applicant proposed multi-story construction immediately surrounding and above the historic Cottage; and the proposed project retains a significant amount of undeveloped air space surrounding the Cottage that serves to balance the. overall perceived scale. and massing of the .new construction on site and limit potential shade 5 impacts proposed in conjunction with the requested modifications to development standards such as the 3'-8" increase in height, additional building volume above 35'-0" and modification to the- required additional two-foot average side yard setback. 3. The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships, not including economic difficulties or economic hardships. Specifically, the applicant's project, which incorporates retention of a designated City Landmark residence as well as new construction on site, does not allow the applicant to fully develop the site in accordance with the Municipal Code and all of the objective. development standards due in part to .the design requirements specified by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties required for protection of the historic resource, and the objective development standards for the Zoning District that primarily contemplate redevelopment of the entire parcel for new construction. The theoretical maximum square footage that could be built on a vacant parcel of this size is approximately 9,610 square feet, assuming compliance with all development standards. Retention of the Landmark building along with. a project that complies with all development standards would result in a maximum of only approximately 7,384 square feet on site (a loss of 2,226 square feet). The applicant's proposal, with requested modifications, would result in a total of 8,421 square feet on site, which also includes the existing 886 square foot Landmark Cottage. Therefore, through the requested modifications to development standards such as building height, building volume, setbacks, and unexcavated yard requirements, the applicant is able to recover approximately 1,189 square feet (53%) of the 2,226 square feet that lost as result of retaining the Landmark residence on site in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. 4. The granting of a variance will not be contrary- to or in conflict with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter, nor to the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. Specifically, the proposed Variance is consistent in principle with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted Land Use Element and. Historic Preservation Element of the City of Santa Monica's General Plan. Land Use Element Policy 1.10.1 encourages the development of new housing in all residential neighborhoods, while still protecting the character and scale of neighborhoods. The proposed project is consistent with this policy in that new residential units are proposed along with the retention of an existing historic resource that contributes to the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Land Use Element Policy 3.1.3 encourages the retention of historic and architecturally significant resources and also states-that the design of new buildings should respect the character of nearby historic resources. The project is consistent with Policy 3.1.3 in that retention and preservation of the existing Landmark Turn-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage is proposed and the new construction on site is designed to be compatible with the historic resource on site while not duplicating its design. Goal 3 of the Historic Preservation Element calls for an increase in public awareness of the history of 6 Santa Monica and historic preservation in the City. The proposed project supports this policy and goal in that the historically significant Turn-of-the- Century Victorian Cottage will be retained on site and will continue to exemplify an important element of the early years of Santa Monica's residential development. Goal 5 of the Historic Preservation Element encourages the promotion of preservation of historic and cultural resources through incentives and technical assistance. Finally, the proposed project is consistent with purpose of the Variance process established to allow discretionary review of requested modifications to development standards in the Zoning Ordinance when "practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships or results inconsistent with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance would-occur from its strict literal interpretation and enforcement. In this case, the proposed project is consistent with the Variance procedure specifically established for projects that involve the retention and preservation of designated Landmarks and Contributing Structures to an adopted Historic District. 5. The variance would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be .located in that the. proposed new construction the proposed new construction on site expresses awell-defined, moderri design and form -that is compatible with, yet differentiated from, the historic Turn-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage on site. The siting, scale, proportions, and massing of the new construction are designed to be compatible with the existing Landmark building and with the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed increase in building height does not overshadow adjacent residential properties (43'-8" where a maximum of 40'-0" is permitted in the R3 District). More specifically, the site is adjacent to multi-story buildings in all directions and is therefore generally consistent with the scale of surrouhding properties: the adjacent condominium building to the south is 4-stories, approximately 45' in height, and 13,600 square feet; the adjacent apartment building to the north is 3 '/z stories, approximately 38' in height, and 15,600 square feet; and the adjacent condominium building directly across the alley is five stories, 50'-0" in height and 38,800 square feet. In addition, the project site is directly adjacent to the R-4 Zoning District across 1st Court alley where five stories and 50'-0" are permitted. The general streetscape along Second Street between California and Washington Avenues primarily consists of an eclectic mix of two- to four-story, post-WW-II multi-family buildings with little building articulation and limited front, side, and rear yard setbacks, compared to today's development standards. According to a review of building permits, of the nineteen parcels on the block, only four parcels developed before WW-11 remain (including the subject property); fifteen of the nineteen parcels were developed after WW-II. The proposed project retains .and rehabilitates the Landmark Cottage