sr-042611-6aCity Council Meeting: April 263, _201,1~q
Agenda Item: ~® r1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Eileen Fogarty, Director, Planning & Community Development Department
Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of 11CUP-002, 1431 2"d Street
(Downtown Parking Structure #6)
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing and grant the appeal,
approving 11CUP-002 and related Zoning Modifications, subject to the attached draft
findings and conditions.
Executive Summary
The City of Santa Monica Architectural Services Division filed a conditional use permit
(CUP) application on February 7, 2011, for the replacement of Parking Structure #6 at
1431 2" Street, along with a Zoning Text Amendment to address Code requirements
applicable to City-owned public parking structures. The Planning Commission held a
public hearing on March 2, 2011, at which the Commission denied the CUP for the
project. However, the Commission recommended approval of the Text Amendment to
ensure that the Code would be consistent with the Bayside District Specific .Plan and
would require stepbacks, slopes and ground floor level commercial space as
appropriate for parking structures. The Council introduced the Text Amendment for
First Reading on March 8, 2011, and adopted the amendment on March 22, 2011. On
March 7, 2011, the applicant appealed the Planning.Commission's denial of the CUP.
The appeal was accompanied by revised ground floor plans addressing some concerns
that ,were the basis for the Planning Commission's denial of the project. Staff
recommends that the Council grant the appeal, subject to proposed findings and
conditions.
The subject site is located on the east side of Second Street between Broadway and
Santa Monica Boulevard in the Bayside Commercial District (BSC-2). The proposed
eight-level public parking structure, provisionally designed to contain 748 parking
spaces (527 spaces above ground and 221 spaces on 3'/z subterranean levels with a
separate entrance) would replace an existing 342-space above-ground parking
structure built in 1968 that currently houses a Santa Monica Police sub-station and
other service uses on the ground floor. The project would .implement the second phase
1
of.the City's Downtown Parking Program, following Phase I in which the Santa Monica
Plaoe structures vyere seismically retrofitted.
The program for the proposed. structure would include:
• Ground floor retail space along the 2"d Street frontage of approximately. 7;410
square feet;
• A protected bicycle storage room visible from'the street that accommodates 90
bikes;
• Thirty. electric car charging stations and infrastructure for additional. charging
-capacity throughout the structure;
• Nineteen motoi-cycle spaces. on the first parking levels .above and below the
ground floor,
• Storage and office space for the Downtowr Farmer's Market and other City and
bowhtown Santa Monica, Inc. purposes, and;
• A solid waste/recycling area at the rear td help remove bins now placed in the
.adjacent alley.
The City's consultants for this project, a team consisting of Morley Construction;
International Parking Design, Inc. ahd Behnisch Architekten, have designed the
proposed parking structure as a building of interest, featuring a diagonal staircase that
crosses the front of the building and offers opportunities for views toward the ocean as
patrons leave or return to their cars. The staircase is surrounded by a functionally
decorative panel system comprised of aluminum "fins" or "sails" that modulate light
entering the structure. The maximum height of the structure is proposed at 84 feet. The
design of the ground .floor level includes a glass storefront across the retail space,
topped with a structure designed to accommodate signage. The retail space is designed
to be divided into multiple tenant spaces or leased as one space. The roof deck -will
include a solar PV system, planned at 80kW, mounted on canopy structures.
Staff is recommending approval of two requests included in the application pursuant to
SMMC 9.04.08.15.070(d) to allow modifications from Zoning Ordinance standards for
the BSC-2 District due to ramping and structural requirements:
1. Modification from the minimum 18-foot floor-to-floor ground floor commercial
height to allow 15 feet.
2. Retail space depth of less than the required 75 feet; proposed is a varying depth
of 70 to 77 feet, with one small area reduced to 38 feet to accommodate the
elevator lobby.
In response to the Planning Commission's concerns, the applicant reconsidered the
options-for circulation at the ground level. The most significant~roposed change is to
provide two vehicle exit lanes and one entrance lane from 2" Street, reversing the
previously proposed configuration, .but maintaining the minimum possible driveway
width per Council direction.. Patrons would enter and then choose their parking
destination (upper or lower) guided by parking availability signs. There would be no
2
interior connection .between -.the subterranean. and upper level sections and the design
would allow flexibility to completely close either section if desired to facilitate operations.
The revised program resolves a number of issues and is a major improvement to
circulation within the proposed structure.
The Planning, Commission also expressed concern at the March 2 hearing that the
design did not #ully address all the building facades; and in particular the visibility of the
rear elevatioh due to its heighf above the generally permitted district height level: The
rear elevation design is subject #o Architectural Review Board (ARB) approval, and a
condition (# 24) is included in Attachment 6 to direct the ARB to pay particular attention
to this issue in its review: In addition; the applicant is exploring the possibilities for using
the Percentage for Art component, which is required for this project, to create a more
vital and iriteresting alley elevatioh. The Cultural Affairs Division is issuing an RFQ for
an artist who would work with the project architects to coordinate a fagade that includes
the art component. The art installation would be approved through the Arts Commission
approval process.
Background
In January 1996, the Council adopted the Bayside District Specific Plan (BDSP); to
guide Downtown development based on four zones. Maximum building heights under
the BDSP are generally lower than previous zoning, with certain exceptions to
encourage residential development and the City-owned parking structures, which
enable the "park once" concept that has been part of the success of Santa Monica's
walkable Downtown. The BDSP was followed by a Text Amendment in February 1996,
which created the BSC District and incorporated the Specific Plan standards into the
Zoning Ordinance. The parking structure provisions were not included in that
amendment.
On February 28. 2006, .Council approved the Downtown Parking Program to
strategically manage the parking supply in Downtown through the retrofit, rebuild, and
addition of new. parking structures. Council authorized staff to proceed with the first
phase of program implementation, which has now been completed, consisting of the
seismic retrofit of Parking Structures #7 and #8 at Santa Monica Place. On September
8, 2009, Council accepted the Walker .Parking Study, which provided a set of
recommendations for how the City can manage and plan for future parking needs and
implement the next phase of the program. The Walker Parking Study asserted that with
3
improved management of parking. resources, the -City could build all the parking `
necessary in the Downtowh within Parking Structures #1 and #6, .without need for
additional new parking structures.
On November 10, 2009; a Council study session was. conducted to discuss concept
massing, urbah design, circulation, and cost implications of rebuilding Parking
Structures #1 and #6. At that time, Council recommended building only. Parking
Structure #6, with maximum possible capacity, based on the Walker Parking Study's
parking needs assessment, Iri keeping with Santa Monica's concept for shared parking,.
Parking Structure. #6 is located within a short vvalking distance from the popular Santa
Monica Pier and the Civic Center. Increasing the number of parking spaces provided at
Parking Structure #6 is a strategic dpportunity to also serve these destinations: The
Council directed staff to prioritize the progress of this project due to the pivotal role that
this parking structure holds in the overall development strategy in terms of phasing
multiple projects iri the Downtown and Civic Center.
A CUP application and Text Amendment were filed on February 7, 2011 for the
reconstruction of Parking Structure #6 (Attachment A). The Planning Commission held
a public hearing on March 2, 2011, at which the Commission denied the CUP for the
project (Attachment C). However, the Commission recommended approval of the Text
Amendment to ensure that the Code would be consistent with the Bayside District
Specific Plah and would require stepbacks, slopes and ground floor level commercial
space as appropriate for City-owned public parking structures. The Council introduced
the Text Amendment for First Reading on March 8, 2011, and adopted the amendment
on March 22, 2011. On March 7, 2011, an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial
of the conditional use permit was filed. The appeal includes revised plans that address
some of the Planning Commission's concerns that were the basis for denial of the
project.
4
.:Discussion
The project site is located on 2"d Street,. in an area characterized by tructures varying
from three to five stories on the east side and two and four stories on the west side of
the street, containing a mix of uses including retail, office, .restaurants; transitional
housing and hotels. Behind these structures, on Ocean Avenue, the skyline includes
several non-conforming high-.rises, including a 15-story residential development at 1431
Ocean Avehue. ,The existing above-ground. parking structure built in 1968 contains 342
parking spaces and ground floof commercial space that currently houses a SM Police
sub-statiori and other service uses:
Project Site Information
Zoning District: BSC2
LUCE Designation: Downtown Core ,~`"~ '
Parcel Area (SF): 30,000 sf
' a:
Parcel Dimensions: 200' (w) x 150'
Existing On-Site City public parking ~,
Improvements (Year Built: structure with ground floor
1968) retail 2"°st.
Rent Control Status N/A °`~$~
Adjacent Zoning Districts and BSC2/BSC4; comer-cial
Land Uses: mixed-use ~"
Pursuant to the recent Zoning Ordinance amendment adopted by the Council on March
22, 2011., the structure as proposed complies with all zoning requirements. A complete
analysis of the project's compliance with applicable municipal regulations and the
General Plan is attached to the Planning Commission report (Attachment D).
Project Description
The proposed eight-level public parking structure would provide 748 parking spaces
(527 spaces. above ground and 221 spaces on 3'/z subterranean levels). Due to
ramping complexity, the internal access to the subterranean levels functions
independently of the remaining structure. The maximum height of the structure is
proposed at 84 feet. A protected bicycle storage room secured with a glass door that
accommodates 90 bikes will be located to the north of the retail space with access from
the front sidewalk. The program includes 30 electric car charging stations and
5
r I.
~~ ~;~~,~~ ~~ ~~,r~~ fad ~~~~(~'~~~~_~$ ~~ ~~~ i ~~ ~~~ ~~
,~~
~~ _ s S,~ ~ ft ~,~t~~~i~ ~''i'~5~ ~~~' 9'~ ~r-..~~ I i -71_
r ~ ~ jy(t
,~" 4f St
C _ ~
~r~ I
~,
~ "'. *~~'ca""t
n.. +~Xi94T.-.iSl ars
"' .~~
CoSM PARKING STRUCTURE #6
infrastructure fior additional charging capacity throughout the structure. Nineteen
motorcycle spaces will be provided on the first parking level above and below the
ground floor.
At the ground floor level, the parking structure would provide a retail space of
approximately 7,410 square feet at the front. The ground floor level design includes a
glass storefront across the retail space, topped with a structure designed to
accommodate signage. The retail space is designed to be divided into multiple tenant
spaces or leased as one space. Storage and office space for the Downtown Farmer's
Market, City and Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. purposes, and a solid waste/recycling
area to help relocated bins from the surrounding alley are located in the rear half of the
building. The roof deck would include a solar PV system, planned at 80kW, mounted on
canopy structures.
Analysis
Urban Design: Neighborhood Compatibility & Pedestrian Orientation
The City requires buildings in commercial areas to be pedestrian-oriented, providing
interesting and active ground floor uses and safe, comfortable interaction between
vehicular access points and the pedestrian realm of the sidewalks. Parking structures
6
present challenges that are traditionally complex in regard to pedestrian orientatioh, but
the same standards of design apply and were reinforced in LUCE Goal T25: Design
parking to meet, applicable urban design goals and minimize negative impacts on
pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users: The City's design-build team, Morley
Construction, International Parking Design, Inc: and Behnisch Architekten, were asked
to accommodate the ptoject's large program on the relatively small lot at 1431 2nd
Street while maintaining the City's high design standards for new structures.
Parking Structure#6 incorporates all of the program elements and has been designed
with apedestrian-friendly ground level orientation. The City's consultant team has.
designed the proposed parking structure as a building of interest; featuring a dramatic
diagonal staircase the crosses the front of the building to activate the fapade and
provide ocean view opportunities for parking patrons The staircase is surrounded by a
.functional, decorative panel system comprised of aluminum "fins" that direct light into
the structure. Through the various programmatic elements, a strong fapade concept
and responsiveness to the design input of the Planning Commission and staff, the
proposed structure achieves the community's urban design goals. In doing so, the
project as revised meets the criteria for approval of a conditional use permit, which
generally relate to compatibility with the district and surrounding land uses. Staff has
prepared conditional use permit findings for approval of the CUP (Attachment B).
The CUP application includes two requests pursuant to SMMC 9.04.08.15.070(d) to
allow modifications from BSC-2 standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance, for which
staff recommends findings for approval. The first relates to the 18-foot floor-to-floor
height requirement for commercial space, to allow 15 feet. .The zoning district
requirement cannot be achieved in this case due to ramping and structural demands
unique to a parking structure. To mitigate the effect, the project proposes a 15-foot floor-
to-floor height that is designed at the front facade to become an 18' storefront glazing,
giving the appearance of greater height. The second modification request relates to the
depth of the retail space, which varies from 70 to 77 feet, with one small area reduced
7
to 38 feet to accommodate the elevator lobby. In the majority: of the space, the 75-foot
depth standard is met or nearly met, with the exception of the elevator area.
The draft. conditions of approval contain a number of special conditions. to ensure a
compatible structure #or this zoning district that achieves the LUCE goals for. pedestrian
orientation by including elemehts that promote bicycling and walking. -Some of the more
specific details of these elements, including the rear fagade design,. would be approved ,
through the 'ARB review process. In addition, the art component currently being
conceptualized to activate the rear fagade requires review and approval of the Arts
Commission.
In addition to the structure's design, circulation within and around the parking structure
is a primary issue for consideration, and an area of major. concern to the. Planning
Commission at its hearing. Revised plans submitted for the Council's consideration
address the Planning Commission's concerns (see Appeal Analysis discussion below).
Commission Action
At the public hearing, the Planning Commission heard public testimony and engaged in
a lengthy discussion of the project. The Commission acknowledged the process that
led up to the project's design and the CUP application and the desire of the business
community to have adequate parking. Ultimately, the majority was concerned about
concentration of a large pool of public parking spaces in this location in the southwest
part of Downtown, and the potential for negative circulation impacts on Santa Monica
Boulevard and 4th Street, especially with a single right-turn only exit lane and no
proposed alley access. The Commission majority generally was generally
uncomfortable with the massing and size of the structure, which more than doubles the
current height and capacity. Given the structure's visibility, the Commission expressed
design concerns, especially the lack of detail on the side and rear elevations. While the
structure's two side elevations are at the property lines and cannot be further
articulated, some further refinement through painting or siding materials at their upper,
more visible, levels is possible. The rear elevation will be particularly visible from the
8
Promenade and surrounding properties and Commissiohers were generally in
'agreement that this side of the building had not been given adequate design attention.
However, the Commissioners appreciated the architectural design of the 2"d Street
facade, and they were supportive of the sustainability goals for the project.
Appeal Analysis
-The Planning Commission's denial of this project was based on the concerns discussed
above.. The appeal documents (Attachmerit A), which include a memo describing the
proposed changes to the plans reviewed _by the Planning Commission; cited the
Planning Commission's .interpretation of the environmental- review for the project,
particularly the Commission's understanding of the purpose of an additional study that
the applicant proposed undertaking to examine whether the proposed internal
circulation would be sufficient td serve users of the structure and avoid bottlenecks.
The additional study was not necessary to ensure adequate CEQA analysis; rather, it
was offered by the applicant in order to verify. the functional capacity of the design
during peak use periods.
Ingress/Egress
Asa result of the concerns expressed by the Planning .Commission about the
structure's circulation, the designers have now reconfigured the drive lanes to include
one entrance, which splits into two lanes within the structure for lower and upper level
access, and two exit lanes, one for left turns and one for right turns. Cars coming from
either part of the structure will be able to use either exit lane. As now proposed, exiting
vehicles will be able to turn left onto 2°d Street from a dedicated lane, with the other lane
allowing right turns. The ability to turn left would disperse the trips on Second Street,
reducing the pressure on Santa Monica Boulevard and 4"' Street, particularly for
freeway-bound vehicles, which can continue via Main Street to the Olympic Drive/4th
Street on-ramp. In addition, two exit lanes would help move vehicles more quickly
through the structure for more convenient exiting and to reduce idling motors.
The draft conditions of approval require a parking management system consisting of
9
.parking availability signage and "pay first" techhology at a minimum. Information about
parking space availability at this ahd other Downtown structui-es will continue to be
provided through the Cify's on-line website information,. and through new wayfinding
signs and .mobile device technology. being planned to help drivers ..find the most
convenient, available parking. The measures that the. City plans to take to help drivers
reduce the time spent circling the area o find a parking space will behefit the access to
this project and the circulation iri general in the Dpwntown area. -
As revised 'and supported by informatiohal signage, the project will operate at a
functional level while maintaining the minimal. feasible curb cut to address pedestrian
sidewalk safetyand Council direction.
To address the Planning Commission's comments favoring inclusion of a vehicular alley
exit, the Architectural Services Division requested that its consultant, Gibson
Transportation Consulting, Inc. (Gibson); perform an analysis of the traffic at the alley.