located at the street; this will serve to help preserve a part of the neighborhood's character and also provide a visual representation of the early history and development of Santa Monica's original Town Site. The design of the new construction incorporates a significant amount of glazing. as well as appropriate articulation and fourth floor stepbacks on the primary and secondary elevations in order to highlight the existing Landmark Cottage rather than visually 7 compete with it. The new construction incorporates a primary roof form and architectural details at each floor that exhibit a broad horizontality that reflects characteristics of the existing Landmark Cottage. The proportions of the balconies at the second and third stories also appropriately interpret the scale and location of the recessed front porch entry, a key feature of the Landmark Cottage. Finally, the proposed project is consistent with the High Density Housing General Plan Land Use Classification for the area. 6. .The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed variance in that the subject property is a legal parcel that is flat and has no -known geological constraints that would limit or prevent its future development. Further, the proposed four-unit condominium project does not exceed the maximum unit density permitted i n the R-3 District where up to six residential units are permitted. 7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed variance would not be detrimental to public health and safety in that the subject property is located within a developed urbanized environment that is adequately served by existing infrastructure, public utilities and services. It is not anticipated that approval of the subject applicatioh will create a need for additional utilities or services. 8. There will be adequate provisions for public access to serve the subject variance proposal in that there is adequate pedestrian access to the site via a public sidewalk on Second Street and there is a rear alley (1St Court) having a standard right-of-way of twenty feet located adjacent to the rear of the subject parcel that will provide vehicular access to off-street parking for the project. Furthermore, in order to ensure that there will be adequate provisions for public access, project Condition #59 specifies that project's construction mitigation program shall specify that there shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of necessary utility connections. 9. The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in unreasonable deprivation of the use or enjoyment of the property in that due to the location of the existing City Landmark designated Turn-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage and the requirement to retain and rehabilitate the structure on site in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the. Treatment of Historic Properties, without the requested modification to development standards, practical use or enjoyment of the subject parcel classification would not be possible consistent with the typical, by-right development potential associated with other similarly-sized parcels in the same neighborhood and zoning. 10. In addition to the other findings adopted in support of granting this Variance, the granting of this Variance is essential and desirable to the public convenience and welfare and is not in conflict with the General Plan nor materially detrimental or 8 injurious to property or improvements in the general vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The granting of this Variance will facilitate the retention and rehabilitation of an officially-designated. City Landmark by accommodating a viable housing project that incorporates and achieves rehabilitation of that City Landmark, as welt as the development of new housing units with subterranean parking and other desirable amenities. The proposed project is less than allowable density, is ho taller than several buildings in the immediate area, and is less floor area than could be proposed were the one-story cottage not being retained on site. The siting, scale, proportions, and massing of the new construction are designed to be compatible with the existing Landmark Cottage and with the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed increase in building height does not overshadow adjacent residential properties (43'-8" where a maximum of 40'-0" is permitted in the R3 District). More specifically, the site is adjacent to multi-story buildings in all directions: the adjacent multi-family building to the south is 45' in height; the adjacent building to the north is 38'-6" in height; and the building directly across the alley is 51'-10" in height. The general streetscape along Second Street between California and Washington Avenues primarily .consists of an eclectic mix of two- to four-story, post-WW-II multi-family buildings with little building articulation and limited front, side, and rear yard setbacks, compared to today's development standards. According to City Planning Staffs review of building permits, of the nineteen parcels on the block, only four parcels developed before WW-II remain (including the subject property); fifteen of the nineteen parcels were developed after WW-II. The proposed project retains and rehabilitates the Landmark Cottage located near the street frontage; this will serve to help preserve a part of the neighborhood's character and also provide a visual representation of the early history and development of Santa Monica's original townsite. The design- of the new construction incorporates a significant amount of glazing as well as appropriate articulation and fourth floor stepbacks on the primary and secondary elevations in order to highlight the existing Landmark Cottage rather than visually compete with it. The new construction incorporates a primary roof form and architectural details at each floor that exhibit a broad horizohtality that reflects characteristics of the existing Landmark Cottage. The proportions of the balconies at the second and third stories also appropriately interpret the scale and location of the recessed front porch entry, a key feature of the Landmark Cottage. Finally, the proposed project is consistent with the High Density Housing General Plan Land Use Classification for the area. With the exception of the specific relief addressed by this Variance and the exemption from the Construction Rate Program for projects involving retention and rehabilitation of historic landmarks, the project will be subject to all of the normal development standards for new construction. VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FINDINGS 1. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Government Code Section 65451. Specifically, while the subject property is not located in an area governed by a specific plan as specified in 9 Government Code Section 65451, compliance with the City's General Plan is required. For the purpose of subdividing the subject parcel, there are two pertinent policies that must be evaluated with the map; those policies relate to building height and unit density. As noted and shown on the subject map, the project complies with applicable policies, as conditioned and subject to approval of pending Variance 08VAR-022, including unit density and height standards for the subject land use designation (High Density Housing). 2. The design or improvement of the .proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Specifically, while the subject property is not located in an area governed by a specific plan, compliance with the City's General Plan is required. As noted and shown on the subject map, the proposed improvements will not exceed land use designation limits to building height and unit density; as conditioned and subject to approval of Variance 08VAR-022. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. Specifically, the subject parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an urbanized area adequately served by existing roadways and infrastructure. The property is physically able to accommodate the proposed development. More specifically, the existing alley located at the rear of the subject property is a standard 20'-0" in width and provides adequate vehicular site access. Furthermore, in order to ensure that the site is adequately served by existing infrastructure, project Condition #59 specifies that project's construction mitigation program shall specify that there shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of necessary utility connections. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. Specifically, the subject parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an urbanized area adequately served by existing roadways and infrastructure. More specifically, the existing alley located at the rear of the subject property is a standard 20'-0" in width and provides adequate vehicular site access. Furthermore, in order to ensure that the site is adequately served by existing infrastructure,. project Condition #59 specifies that .project's construction mitigation program shall specify that there. shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of necessary utility connections. Moreover. the type of development and unit density is consistent with policies set forth in the City's General Plan and other improvements in the general vicinity. 5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that the proposed subdivision is located in an urbanized area that does not contain habitats or would otherwise injure fish and wildlife. 6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed subdivision is for a property 10 located in an urbanized area and is consistent with other similar improvements in the area. As noted and shown on the map, the project complies with height and unit density limitations set forth in the General Plan, as conditioned and subject to approval of Variance 08VAR-022. The subdivision of the parcel does not have the potential to disrupt the urban environment or othervvise-cause serious public health problems. 7. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision in that there are no public easements located within the proposed subdivision. 8. The proposed subdivision is consistent with any ordinance or law of the City of Santa Monica. Specifically; the project has demonstrated compliance with applicable unit density and height limitations set forth in the underlying land use designation, as conditioned and subject to approval of Variance 08VAR-022. Moreover, as conditioned, the project must comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, which will be comprehensively evaluated during the City's plan check review process, prior to issuance of a building permit. CONDITIONS Administrative 1. The approval of this Tentative Parcel Map application shall expire if the rights granted are not exercised within two years from the permit's effective date; the approval of this Variance application shall expire if the rights granted are not exercised within two years from the permit's effective date. Exercise of rights shall mean issuance of a building permit to commence construction. 2. Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.450(4), if the Building Official determines that another building permit has been issued less than fifteen months prior to the date on which the building permit for this project has received all plan check approvals and none of the relevant exceptions specified in 9.04.10.02.450(c) and (e) apply, the Building Official shall place the project on a waiting list in order of the date and time of day that the permit application received all plan check approvals, and the term of this approval and other City approvals or permits necessary to commence the project shall be automatically extended by the amount of time that a project remains on the waiting list. However, the permit shall also expire if the building permit expires, if final inspection is not completed or a Certificate of Occupancy is not issued within the time periods specified in SMMC Section 8.08.060. One one-year extension of the Variance may be permitted if approved by the Director of Planning. Applicant is on notice that time extensions shall not be granted if development standards or the development process relevant to the project have chahged since project approval. Extension requests to a subdivision map must be approved by the Planning Commission. 11 3. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval, except as provided in the provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6 and Subchapter 9.20.18 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. During this time period the final map shall be presented to the City of Santa Monica for approval. No building permit for the project will be granted until such time as the final map is approved by the Santa Monica City Council. 4. Within ten days of City Planning Division .transmittal of the Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official Action prepared by the City Planning Division, agreeing to the conditions of approval and acknowledging that failure to comply with such conditions shall constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. By signing same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights applicant may possess regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall, be returned to the City Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds for potential permit revocation. 5. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with any conditions of approval of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. 6. Applicant is advised that projects in the California Coastal Zone may need approval of the California Coastal Commission prior to issuance of any building permits by the City of Santa Monica. Applicant is responsible for obtaining any such permits. Conformance with Approved Plans 7. This approval is #or those plans. dated July 1, 2009, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. 8. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to Planning Commission Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission,.. Landmarks Commission or Director of Planning. 9. Project plans shall be subject to complete Code Compliance review when the building plans are submitted for plan check and shall comply with all applicable provisions of Article IX of the Municipal Code and all other pertinent ordinances and General Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica prior to building permit issuance. 12 Affordable Housing Obligation 10. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Chapter 9.56, the project is subject to the City's Affordable Housing Production Program which requires a three" unit development to pay an Affordable Housing Production fee. The City's Affordable Housing Production fee is calculated based on the project's floor area as defined by -SMMC Section 9.04.02.030.315. The fee will be calculated prior to payment based on the requirements of the Affordable Housing Production Program, Section 9.56.070 and shall be based on the affordable housing unit base fee in effect at the time the affordable housing fee is paid to the City. The fee must be paid in full prior to the City granting any approval for the occupancy of the project, but no earlier than at the time of building permit issuance. ~' Pursuant to SMMC 9.56.030 (c), a designated Landmark building that is retained and preserved on-site as part of amulti-family. project shall not be considered or included in the assessing any of the requirements under this Chapter. Therefore, only the three new condominiums are counted for the purposes of calculating the owner's affordable housing obligation. Fees 11. A Park and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per residential unit shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the construction or placement of the residential unit(s) on the subject lot, per and subject to the provisions of Section 6.80.010 et seq. of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. 12. Prior to issuance of a condominium license, the developer shall provide for the payment of a Condominium Tax of $1,000 per planned salable unit pursuant to Chapter 6.76 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. 13. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with the requirements of Chapter 9.72 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, the Child Care Linkage Program. Cultural Resources 16. No demolition of buildings or structure built 40 years of age or older shall be permitted until the end of a 60-day review period by the Landmarks Commission to determine whether an application for landmark designation shall be filed. If an application for landmark designation is filed, no demolition shall be approved until a final determination is made by the Landmarks Commission on the application. 17. If any archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation or construction, work in the affected area shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be contacted to conduct a survey of the affected area at project's owner's expense. 13 A determination shall then be made by the Director of Planning to determine the significance of the survey findings and appropriate actions and requirements, if any, to address such findings. Rent Control 18. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary to demolish, convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental unit(s) from the housing market, the owner of the property shall first secure a removal permit under Section 1803(t), an exemption determination, an approval of a vested rights claim from the Rent Control Board, or have withdrawn the controlled rental unit(s) pursuant to the provisions of the Ellis Act. CC&Rs 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, Condominium Association By-Laws and a Declaration of CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall contain anon-discrimination clause as presented in SMMC Section 9.20.20.020 and such provisions as are required by SMMC Section 9.04.16.01.030(d) and (e). 20. No furniture shall be permitted on the rooftop decks above the second floor. This condition shall also be reflected in the CC & R's. Final Design 21. The applicant shall be required to post the property with apre-printed sign consistent with the requirements of SMMC 9.32.180 within ten days after a Certificate of Appropriateness application has been filed for review by the. Landmarks Commission 22. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash enclosures, and signage shall be subject to review and approval by the Landmarks Commission. 23. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall pay particular attention to the project's pedestrian orientation and amenities; scale and articulation of design elements; exterior colors, textures and materials; window treatment; glazing; and landscaping. Further, the Landmarks Commission shall carefully review the design of the new structure to ensure that it serves as a backdrop to the Landmark building. 24. The Landmarks Commission,. in .its review, shall pay particular attention to the building's proposed fenestration on all elevations and the applicant's proposed incorporation of glass block at the fourth floor. 14 25. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall require the applicant to provide down-lighting for any proposed exterior light fixtures. 26. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall require the applicant to provide additional landscaping along the side yards and alley, including taller trees for screening. 27. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 9.04.10.04 (Landscaping Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance .including use of water-conserving landscaping materials, landscape maintenance and other standards contained ih the Subchapter. 28. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.130, 140, and. 150. Refuse areas shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site need, including recycling. The Landmarks. Commission in its review shalF pay particular attention to the screening of such areas and equipment: More specifically, the Landmarks Commission shall limit the placement of excessive mechanical equipment on the roof; any rooftop mechanical equipment shall be minimized in height and area, and shall be located in such a way as to minimize noise and visual impacts to surrounding properties. Unless -otherwise approved by the Landmarks Commission, rooftop mechanical equipment shall be located at least five feet from the edge of the roof. Except for solar hot water heaters, no residential water heaters shall be located on the roof. 29. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the required front or street side yard setback areas. The Landmarks Commission in its review shall pay particular attention to .the location and screening of such meters. 30. Prior to consideration of the project by the Landmarks Commission, the applicant shall review disabled access requirements with the Building and Safety Division and make any necessary changes in the project design to achieve compliance with such requirements. -The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall pay particular attention to the aesthetic, landscaping, and setback impacts of any ramps or other features necessitated by accessibility requirements. 31. As appropriate, the Landmarks Commission shall require the use of anti-graffiti materials on surfaces likely to attract graffiti. Construction Plan Requirements 32. Final building plans submitted for approval of a building permit shall include on the plans a list of all permanent mechanical equipment to be placed indoors which may be heard outdoors. 15 Demolition Requirements 33. Until such time as the demolition is undertaken, and unless the structure is currently in use, the existing structure shall be maintained and secured by boarding up all openings, erecting a security fence, and removing all debris, bushes and planting that inhibit the easy surveillance of the property to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Officer and the Fire Department. Any landscaping material remaining shall be watered and maintained until demolition occurs. 34. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, applicant shall prepare for Building Division approval a rodent and pest control plan to insure that demolition and construction activities at the site do not create pest control impacts on the project neighborhood. Construction Period 35. .Immediately after demolition and during construction, a security fence, the height of which shall be the maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained around the perimeter of the lot. The lot shall be kept clear of all trash, weeds, etc. 36. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the site shall cover any open load with a tarpaulin or other secure covering to minimize dust emissions. Immediately after commencing dirt removal from the site; the general contractor shall provide the City of Santa Monica with written certification that all trucks leaving the site are covered in accordance with this condition of approval. 37. Developer shall prepare a notice, subject to the review by the Director of Planning and Community Development, that lists all construction mitigation requirements, permitted hours of construction, and alley closures, and identifies a contact person at City Hall as well as the developer who will respond to complaints related to the proposed construction. The notice shall be mailed to property owners and residents within a 200-foot radius from the subject site and include property owners and residents immediately adjacent to and across the alley from the subject property at least five (5) days prior to the start of construction. 38. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consistent with the public hearing sign requirements which shall identify the address and phone number of the owner and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and complaints during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours of permissible construction work. 16 39. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily visible and accessible location at all times during construction at the project. site. The pages shall be laminated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy. Standard Conditions 40. Lofts or mezzanines shall not exceed 33.3% of the room below unless compliance with the district's limits on number of stories can be maintained. 41. No fence, gate, or wall within the required front yard setback, inclusive of any subterranean garage slab and fencing, gate, or railing on top thereof, shall exceed a height of 42" above actual grade of the property. 42. Mechanical equipment shall not be located on the side of any building which is adjacent to a residential building on the adjoining lot, unless otherwise permitted by applicable regulations. Roof locations may be used when the mechanical equipment is installed within asound-rated parapet enclosure. 43. Final approval of any mechanical equipment installation will require a noise test in compliance with SMMC Section 4.12.040. Equipment for the test shall be provided by the owner or contractor and the test shall be conducted by the owner or contractor. A copy of the noise test results on mechanical equipment shall be submitted to the Community Noise Officer for review to ensure that noise levels do not exceed maximum allowable levels for the applicable noise zone. 44. Final parking lof layout and specifications shall be subject to the review and approval of the Transportation Management Division. 45. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the recorded map shall be provided to the City Planning Division. 46. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with Subchapter 9.04.16 Condominiums. 47. Construction period signage shall be subject to the approval of the Landmarks Commission. 48. The property owner shall insure any graffiti on the site is promptly removed through compliance with the City's graffiti removal program. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PWD) Drainage 49. To mitigate storm water and surface runoff from the project site, an Urban Runoff Mitigation Plan may be required by the Department of Public Works (PWD) 17 pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 7,10. Prior to submittal of landscape plans for Architectural Review Board approval, the applicant shall contact PWD to determine applicable requirements, which include the following: • Non-stormwater runoff, sediment and construction waste from the construction site and parking areas is prohibited from leaving the site; • An sediments or materials which are tracked off-site must be removed the same day they are tracked off-site; • Excavated soil must be located on the site and soil piles should be covered and otherwise protected so that sediments do not go into the street or adjoining properties; • Washing of construction or other vehicles shall be allowed adjacent to a construction site. No runoff from washing vehicles on a construction. site shall be allowed to leave the site; • Drainage controls may be .required depending on the extent of grading and topography of the site; and • New development is required to reduce projected runoff pollution by at least twenty percent through incorporation of design elements or principles, such as increasing permeable surfaces, diverting or catching runoff via swales, berms, and the like; orientation of drain gutters towards permeable areas; modification of grades; use of retention structures and other methods. 50. Automotive repair facilities and dealerships, parking areas and structures, automotive paint shops, gas stations, equipment degreasing areas, and other facilities generating wastewater with significant oil and grease content are required to pretreat these wastes before discharging to the City sewer or storm drain system. Pretreatment will require that a clarifier or oil/water separator be' installed and maintained on site.. In cases where settleable solids are present (or expected) in greater amounts than floatable oil and grease, a clarifier unit will be required. In cases where the opposite waste characteristics are present, an oil/water separator with automatic oil draw-off will be required instead. The Public Works Department will set specific requirements. Building permit plans shall show the required installation. Hazardous Materials 51. Prior to the demolition of any existing structure, the applicant shall submit a report from an industrial hygienist to be reviewed and approved as to content and form by the Public Works/Environmental Programs Division. The report shall consist of a hazardous materials survey for the structure proposed for demolition. The report shall include a section on asbestos and in accordance with the South Coast AQMD Rule 1403, the asbestos survey shall be performed by a state Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC). The report shall include a section on lead, which shall be performed by a state Certified Lead InspectorlAssessor. Additional hazardous materials to be considered by the industrial hygienist shall 18 include: mercury (in thermostats, switches, fluorescent light); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (including light Ballast), and fuels, pesticides, and batteries. Streets. 52. Unless otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works, all sidewalks shall be kept clear and passable during the grading and construction phase of the project. 53. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveways which need replacing or removal as a result of the project as determined by the Department of Public Works shall be reconstructed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Approval for this work shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of the building permits. 54. Street and/or alley lighting shall be provided on public rights of way adjacent to the project if and as needed per the specifications and with the approval of the Department of Public Works. Off-site 55. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed and be designed and constructed to be as permeable as possible. Plans and specifications for off site improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 56. A subdivision improvement agreement for all off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be prepared and a performance bond posted through the City Attorney's office. Environmental Mitigation 57. To mitigate solid waste impacts, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, project owner shall submit a recycling plan to the Department of Public Works for its approval. The recycling plan shall include: 1) List of materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans, and glass to be recycled; 2) Location bf recycling bins; 3) Designated recycling coordinator, 4) Nature and extent of internal and external pick-up service; 5) Pick-up schedule; and 6) Plan to inform tenants/ occupants of service. 19 58. Ultra-low flow plumbing fixtures are required on all new development and remodeling where plumbing is to be added, including dual flush toilets, 1.0 gallon urinals and low flow shower heads. Construction Period Mitigation 59. A construction period mitigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant for approval by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of a building permit. The approved mitigation plan shall be posted on the site for the duration of the project construction and shall be produced upon request.. As applicable, this plan shall: 1) Specify the names, addresses, telephone numbers and business license numbers of all contractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and architect; 2) Describe how demolition of any existing structures is to be accomplished; 3) Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erection/construction; 4) Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or sidewalk is proposed to be used in conjunction with construction; 5) Set forth the extent and nature of any pile-driving operations; 6) Describe the length and number of any tiebacks which must extend under the property of other persons; 7) Specify the nature and extent of any dewatering and its effect on any adjacent buildings; 8) Describe anticipated .construction-related truck routes, number of truck trips, hours of hauling and parking location; 9) Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling; 10) State whether any construction activity beyond normally permitted hours is proposed; 11) Describe any proposed construction. noise mitigation measures, including measures to limit the duration of idling construction trucks; 12) Describe construction-period security measures including any fencing, lighting, and security personnel; 13) Provide a drainage plan; 14) Provide a cohstruction-period parking plan which shall minimize use of public streets for parking; 15) List a designated on-site construction manager; 16) Provide a construction materials recycling plan which seeks to maximize the reuse/recycling of construction waste; 17) Provide a plan regarding use of .recycled and low-environmental-impact materials in building construction; 18) Provide a construction period water runoff control plan; 19) Provide for adequate dust control during construction; 20) Specify that there will be no pile driving permitted during construction; 20 21) Specify that there shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of necessary utility connections. Final Map Requirements 60. In submitting required materials to the Santa Monica Engineering Division for a final map, applicant shall provide a copy of the approved Statement of Official Action. 