Due to the geometry and ramping configuration, access to the one-way (north) alley is
only feasibly provided from the lower levels, which hold about 230 of the structure's
parking spaces. Gibson's analysis indicated that a vehicular exit at the alley would
introduce traffic that could conflict with pedestrians and delivery trucks, in turn resulting
in delays exiting the parking structure. Gibson concluded that the alley should not be
used for vehicular egress due to these issues.
As a result of the revised driveway lanes, the ground floor configuration has been
modified, reconfiguring the retail space and the bicycle storage area, which still provides
room for 90 bicycles. The storage and office space in the rear has been reduced but
still meets project objectives. These changes should improve the functioning of the
garage without making any significant difference to the front fagade, which maintains
the length of retail frontage and curb space presented ih the original design.
While the larger parking structure proposed on this site would concentrate more parking
in this location, it is important to consider that this location is also highly desirable to
10
provide parking for the Pier and for Civic Center overflow during events. It should also
be noted that parking to be removed at Structure #3 on 4th Street is proposed to be
included in the City's 5th Street and Arizona :project as part of the mixed-use
development being planned on that site.
Design.Issues
The art component of the project is now proposed to be located on the alley elevation,
and the artist qualification and selection process is currently underway.. Artvvork along.
the alley at the pedestrian level may add some interest to the elevation and is intended.
to contribute toward implementing the Creative Capital Plan's Arf Alley cohcept. If the
art component is located within the lower portion of the elevation, the project team
should also propose design solutions for the ARB to consider for the upper levels, those
most visible from other points in the district. Draft condition #24 (Attachment B) directs
the ARB in its review to pay particular attentiori to this issue.
Environmental Analysis
On February 28, 2006, the City Council certified the Final Program Environmental
Impact Report for the City of Santa Monica Downtown Parking Program which analyzed
the demolition and reconstruction of Parking Structure #6 with a potential maximum
height of 84 feet. Pursuant to Section 15162(a) of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Guidelines, after an environmental impact report has been certified, no
additional environmental review is required if none of the conditions or circumstances
described in subsections (1) - (3) of that section has occurred. Rather, pursuant to
Section 15164(a), the lead agency shall prepare an addendum if some changes or
additions are necessary which would not result in new significant environmental impacts
or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts. In accordance with
CEQA, an addendum to the EIR (Attachment E) was prepared to update the cumulative
projects list for reconstruction of Parking Structure #6 and reconsider the EIR analysis in
the context of a development agreement application filed on January 7, 2011, for the
proposed AMC Theater project at 1318 4th Street, which would replace Parking
Structure #3. The addendum concluded that the final design modifications for Parking
11
,Structure 6 (i.e., increase in number of parking spaces and the modified ingress/egress
scheme) and the change in cumulative conditions under which Parking Structure #6
would be undertaken would not constitute a substantial change in the project that will
result in "new significant .environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant effects." The environmental impacts associated with
recohstruction of Parking Structure #6 would be within .the envelope of impacts
analyzed in the Final PEIR and/or do not constitute a new or greater significant impact.
At the request of the applicant, following the Commission's. project denial, .Gibson
Transportation conducted additional study to assess traffic and circulation implications
.associated with the project. In light of the .addition of a second exit lane allowing
turning movements in both directions out of the structure, City staff requested that
Gibson also provide specific analysis of the change to the plans. Consistent with the
addendum previously prepared, the analysis, which staff has. independently reviewed
and analyzed, concluded that there were no additional impacts that were not previously
identified in the Downtown Parking Program Final PEIR.
In terms of CEQA analysis of the historic status of the property, the existing parking
structure is not listed on the City's recently released Historic Resources Inventory and is
determined not to be a significant historic resource. Notwithstanding this CEQA
determination, because the existing structure proposed for demolition is over 40 years
old, a permit to demolish the existing improvements will not be issued until the
Landmarks Commission reviews the demolition permit application and all requirements
of SMMC Section 9.04.10.16.010 (d) are met. The City's Landmarks Commission
retains jurisdiction to review the demolition permit application and to nominate the
improvement as a City Landmark or Structure of Merit pursuant to the designation
criteria and procedures contained in Chapter 9.36 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
At the time of preparation of this report; a demolition permit application had not yet been
submitted.
12
Public Hearing
Pursuant to ..Municipal Code Section _9.04.20.22.050, notice of the public hearing was
published in the Santa Monica Daily Press at least ten consecutive calendar days prior
to the hearing and notices .were sent to all property owners and tenants within 500 feet
of the subject site. 'The property has been posted with a Notice of Appeal as required.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The granting of this appeal does not have direct budget impacts;
Prepared by: Elizabeth Bar-EI, AICP, Senior Planner
Approved: Forwarded to Council:
Attachments:
A. Appeal Submittal and Summary Memo
B. Draft Findings and Conditions of Approval
C. Planning Commission Minutes and Statement of Official Action (hyperlink)
D. Planning Commission Staff Report (hyperlink)
E. Revised CEQA Addendum to Downtown Parking Program PEIR
F. Site Photographs
G. Project Plans
Eileen F y Rod Gould
Director, nnin & Community City Manager
Development
13
14
APSE FR
(Please Type or Prinfi all Information)
Application Number
11 P~?$ d®3
Filed:
By:
3•~•Zoll
1 vin ~,
APPELLANT NAME: City of Santa Monica
APPELLANT ADDRESS: 1437 4th Street, Suite 300, Santa Monica, CA 90401
CONTACT PERSON: Karen Domerchie Phone: {310) 434-2619
(all correspondence will be mailed to this address)
Address: 1437 4th Street, Suite 300
Santa Monica, CA 90401
PROJECT cAE NuM~ER{s~ : C.{,t,~ t1 ~ oo ~
PROJECT ADDRESS: 143 2nd Street, Santa Monica, GA 90401
APPLLCANT: City of Santa Monica
ORIGINAL BEARING ®ATE: March 2, 2011
ACTION EEING APPEALED:
1) Conditional use permit denial by Planning Commission on March 2; 2011-
2} Discretionary action on height of retail space
3) Discretionary action on depth of retail space
Please state the specific reason{s) for the appeal (use separate sheet if necessary):
Is the appeal related to the discretionary action and fandings issued for the proposed
project? _X_Yes tdo Ifiyes,explain:
See Attached Sheet.
Is the appeal related to the conditions of approval? _X_ Yes ~o If yes, which
conditions and why:
See Attached Sheet.
Is the appeal related to design issues? Yes _X_ IVo If yes, explain:
Is the appeal related to compatibility issues such as building height, massing, pedestrian
orientation, etc.? _, Yos _X_ Plo If yes; explain:
Is the appeal related to non-compliance with the Santa Tdonica I~unieipal Code? _ Yes
_X_ No If yes, which Code section(s) does the project not comply with-and why:
Is the appeal related to environmental impacts associated with the project? a Yes
X_ No If yes, explain:
Is the appeal related to other issues? _X_ Yes ®~o Ifi yes, explain:
See Attached Sheet.
APPELLAN"f SICP~A°PURE:
Director of Public Works
(V~°fE: A hearing date on the appeal will not be scheduled until suffiicient
information regarding the basis-for the appeal has been received t® enable City
Planning ®ivision staff to prepare the required analysis for the staff report.
APPEAL F®RM for PARI(INC, STRUCTURE NO. ti (1431 2na Street)
Is the appeal related to the discretionary action and findings issued for the proposed project?
_X_ Yes _ No Please explain.
The findings indicate that the proposed use will not result in an over concentration of such uses in the
immediate vicinity in that the amount of parking being provided for the downtown area is consistent with
the Downtown Parking Program and this structure is an integral part of that program. The Planning
Commission feels that with the rebuilding of Parking Structure #6, the loss of Parking Structure #3 due to
AMC Theaters, and because Parking Structure #1 will notbe rebuilt, that too much parking is cenfralized
at the south end of the Third Stroet Promenade. However, an analysis of the 1996 Downtown Parking
Program Environmental Impact report has been performed, and the rebuilding of Parking Structure #6
does not result in revisions that would result in a change to the Environmental Impact Report.
Is the appeal related to the conditions of approval? _X_ Yes _ No If yes, which conditions
and why.
One of the conditions of approval was that the applicant shall consult with the Strategic and
Transportation Planning Division and-the City's Transportation Engineer who shall determine the need for
alterations to striping and signaling at and around the structure's entrance to improve circulation related to
vehicle ingress and egress. The Planning Gommfssion denied the Condi#ional Use Permit because an
analysis of the circulation at the structure's entrance and alley has not been done yet.. The Environments!