61. The form, contents; accompanying data, and filing of the final subdivision map shall conform to the provisions of SMMC Sections 9.20.12.010 through 9.20.08.090 and the Subdivision Map Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall be paid prior to scheduling of the Final Map for City Council approval 62. One mylar and one blue-line copy of the. final map shall be provided to and recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder prior to issuance of any building permit fora condominium project pursuant to Government Code Section 66499.30. Applicant shall also provide the County with a copy of this Statement of Official Action at the time the required copies of the map are submitted. 63. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.16.010 (d) shall have been met. OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT 64. Street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as required in a manner consistent with the City's Community- Forest Management Plan 2000, per the specifications of the Open Space Management Division of the Community and Cultural Service Department and the City's Tree Code (SMMC Chapter 7.40). No street trees shall be removed without the approval of the Open Space Management Division. FIRE 65. A security gate shall be provided across .the opening to the subterranean garage. If any guest parking space is located in the subterranean garage, the security gate shall be equipped with an electronic or other system which will open the gate to provide visitors with vehicular access to the garage without leaving their. vehicles. The security gate shall receive approval of the Police and Fire Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21 VOTE Ayes: Councilmembers Bloom, Holbrook, McKeown, Shriver, Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor, Mayor Genser Nays: None Abstain: None Absent: Couneilmember Davis NOTICE If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedures Section 1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1.16.010. I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final determination of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica. lo-a-g-o~ MARIA M. STEWA T, City Clerk Date F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STOAS\2009\09APP-004,5,6 APPEAL STOA (1012 2nd St).doc 22 ATTACHMENT B NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 23 Notice of Exemption Form D To: Office of Planning and Research From: (Public Agency) Clty Of Santa Monica P.O. Box 3044, Room 212 City planning Divisiori,1685 Main Street, Room 212 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Santa Monica, CA -90401 County Cierk {address) County of Las Angeles 12400 E. Imperial Highway . ~ ~P~'~ftrd~i, FdL~® Norwalk, CA 90650 ;; N i' . ,? 4 2009 Project Tine: 1012 Second Street -VAR 08-002, TM 0$-008 ~.~"~~IVGL~,.;;, +~uuivTt-CLERK Project Location -Specific: 1012 Second Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90403 (located between Washington Avenue and California Avenue) Project Location -City: Santa Monica. CA ProjectLocation -County: Los Angeles Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project: project is afour-unit residential condominium project that includes the retention and rehabiliation of an existing City Landmark . designated Tum-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage and construction of three new condominium unfts on the rear of the parcel. An enclosed breezeway will cronnect the cottage to a portion of the first story of the new structure. Afour--unit apartment building located at the rear of the parcel will be demolished. Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Santa Monica, City CounCll Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: ttoward LakS, Howard Laks Architects - ExempbStatus: (check one) ^ Ministerial (Sec. 21080(6x1);15268); ^ Declared Emergency {Sec. 21080(6)(3};'15269(a)); ^ Emergency Pmect (Sec. 21080(6x4); 15269(bxc)); ® Categorical Exemption. State Cype and section cumber: ^ Statutory Exemptions. State code number: Class 3 [Section 15303(6}],Class 31 [Section 15331] Reasons why project is exempt: The bases for these exemptions are described herein (see attached} and further detailed in the September 22, 2009 City Council staff report and at the public hearing on that date. Lead Agency Roxanne TanemorilTon Kim - ~ - (310) 458-8341 Contact Person: y Area Code/Telephone/Extension: If filed by applican#: I .Attach certified document of exemption fording. . Z. Has a Notice of Exemption bean filed by the public agency approving the projeet? ^ Yes ^ No Signature: ~ni ~„a,~__~'~n-a-(~ Date: ~'~R'~OR Title: ~tRF1ri~Nt, T'ta,ind~t~ ~ Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR: ^ Signed by Applicant Revised 2005 28 R Reasons why project is exempt: The request to create afour-unit subdivision consisting. of the retention and rehabilitation of a designated Landmark one-story coftage with construction of three new condominiums in the rear of the property is exempt from the provisions of the Galifomia Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15303 (b), Class 3, and Section 15331, Class 31, of the State CEQA Guidelines. Class 3 Class 3 consists of cons#ruction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures. In urbanized areas, this exemption applies td structures designed for not more than six dwelling units. The. proposed project would develop afour-unit condominium in an urbanized environment. As such, it squarely falls within this categorical exemption. Moreover, the unusual circumstances exception does not apply for several. reasons. First, the construction impac#s associated with this project are normal and common considerations jn the development of any small condominium project. The fact that the property backs onto an alley does not change this conclusion. The City's streets are on a grid system with the vast majority of the City's residential parcels backing onto an alley. The subject alley is a standard 20' wide alley. Consequently, this circumstance cannot set this project apart from others in the exempt class. Moreover, the applicant has proposed a construction plan in which the construction equipment will access the property from 2"d Street, not from the alley. Relatedly, the potential presence of asbestos, lead and hazardous materials in the apartment building located at the rear of the parcel that will be demolished as part of this project is not an unusual circumstance. Instead, it too is a common and typical concerri with older buildings. The State of California directly regulates asbestos. removal through its local Air Quali#y Management Districts and has established notification and work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demol'~fion and renovation activities, More _ specifically, .State law requires -that a copy of the asbestos demolition notification form be provided to the City's Building and Safety Division .prior to the issuance of permits for the.proposed project. This weli- established regulatory program, and the potential presence of asbestos, lead, and hazardous ma#erials in most older buildings demonstrates that this is not an uriusual~circumstance that would negate application of this exemption. Finally, the fact that multiple variances are sought for this project does not constitute unusual circumstances. The request for multiple variances, is contemplated and invited by Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.10.030(m). These specific variances. for the project are minor in nature, were designed to off-set the loss of typical, by-right development potential associated with retaining and preserving an existing landmark structure, and enable the applicant's project to be in substantial pari#y with other property owners in the surrounding neighborhood with respect to scale, proportion, massing, and buildable floor area. The development authorized by these variances remains less than the by-right development that could have occurred without the variance. Class 31 Class 31 consists of projects limited to maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995), Weeks and Grimmer. The City of Santa Monica's Landmarks Commission designated the subject Turn-of-the-Century Uctorian Cottage as a City Landmark in September 2005 in conjunction with its review of a proposed demolition permit for ail structures on the parcel at 1012 Second Street. The apartment building proposed for demolition is not a historic resoutce and was specifically excluded from. the Landmark Designation. The proposed project preserves and rehabilitates the designated Landmark on site and proposes new construction on the parcel in accordance with the Secretary bf the Interior's Standards for the Treatmen# of Historic Properties. The City's historic consultant and the applicant's historic consultant, who both meets the Secretary of Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards, have verified the project's consistency with these standards and have thoroughly documented: this analysis with written reports. Accordingly, the proposed rehabilitation project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historic resource and therefore qualifies for a Class 31 Categorical Exemption. Moreover, none of the exceptions to this exemption apply here for several reasons. First, the presence of a historic resource on the.properry, its relocation, and its alteration do not constitute unusual circumstances which create environmental risks that do not exist for the general class of exempt projects. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15331 specifically authorizes the Lead Agency to utilize a Class 31 Categorical Exemption for projects tha# involve the `maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995), 1Neeks and Grimmer.' Projects that have been determined by the Lead Agency to comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of the Historic Properties and to be Categorically Exempt pursuant to Class 31, necessarily involve a historic resource.. Since this exemption contemplates the involvement of a historic resource in a project, its presence on the site which will be maintained cannot constitute an unusual circumstance or otherwise support an exception to this exemption: Simi4arly, alteration of a historic resource is a contemplated action in restoration, preservation, and reconstruction projects. As such, there is no basis to conclude that it would constitute an unusual circumstance since it does not differ from the general circumstances of projects covered by this categorical exemption. So too with respect to minor relocations as proposed here. White the relocation of a structure must be undertaken with care and is not a feature . of "all hisiorical resource. restoration/rehabilitation projects, it is certainly not an uncommon component of such projects, particular as with the proposed project, where the historical resource is only being relocated five feet forward on the site as part of the rehabilitation project. Such relocation projects have a long history both in the C'dy and regionally. Additionally, the.relocation of the cottage was specifically reviewed.by the City's consultant and the applicant's consultant and they determined that it would meet the Secretary of Interior Standards based on guidance found in Moving Historic Buildings by John Obed Curtis (National Park Service, 1979), the nature of fhe structure (a one-story, massed-plan vernacular. cottage), the procedure for relocation (as a single and intact unit); the specific planned relocation of the resource on the same site, and the substantial change in the historic setting due to the adjoining developments. Additionally, the planned relocation will allow the building to align with its neighbors, improve its visibility from the street, and more closely approximate the historic relationship between the buildings and the street. No contrary evidence was offered by a qualified expert. Unsubstantiated opinion does not constitute evidence. I Finally, there is no evidence of cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time that is significant. The claim that there is a potentially significant cumulative impact to other properties. and residents if other lots with historic single-family dwellings in the neighborhood are given multiple variances from zoning regulations is offered with no evidentiary support. There has been no identification of what specific cumulative impacts would result. Moreover,-this project is only fFie second such project which has sought the incentives offered by Section 9.04.20.10.030(m} since its adoption in October 2006. No similarly-situated property or properties were identified in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the fear of future actions that adecision-making body may take is speculative. All projects that involve the retention and preservation of a designated historic stnacture and requested modifications to development standards are subject to discretionary review where each modification is evaluated on a case-by-case basis in light of property- and area-specific ciroumstances. Each of these projects will be subject to review under the City's Landmark Ordinance and must be undertaken in accordance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards pursuant to both Section 9.04.20.10.030(m) and the Landmarks Ordinance.