Impact Report has provided this information. However, staff is currently having a traffic access and
circulation assessment done for traffic related to the rebuilding of Parking Structure #(i, as additional
insurance that the choice of one egress is functional.
9s the appeal related to design issues? Yes _X_ No If yes, explain.
is the appeal related 4o the comps#ibfiity issues such as building height, massing, pedestrian
orientation, etc.? _Yes _X No If yes, explain.
Is the appeal related to non-compliance with the Santa Monica IUlunicipal Code? Yes
_X_ No If yes, which Code section(s) doss the project nat comply with and why:
Is the appeal related to environmental impacts associated with the project? ~ Yes _X^ IVo If
yes, explain,
Is the appeal related to other issues? _X_ Yes ~ No 1f yes, explain
1) Conditional use permit denial by Planning Commission on March 2, 2011
2) Discretionary action on height of retail space
3) Discretionary action on depth of retail space
Page 1 of 1
CoSM l'S #6
Design Changes from 3/2/11 Planning Commission Meeting
3f30/ll
1. Originally there were three traffic lanes entering and exiting the parking structure at 2°d
Street. There are stil I how only three vehicular lanes serving the parking structure off of
2"a Street, however;
t1.
B.
Previously, the two vehicular exit lanes (one from the above-grade parking area
and one from the below-grade parking area) combined and formed a single exit
lane within the structure (enough length for four vehicular queuing lengths before
the 2"d Street sidewalk} and exited onto 2nd Street for aright-turn only (heading
North).
Now, the two vehicular exit lanes (one from the above-grade parking area and one
from the below-grade parking area} continue to the 2"d Street sidewalk within the
structure {enough length for eight vehicular queuing lengths before the 2"d Street
sidewalk), allows fora "Vehicular weave" azea prior to the queuing ]engths and
provide for a dedicated right-turn-only lane and a dedicated left-turn-only lane out
onto 2nd Street for a faster exiting capacity from the structure.
® Previously, the two in-bound vehicular lanes (which encouraged one lane for
right-turn-in and one lane for left-turn-iri from 2'id Street) led to both the entry
ramps for the above-grade parking area and the below-grade parking area (with a
"vehicular weave" length'for the driver to choose either the above-grade or
below-grade parking area).
Now, there is only a single vehicular in-bound lane from 2nd Street (for both right-
turns and left-turns in-bound movements). There is still a "vehicular weave"
length for the driver to choose either the above-grade or below-grade parking
area. The in-bound capacity is set by the number of entry gates, so The inbound
capacity is not reduced (enough length for nine vehicular queuing lengths after the
interior gore point).
There is no change to the bomber or location of entry and exit gates. This new layout is
an improved vehiciilaz design resulting in increased exiting ability onto 2°d Street from
the structure and a 100% increase in exit queuing capacity within the structure.
2. Previously, there was approximately 8,020 sf of retail area along 2"a Street. With this new
design, this retail aa'ea has been reduced to approximately 7,410 sf.
3. Previously, there was approximately 535 sf of office area for the City's Farmers Market
needs. With this new design, this area is being shared between the Farmers Market and
bowntown Santa Monica, Inc.
15
ATTACHMENT B ::
DRAFT FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS-0F APPROVAL
FINDINGS'
..Conditional Use Permit Fihdings
1, The. proposed parkirig structure use is one conditionally permitted within the
subject district and .complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of
Santa Monica Comp~ehehsive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance",`in that parking
structures are conditionally permitted in the BSC2 Zoning District. The project
complies with all relevant provisions ih the Zoning Ordinance.
2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in
which it is to be established or located, in that the new parking structure would
replace an existing parking structure and would provide parking for existing and
future uses within the district, thereby enabling other properties to maintain more
pedestrian-friendly commercial uses without need to provide on-site parking. In
addition, the project is designed to be compatible with the surrounding urban
context.
3. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed,
in that it is a regular, rectangular-shaped parcel that cam support the
.programmatic needs of a parking structure, as conditioned, and that it replaces
an existing parking structure on the same footprint.
4. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the
subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain, in that the existing structure
will be demolished and the proposed project will be the only structure on the
property.
5: The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses
within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located
in that the current use at the property is also a parking structure so there will be
no change of use at the site. The proposed ground floor retail is designed to be
an improvement over the current space, which will improve the compatibility with
the surrounding area. Furthermore, the parking structure will provide additional
needed parking for the surrounding uses in the district.
6. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public
health and safety, in that the downtown infrastructure is sufficient to support the
needs of the parking structure. Furthermore, some of the structure's electricity
needs will be provided through the installation of aphoto-voltaic solar energy
16
system above the structure's rooftop deck
7. Public access 'to the. proposed. use will be adequate. in that the proposed
driveways off of 2"d Street will adequately serve the parking needs,'-and the
bicycle parking will be directly accessible from the front of the structure. The
proposed diagonal staircase will provide safe, visible access to -all parking levels,
and the elevatorlobbies as conditioned herein will be open and well-lif.
8. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and
relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood, in that the structure will
be part of a contihuous streetwall without setbacks as generally found in the
dovvhtown. area. Furthermore, as a use that is being .constructed for public
purposes, the structure will include storage -and trash receptacle areas that will
benefit surrounding commercial uses and resolve existing issues related to trash
receptacles that protrude into the alleys.
9. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
General Plan Land Use & Circulation Element (LUCE). Land Use and Circulation
Element (LUCE) Goal D11 calls for addressing parking needs comprehensively
and .Policy D11.2 states that locating additional parking resources to help
mitigate impacts on 4th Street should be considered. Additional goals include
ensuring that new Downtown buildings contribute to the pedestrian character of
downtown and are compatible in scale (D8); maintaining Downtown's competitive
advantage as a destination (D1); designing parking is designed to meet
applicable urban design goals and minimize negative impacts oh pedestrians,
bicyclists and transit users (T25). The proposed parking structure, with
increased capacity on 2"d Street, is consistent with these goals and the policies
derived from them, providing parking for the downtown area as well as visitors to
the Santa Monica Pier and oceanfront. By maximizing the opportunity for parking
with 3'/z subterranean levels, the Parking Structure #6 replacement project is a
key component of the strategy to achieve the City's parking supply goals for the
downtown area within the height limit allowed in the Bayside Specific Plan and
will provide parking capacity for future downtown land uses to develop as
envisioned in the LUCE and to promote economic growth.
10. The proposed parking structure would not be detrimental to the public interest;
health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that it meets a recognized
need for the district, is in an accessible location and provides parking for the
downtown, Pier/oceanfront area and Civic Center.
11. Subchapters 9.04.12 and 9.04.14 of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive
Land Use and Zoning Ordinance do not contain any special standards applicable
to parking structures.
17
12. The proposed use will not result in an over cohcentration of such uses in the
immediate vicinity, in that the amouht of parking being provided for the downtown
area is .consistent with the adopted Downtown Parking Program and this
structure was anticipated in the analysis and approval of that program.
Additional Fihding to Waive the Standards of SMMC 9.04.08.15.070(b)
1_ Pursuant to . SMMC 9.04.08.15.070(d), the City Council hereby grants a
modifioation to sub-section (b) of said section requiring that the ground floor level
floor-to-floor height shall be a minimum of eighteen feet within the front seventy-
five: feet of the building. Based on the project plans dated 4!26/11; the Council
finds:
1) That the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships ihconsisteht with its general
purpose and intent or that there are exceptiohal circumstances or conditions
applicable to the proposed development that do not apply generally to other
developments subject to this requirement in that the proposed public parking
structure has engineering .and circulation requirements that are unique and
should be accommodated because the structure provides a public benefit that
is needed at this location to serve the downtown, oceanfront and Civic Center
areas. Furthermore, the width of the property and the ramping requirements
restrict the height of the retail space. Strict requirement of the floor-to-floor 18
foot height would be functionally impracticable as the ramp to the second floor
of the parking structure would need to be constructed at 20% slope, which
surpasses the level of comfort for most drivers and would introduce safety
hazards as the structure is expected to be very heavily utilized.
2) That the granting of an exception would not adversely affect surrounding
properties or be detrimental to the district's pedestrian-oriented environment
in that the height of the storefront system has been designed to be 18 feet,
including front fapade extensions and awnings such that the retail space will
appear to be 18 feet in height to pedestrians on the sidewalk.
Additional Finding to Waive the Standards of SMMC 9.04.08.15.070(c)
1. Pursuant to SMMC 9.04.08.15.070(d), the City Council hereby grants a
modification to sub-section (c) of said section requiring a minimum depth of
seventy-five feet measured from the front of the structure for the proposed retail
space. Based on the project plans dated 4/26/11, the Council finds:
1) That the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with its general
purpose and intent or that there are exceptional circumstances or conditions
18
applicable to the proposed development that do not`apply generally to other '.
:developments subject to this requirement, It is appropriate. to make this
exception to accommodate this parking structure because it provides a public
benefit that is needed at this location to serve the downtown, oceanfront and
Civic Center areas and because internal circulation requirements for the four
`:drive aisles afi the rear of the structure serving both the subterranean and
upper parking levels make it infeasible to achieve the 75-foot depth across
the entire retail space within the property depth of 150 feet; and
2)
That the granting of an exception would not .adversely affect surrounding
properties or be detrimental to the districYS pedestrian-oriented environment
in that the proposed retaiP space achieves a partial depth of at least 70 feet, '
and as much as"77 feet, in about ttree-quarters of he width,. with reduced
depth in the southerly portion of the building in which a safe and well-lit
elevator lobby for the parking structure is provided, cutting into the retail -
space. The proposed retail space represents an improvement to the curreht
parking structure's ground level provisions.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Project Specific Conditions
1. Bicycle facilities within the structure shall accommodate a minimum of 90
bicycles, with direct access from the front of the structure. For the secured
portion of the bicycle parking area, the applicant shall provide access control and
associated security features such as card readers, access cards security
cameras, and electrical and data connections sufficient to allow the facility to be
operated as part of the City's integrated bike transit center system. Technical
specifications shall be subject to the approval of the City's Information Systems
Department, and the design of this area shall be subject to the approval of the
Transportation Demand Program Manager.
2. The applicant shall also provide additional bicycle parking in front of the structure
within the public right of way, with location, type, number and other details
subject to approval of the Strategic and Transportation Planning Division and
subject to issuance. of an encroachment permit by the Department of Public
Works.
3. The project shall include a minimum of 30 electric vehicle charging stations and
infrastructure for more shall be installed at all inner columns of the parking
structure where feasible.
19
4. Fihal design. of the entrance/exit lanes 'on 2"d Street ahd all circulation details
shall be subject to the approval of the Strategic and Transportation Planning
Division.
5. The proposed rooftop solar panel support structures require approval by the.
Architectural Review Board.
6. The front and rear elevator lobbies shall be well-lit and designed to enhance
public safety.-
7: Prior to issuance of building permits,- the .project shall incorporate visibility,
warning signals, or 'other features in and around .the driveways to minimize
..pedestrian/vehicle :conflict to the satisfaction of the Strategic and Trahsportation
Plahning Division.
8. Exterior parking information signage; subject to approval of the City's
Transportation Engineer, shall be provided and .shall at a minimum provide
information regarding availability of spaces in both the upper and lower parking
sections.
9: The public art shall be located so as to be visible to visitors to the structure. An
alley installation that promotes the Creative Capital Plan concept of Art Alleys
would satisfy .this condition. The art installation requires approval by the Arts
Commission.
10. A parking management system will be installed so that patrons pay first before
exiting the structure in order to reduce the time necessary for vehicles to exit the
structure.
11. The applicant shall consult with the Strategic and Transportation Planning
Division and the City's Transportation Engineer, who shall determine the need for
alterations to striping and signaling at and around the structure's entrance to
improve circulation related to vehicle ingress and egress.
Administrative
12. Within ten days of Strategic & Transportation 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.
13. Within thirty (30) days after final approval of the project, a sign shall be posted on
site stating the date and nature of the approval. The sign shall be posted in
accordance with the Zoning Administrator guidelines. and shall remain in place
until a building permit is issued for the project.
20
14: 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.
15. Applicant is advised that projects in the California Coastal Zone may need
app~ova( 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 -
16. This approval is for those .plans dated April 26, 2011, a copy of which shall be
maintained iri the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall
be consistent with such plans; except as otherwise, specified in these conditions
of approval.:.
17. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subjecf to approval by the Director of
Planning & Community Development. A significant change. in the approved
cohcept shall be subject to Planning Commission review. Construction shall be
in conformance with. the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning
Commission,. Architectural Review Board or Director of Planning & Community
Development.
18. 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.
Cultural Resources
19. 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.
20. 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.
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.
21
Project Operations
21. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to
surrouriding properties or residents by reason of lights, noise, activities, parking
or other actions.
22, The projecf shall at all times comply with the provisioris of the Noise Ordinance
(SMMC Chapter 4.12).
Final Design
23. Plaris for filial design,. landscaping, sci-eehing, trash enclosures, :and signage
shall be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Board.'
24: The`Architectural Review Board, in its review, shall .pay special attention to
ensure that the alley (rear) fagade is treated in an architectural manner that is -
sensitive to the fact that the upper levels are visible from Downtown locations to
the east. The ARB shall alsoensure that the design takes into account the
visibility of the upper portions of the side elevations, particularly above the level
of the general height limitation in the district.
25. The Architectural Review Board, 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.
26. Plans for any proposed landscaping 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 in the Subchapter.
27. 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
Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the
screening of such areas and equipment. Any rooftop mechanical equipment
shall be minimized in height and area, and shall be located in such away as to
minimize noise and visual impacts to surrounding properties. Unless otherwise
approved by the Architectural Review Board, 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.
28. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the required front or street side
yard setback areas. The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay
particular attention to the location and screening of such meters.
22
29. Prior to consideration of the project by the:Architectural Review Board, 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 Architectural Review Board, in its
review, shall .pay particular attention to the aesthetic, landscaping, and setback
impacts of any ,ramps or ..other features 'necessitated by accessibility,
requirements.
30. As appropriate, the Architectural Review Board shall require the use bf anti- '
graffiti materials on surfaces1ikely to attract graffiti.
Construction Plan Requirements
31. During demolition, excavation, and construction, this project: shat( comply with
SCAQMD Rule .403 to minimize fugitive dust and. associated particulate
emission, including but not limited to the following:
• All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to
prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least three
times daily with complete coverage, preferably at the start of the day,
in the late morning, and after work is done for the day.
• All grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during
periods of high winds (i.e., greater than 20 mph measured as
instantaneous wind gusts) so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
• All material transported on and off-site shall be securely covered to
prevent excessive amounts of dust.
• Soils stockpiles shall be covered.
• Onsite vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph.
• Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles enter and exit the
construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any
equipment leaving the site each trip.
• An appointed construction relations officer shall act as a community.
liaison concerning onsite construction activity including resolution of
issues related to PM~o generation.
• Streets shall be swept at the end of the day using SCAQMD Rule 1186
certified street sweepers or roadway washing trucks if visible soil is
carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend water sweepers
with reclaimed water).
• All active portions the construction site shall be sufficiently watered
three times a day to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
23
32: Final building plans submitted fior approval of a building permit shall include on
the plans a list of alf permanent mechanical equipment to be placed indoors .
which may be heard outdoors.
Demolition Requirements
33. Uhtil 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 ecurity 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
Divisioh 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. Applicant 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 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 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
24
complaints during the construction period. Said.. sign shall also indicate the hours
of permissible construction work.
39: A copy of these conditions shall be posted ih an easily visible and accessible
location at all times during. construction. at the project site: The pages shall be
lamiriated brotherwise protected o ensure durability of the copy.
Standard Conditions
'40. 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
41
42.
43.
by applicable :regulations. Roof locations may be used .when the mechanical
equipment is installed within a soiahd-rated parapet enclosure.
Final approval of any. mechanical equipmenf 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.
Final parking layout and specifications shall be subject to the review and
approval of the Strategic and Transportation Management Division.
Construction period signage shall be subject to the approval of the Architectural
Review Board.
44. The Department of Public Works and/or its contractors shall insure any graffiti on
the site is promptly removed through compliance with the City's graffiti removal
program.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PW)
Drainage
45. 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 pursuant to
Municipal Code Chapter 7.10. Prior to submittal of landscape plans for
Architectural Review Board approval, the applicant shall contact Public Works 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
25
;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 svvales, berms, and the like; orientation. of drain gutters towards
permeable areas, modification of grades; use of retention structures and
.other methods..
Hazardous Materials
46. 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, 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 Inspector/Assessor. Additional hazardous materials to be
considered by the industrial hygienist shall include: mercury (in thermostats,
switches, fluorescent light); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (including light
Ballast), and fuels, pesticides, and batteries.
Streets
47. Unless otherwise approved by the Department of Publid Works, all sidewalks
shall be kept clear and passable during the grading and construction phase of
the project.
48. 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.
26
49. Street and/or alley lighting shall be provided oh 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
50. Applicant shall provide all equipment, sidewalk; curb and gutter work related, to
the curb extension expansion and right-of-way bicycle parking area per approval
of the Strategic ahd Transportation Planning Division.
51. All off-site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed: Plans
-and specifications for off-site' improvements shall' be prepared by a registered '
.civil engineer,and approved by the City Ehgineer.
Environmental Mitigation
52. 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 of 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.
53. 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
54. A construction period mitigation plah 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;
27
- :I
i
2) Describe how demolition of any existing structures is to be accomplished;
3) Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erectionJconstruction;
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 devJataring and its effect on -any
adjacent buildings;
- 8) Describe anticipated construction-relafed truck routes, number of truck
trips., hours of hauling and parking location;
9) Specifythe 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 aconstruction-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; and
18) Provide a construction period water runoff control plan.
COMMUNITY AND CULTURAL SERVICES
55. 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 Public Landscape Division of the Community and Cultural
Services Department and the City's Tree Code (SMMC Chapter 7.40). No street
trees shall be removed without the approval of the Public Landscape Division.
28
ATTACHMENT C
Planning Commission Minutes and Statement of Official Action
http://www01.smgov. het/plahning/comm fission/agendas/pc2011/pm20110302;pdf
http;//www01 smgov.neUplanning/commission/agendas/pc2011/ps2011040607-
Al.pdf
ATTACHMENT D
Planning Commission StaffReport
http://www01.smgov. het/plann ihg/commission/agendas/pe2011 /ps2011030209-A: pdf
THESE ATTACHMENTS ARE LOCATED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE AND ARE
PROVIDED IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT ONLY
29
30
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Cityof
Santa Monica
Date: April 14, 2011
To: Eileen Fogarty, Director, Planning arid Community: Development -
From: Rache( Kwok, Environmental Planner
Subject. Addendum to the Downtown Parking Program Final Program EIR
Background: On February 28; 2006, City of Santa Mohica City Council certifed the Final Program
Envirdnmerital Impact Report (Final PEIR State Clearinghouse No: 2002121122) for the City of Santa
Monica Dowhtown Public Parking Program (Dowhtown Parking Program). This document is an
Addendum to the Final PEIR. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this
Addendum addresses the cFlange in cumulative conditions under which .Parking Structure 6 of the
Downtown Parking Program. would occur. In addition, following the Plannirg Commission's review. and
denial of a conditional use permit for Parking Structure 6 on March 2, 2011, .final design plans were
prepared for Parking Structure 6 which reconfigured the ingress and egress scheme. Subsequent to the ',
Planning Commission's review, this Addendum has been revised to determine whether the final design
plans for Parking Structure 6 would result in new and/or substantially more severe significant traffic and
circulation impacts that were hot addressed in the Final PEIR.
The Final PEIR analyzed a parking program that included the following:
• Demolition and Reconstruction of Parking Structure 1 located at 1234 Fourth. Street, Parking
Structure 3 located at 1320 Fourth Street, and Parking Structure 6 located at 1431 Second Street.
Upon reconstruction, these three parking structures would provide a combined total "pooled"
parking supply of 1,693 spaces (total net new 712 spaces).
• Two new parking structures in the vicinity of 5`" Street that would contain a total of approximately
1,000 spaces'
The program EIR identified interim replacement parking for approximately 580 spaces at the Civic
Center Parking Structure during construction of the various parking structures
As indicated in the Final PEIR, the purpose of the Downtown Parking Program is to provide adequate
public parking resources in the Downtown area to support existing and future land uses. The Final PEIR
provided aproject-level and cumulative level analysis of the environmental impacts associated with
implementation of the Downtown Parking Program.
Final Design of Parking Structure 6 and Change in Cumulative Conditions: The City is commencing on
the next phase of the Downtown Parking Program with the reconstruction of Parking Structure 6. In
March 2011, subsequent to the Planning Commission's review and denial of a conditional use permit, the
City prepared final design plans which reconfigured the ingress and egress for Parking Structure 6. This '
Addendum provides an environmental analysis that reflects the latest ingress and egress scheme (i.e.,
single lane entry with one outbound left turn lane and one outbound right turn lane). The City anticipates
construction of the parking structure in 2012. Parking Structure 6 is anticipated to accommodate
' The Final PEIR identified that the two new parking structures would be located in the area generally bound by Wilshire Boulevard
to the north, 4'" Court to the west, Colorado Avenue to the south, and 6'" Court to the east.
31
approximately 750 parking spaces, an approximately 400 space increase beer what exists today and an
increase of approximately 167 spaces over what was studied in the Final PEIR for this site. The actual
number of parking spaces may vary slightly as construction plans are finalized.
In 2008, the Gity contracted with Walker Parking Consultants to update the Downtown Parking Prdgram.
The Walker Parking Study concluded that with Yecohstruption of Parking Structures 1 & 6, public use of
private lots, and policy and pricing changes,. the City's downtown area would have sufficient parking and
recohstructipn'bf Parking Strudture 3 would not be necessary.. Accordingly, Parking Structure 3 is
currently Being considered for redevelopment as part of the proposed AMC Theatre development. In
cdmpliance with CEQA, the environmental impacts associated with the AMC Theatte development (i.e.,
redevelopment of, Parking Structure 3 site) will be analyzed ih a separafe environmental impact report
being prepared for ttiaf project. However,: the proposed AMC tlevelopment was not. previously corisitlered
in Elie cumulative analysis for the`Downtowri Parking Program Final PEIR.'
The Dowrtown Parking Program is intentled to provide adequate parking in Downtown through a pooled
parking supply that inclutles existing retrofitted"parking structures, reconstructed parking structures
.(Parking Structures 1, 3, and 6), antl two new parking strudtures TFie City has acquired a property at 5th
Street and Arizona Avenue to support this parking prdgram. Guiding principles for future development
include public parking that could tie equivalent to orie'or both of the two new parking structures near 5th
Street that were previously contemplated and analyzed in the Final PEIR. Notwithstanding the removal of
Parking Structure 3 from the Downtown Parking Program, public parking needs in the Downtown area
would continue to be met through a "pooled" parking supply that would include the project elements
identified in the Final PEIR, inclusive of the reconstruction of Parking Structure 6 and the potential new
parking structure at 5th Street and Arizona Avenue. As such, the City anticipates that the change in
cumulative conditions (namely, the development of the AMC Theatre at the existing Parking Structure 3
site) would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects. In addition, the fnal design plans for Parking Structure 6 would
not result in any new significant traffic and circulation impacts or result in a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified traffic impacts.
CEQA Authority for this Addendum: CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines establish the type of environmental
documentation which is required when changes to a project occur after an EIR is certified.
Section 15164(a) states that:
"The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified
EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section
15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred".
Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines requires a Subsequent EIR where an EIR has already been
prepared under the following circumstances:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous E/R due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
32
3 New information bf substantial impdrtance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time fhe,previous E/R was dertified as
complete shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed iri fhe previous EIR
ornegative declaration,
b. Significant effects previously examined wil(be substantially more severe than shown in
the previous EIR,
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, buf
the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives. which are considerably different from those
analyzed ih the previous EIR would substantially reduce' one or more significant effects
on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure
or alterhative.
The purpose of this Addendum is to address the change in cumulative conditions under uvhich Parking
Structure 6 of the Downtown Parking Program would be undertaken [riamely, the addition of the prdposed
AMC Theatre Project as a related project] and analyze whether development of Parking Structure 6 could
teaialt in any new cumulatively significant environmental impacts which were not identified in the Final
PEIR or whether pteviously identified significant impacts would be substantially. more severe. In addition,
this Addendum has been revised to assess whether the final tlesign plans for Parking Structure 6 would
result in new and/or substantially more severe significant traffic and circulation impacts that were not
addressed in the Final. PEIR. As indicated in the analysis provided herein, the change in cumulative
conditions as well as the design plans under which Parking Structure 6 would be undertaken would not
constitute a substantial change in the project that will involve "new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity df previously identified significant effects'. The environmental impacts
associated with reconstruction of Parking Structure 6 would be within the envelope of impacts analyzed in
the Final PEIR and/or do not constitute a new or greater significant impact.
On the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, the City has determined that an
Addendum is the appropriate form of CEQA documentation to address the potential changes in the
Downtown Parking Program (elimination of Parking Structure 3 for the proposed AMC Theatre Project)
and in cumulative conditions.
Environmental Analysis: The environmental analysis in this Addendum considers the environmental
issues that were analyzed in the Final PEIR (Transportation/Traffic, Air Quality, Noise and Vibration, Land
Use and Planning, Aesthetics/Shadows, Construction Effects, and Neighborhood Effects). The
addendum analyzes the change in cumulative conditions and design plans for Parking. Structure 6 and
determines if, as a result of the change, reconstruction of Parking Structure 6 would result in new
significant impacts or increase the severity of previously anticipated significant impacts. Notwithstanding
the change in cumulative conditions, environmental impacts associated with reconstruction of Parking
Structure 6 as part of the Downtown Parking Program would be within the envelope of impacts
documented in the Final PEIR. The design plans for Parking Structure 6 and the change in cumulative
conditions would not result in new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts.
While this Addendum takes into consideration the cumulative effects that removal of Parking Structure 3
would have on Parking Structure 6, it should be noted that the project-specific environmental impacts of
33
the Parking Structure 3 site forthe proposed AMC Theatre Development would be subject to a separate
environmental review.
In addition, other minor final design modifications with regard to Parking Structure 6 (e.g., increase in
ramp slopes .for the parking structure, changes in building. stepbacks; increase in half level of :
subterraneah parking) would not result in new environmental impacts. These minor.design modifications
.represent insignificant adjustments ihthe design of the parking structure and would not have a greater
and/or different physical .impact on the environment than what was analyzed in the Final PEIR. For
example, the Fihal PEIR analyzed construction air quality and noise impacts associated with the parking
.structure based on the maximum peak daily construction activities. Therefore, ah increase in a half level
of subterrahean parking and/or increase in slope would not chahge the condlusions for construction-
related air. quality and/or noise impacts. since construction activities would be similar on a peak daily.
basis
Environmental `
Issue Final PEIR
Impact Analysis of Environmental Impact Due to
Change in Cumulative Conditions Consistent
with Final
PEIR?
TransportationlTraffic , ": '
Issue 4.1.5-1 Significant The Final PEIR's traffic analysis was conducted on a Yes
Intersection and conservative cumulative basis, taking into account an
Operations (long Unavoidable area-wide ambient growth of 0.8 percent per year and
term) the development pf related projects [see Figure 1].
While the cumulative traffic analysis did not include the
proposed AMC Theater development as a related
project, the inclusion of the 0.8 percent ambient growth
factor accounts for traffic from future projects (such as
the proposed AMC Theater Development) that could
not have been known at the time of the Final PEIR. As
such, given that the traffic analysis in the Final PEIR
utilized an ambient growth factor, the cumulative trips
from the proposed AMC Theater Development were
essentially captured in the traffic analysis. a Thus, the
total amount of cumulative traffic on the street network
is anticipated to be consistent with that analyzed in the
Final EIR.
However, with the redevelopment of Parking Structure 3
for the proposed AMC Theater Development and the
increase in the number of parking spaces for Parking
Structure 6, there could be a geographicalshift in trip
distribution patterns and an increase in the number of
vehicle trips going to Parking Structure 6 (instead of
Parkin Structure 3). A traffic im act anal sis was
' It should be noted that the traffic analysis in the Final PEIR is highly conservative. Generally parking structures are not land uses
that result in direct trip generation. Rather it is the land uses in the vicinity of parking spaces that generate trips (and subsequently,
parking demand). Nonetheless, the traffic analysis assumed a worst case scenario that analyzed trips from the parking structures
based on the total number of net new parking spaces. No changes to the Downtown Parking Program are proposed which would
not increase the total net new number of parking spaces above what was analyzed iri the Final PEIR. Rather, from a trip generation
standpoint, by not reconstructing Parking Structure 3, trip generation would be less than analyzed.
' The traffic analysis in the Final PEIR analyzed traffic impacts by comparing a Cumulative Base Scenario against a Cumulative
Base Plus Project Scenario. In the case of the project, this cumulative type of traffic analysis was more conservative in that it took
into account trips associated with area wide ambient growth of 0.8 percent per year and trips associated with planned related
development projects. Therefore, a traffic analysis wherein traffic impacts are analyzed by comparing an Existing Base Scenario
against an Existing Base Plus Project Scenario (to be consistent with the case of Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Assn. v. City of
Sunnyvale City Council) would reveal fewer traffic impacts. Therefore, no new significant environmental traffic impacts or an
increase in the severity of signifcant impacts would occur when utilizing this approach.
34
Environmental
Issue Final PEIR
Impact Analysis of Environmental lmpacf Due to
Change in Cumulative Conditions Consistent
with Final
PEIR?
conducted for eight intersections surrounding Parking
Structure 6 to determine if any new significant impacts
(which were not previously identified in the PEIR) would
occur.° Based. on the results of the traffic impact
analysis, Parking Structure 6 would not result iri new
significant impacts on intersections, which were not
previously identified in the Firial PEIR. In addition, the
proposed ingress and egress scheme (single lane entry
with one outbound left turn lane and one outbound right
turn lane) would minimize potential-'access and
circulation impacts in and'around the parking structure.
Therefore, the .conclusions of thePEIR would nbt'
materially change, It should also .tie noted 'that, as
shown in Figure.1, the traffic analysis in the PEIR was
highly conservative and essentially, .double counted
various trips occurring along the roadway netwbrk.
Specifically, -the ambient growth factbr of 0.8 percent
double counts trips from related projects. In addition,
the parking structure .trips calculated fdr Parking
Structure 6 also double counts trips associated with
existing land uses, related projects; and ambient
growth. This conservatively methodology provides a
worst-case analysis that double counts a number of
trips going to Parking Structure 6.
Additionally, due to the- proposed AMC Theater
Development and associated removal of Parking
Structure 3, a cumulative parking shortage in the
Downtown area .could result in secondary traffic
circulation impacts. Drivers who can't find parking may
continuously circle around the area and contribute to
congestion and circulation problems. As previously
stated, the public parking demand that would have been
accommodated by the reconstruction of Parking
Structure 3 could instead be accommodated at the
potential new parking structure at 5th Street and
Arizona Avenue [a component of the Downtown Parking
Program that was previously analyzed]: The future (i.e.,
long term) public parking needs in the Downtown area
would continue to be met through a "pooled" parking
supply that would include the reconstruction of Parking
Structure 6 and the potential new parking structure at
5th Street and Arizona Avenue. The Walker Study
analyzed future parking demand based on the list of
related projects, and concluded that with reconstruction
of Parking Structures 1 & 6, public use of private lots,
and policy and pricing changes, the City's downtown
area would have sufficient parking Therefore, traffic
circulation impacts would remain consistent with those
analyzed ih the Final PEIR, and are anticipated to be
significant and unavoidable for 11 intersections.. The
change in cumulative conditions due to the proposed
AMC Theater Develo ment would not than e the traffic
°Gibson Transportation, Circulation and Traffic Assessment for Santa Monica Parking Structure No. 6, April 11, 2011 (study on file in
the Planning & Community Development Department as part of the administrative record).
35
Environmental Final PEIR Analysis'of'Environmental Impact Due to Consistent
Issue Impact Change in Cumulative Conditions with Final
PEIR?
conclusions of the FinaLPEIR.
Issue. -. 4.1:5-2 Significant Asstated above, while-the cumulative traffic analysis Yes
Conge$tion and did not include the proposed AMC Theater development
Management Unavoidable as a related project, the inclusion of the 0.8 .percent -
Program Network ambient growth factor accounts for future projects (such
as the AMCTheater Development) that could not have :
been known at the time of the Final PEIR.. As such, the
amount of cumulative traffic would be consistent with
that analyzed in the Final' PEIR. `7he change iri
cumulative conditions tlue to .inclusion of the proposed
AMC Theater Development would not change the traffic.
conclusions of thefinal PEIR. Therefore, trafficimpacts
do the CMP freeway network wduld remain consistent
with thoseanalyzed in the Final PEIR, and `is
anticipated 4o be ignificant and unavoidable at the 1-10
freewa east of Cloverfield Boulevard.
Air Ruali
Issue 4 2 3-1 Significant As stated above, while the cumulative traffic analysis Yes
Regional Operational and did not include the proposed AMC Theater development
Emissions Unavoidable as a related project, the inclusion of the 0.8 percent
ambient growth factor accounts for future projects (such
as the proposed AMC Theater Development) that could
not have been known at the time of the Final. PEIR. As
such, the amount of cumulative traffic would be
consistent with that analyzed in the Final PEIR.
Accordingly, regional operation emissions [which are
calculated based on the cumulative traffic analysis]
would be consistent with those analyzed in the Final
PEIR, and as such, would be significant and
unavoidable.
Issue 4.2.3-2 Less Than As indicated above, the amount of cumulative traffic Yes
Localized CO Impacts Significant would be consistent with that analyzed in the Final
PEIR. Accordingly, localized CO impacts would be
consistent with those analyzed in the Final PEIR, and
as such, would be less than si nificant.
Issue 4.2.3-3 Odors Less Than The proposed AMC Theater Development would Yes
Signifcant generate odor impacts similar to those analyzed in the
Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking Structure 3.
Odor impacts are typically localized. Based on the type
of use, the proposed AMC Theater Development is not
anticipated to result in significant odor sources. The
change in cumulative conditions would not result in new
significant odor impacts for the reconstruction of
Parking Structure 6. Odor impacts would be consistent
with those analyzed and as such, would be less than
si nificant.
Issue 4.2.3-4 AQMP Less Than AQMP consistency is assessed on aproject-by-project Yes
Consistency Significant basis. The proposed AMC Theater Development would
be reviewed to ensure consistency with the AQMP. The
change in cumulative conditions would not result in new
Signifcant AQMP impacts for the reconstruction of
Parking Structure 6. AQMP consistency impacts would
be consistent with those analyzed and as such, would
be less than si nificant.
Noise and Vibration
36
Environmental `. Final PEIR Analysis of Envir•onmenta('Impact Due to Consistent
Issue Impact Change in Cumulative Conditions with. Final
PEIR?
Issue, 4.3.4-1 Less Than Opefational noise impacts'.areassessed on a project- Yes
Operational noise Significant by-project basis, with consideration to the specific types
sources of noise sources proposed: Based on the type of use,
the proposed AMC Theater Development is .not
anticipated to .result insignificant noise sources: The
'change in cumulative conditions would not result in new
significant operational noise impacts for the
reconstruction bf Parking Structure B. Noise jmpacts
v~ould be consistent with those analyzed and as such,
vrould be less than si nificant.
Issue 4.3.4-2 .Traffic Less - Than -Asstated above, while the cumulative traffic analysis Yes.
Noise .Significant- did. riotinpludeSheproposedAMCTheaterdevelopment
- -as a relatedproject,theinclusionof the0.8 percent
ambient growth factor accounts for future projects. (such
as the proposed AMC Theater Development) that could
- not.have been known at the time ofthe Final PEIR. As
such, ;the amount of cumulative #raffic would be
consistent with that analyzed iri the-Final PEIR. As
indicated above, the amount of cumulative traffic
associated with the reconstruction of Parking Structure
6 would be consistent with that analyzed in the Final
', PEIR. Accordingly, traffic noise levels would be
consistent with those analyzed in the Final PEIR, and
as such, would be less than si nificant.
Issue 4.3.4-3 Less Than Vibration impacts are typically assessed on a project- Yes
Vibration Significant by-project basis, with consideration to the specific types
of vibration sources proposed. Based on the type of
use, the .proposed AMC Theater Development is not
anticipated to result in a signifcant vibration source.
The change in cumulative conditions would not result in
', new significant vibration impacts far the reconstruction
of Parking Structure 6. Vibration impacts would be
consistent with those analyzed and as such, would be
'' less than si nificant.
'~., Land Use and Planning
Issue 4.4-1 Local Less Than Consistency with local land use policies are typically Yes
Land Use Policies Significant assessed on aproject-by-project basis. The proposed
', AMC Theater Development would be reviewed to
ensure consistency with local land use policies. The
change in cumulative conditions would not result in new
I significant local land use policy impacts for the
reconstruction of Parking Structure 6. Local land use
policy impacts would be consistent with those analyzed
and as such, would be less than si nifcant.
Issue 4.4-2 Regional Less Than Consistency with local land use policies are typically Yes
Policies Significant assessed on aproject-by-project basis. The proposed
AMC Theater Development would be reviewed to
ensure consistency with regional land use policies. The
change in cumulative conditions would not result in new
significant regional .land use policy impacts for the
reconstruction of Parking Structure 6. No changes are
proposed that would relate to consistency with regional
policies. Regional land use policy impacts would be
consistent with those analyzed and as such, would be
less than si nificant.
37
Environmental Final'PEIR Analysis of Environmental Impact Due to :Consistent:
Issue Impact Change in Cumulative Conditions with Final
PEIR?
Issue 4 4 3 Land Use Less Than The City of Santa Monica Downtown area is generally Yes '.
Compatibility ( Significant built out. Theproposed AMC Theater Developmehf is a
related redevelopment project, whose commercial uses
~
would not conflict with the reconstruction of Parking ,
Structure 6..Land use compatibility impacts would be- I
consistent with those analyzed and as such, would be
lesstliansi nificant.
AestheticslShadows
Issue 4.5-1 Public Less Than View impacts are typically assessed on a project-by- Yes
$cehicViews 'Significant projecYbasis, with cohsideration toa projegt'sheight -
_ and view blockage potential In terms of height and -
potential view blockage impacts, the proposed AMC
Theater beveldpment would be generally consistent
with that analyzed in the Final PEIR for reconstruction
of Parking Structure 3. The change in cumulative
honditions would not result in hew significant view
impacts far the reconstruction of Parking Structure 6.
View impacts would be consistent withthose analyzed
and as such, would be less than si nificant.
Issue 4.5-2 Visual Less Than Visual character impacts are typically assessedon a~ Yes -.
character or Quality Significant project-by-project basis, with consideration to .the
project's design. The. proposed AMC Theater.
Development would be reviewed by the Architectural
Review Board to ensure consistency with aesthetic
policies. The change in cumulative conditions would not
result in new significant visual character and quality
impacts for the reconstruction of Parking Structure 6.
Visual character and quality impacts would be
consistent with those analyzed and as such, would be
less than si nificant.
Issue 4.5-3 Light and Less Than The addition of the AMC Theater Development to the Yes
Glare Significant cumulative conditions for Parking Structure 6 would
with Mitigation potentially cumulatively increase light/glare impacts.
However, as with Parking Structure 6, light/glare
sources would be required to be shielded. LighUglare
impacts would be consistent with those analyzed and
as such, would be less'than si nificant with mitt anon.
Issue 4.5-4 Shading Less Than Shading impacts are typically assessed on a project-by- Yes
Significant project basis, with consideration to the project's height
(for Parking and location to sensitive uses. In terms of height and
Structure 6) shading impacts, the proposed AMC Theater
Development would be generally consistent with that
analyzed in the Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking
Structure 3. The change in cumulative conditions would
not result in new significant shading impacts for the
reconstruction of Parking Structure 6. Shading impacts
would be consistent with those analyzed and as such,
would be less than si nificant.
Construction Effects
38
Environmental Final PEIR Analysis of Env
Issue Impact Change in Cumu
PEIR?
Issue 4.6.3-1 Parking Less ~ Than During the construction activities for Parking Structure 6 Yes ~~,
Shortfall during Significant and other cumulative City projects (includirig removal of I
Construction - with Mitigation Parking Structure 3 for the AMC Theater Development),
existing parking would be displaced. As analyzed by
City staff; interim parking need during the construction
activities for Parking Structure 6 and other cumulative
City projects would be adequately accommodated py
the Citys Civic Center. Parking Lot and Structure as
originally analyzed. Therefore:, construction effects on
parking would be less than'signifidant with mitigation
and cdnsistehtwith those anal zed in he Final PEIR.
Issue 4.6.4.3-1 Significant The proposed AMC ,Theater Development would Yes
Coristrucfion Air and generate construction emissions similar to those
Quality Unavoidable analyzed in the'Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking
Structure3: As disclosed in the Final PEIR, concurrent
cumulative development in the Downtown area would
result in en increase in' short-term' emissions.
Construction activities that occur concurrently for
reconstruction of Parking Structure 6 and the proposed
AMC Theaterbevelopment would result in significant
and unavoidable construction air quality impacts.
Construction air quality impacts would be consistent
with those analyzed and as such, would be significant
and unavoidable.
Issue 4.6.4.3-2 Less Than The proposed AMC Theater Development would Yes
Construction Odors Significant generate construction odor impacts similar to those
analyzed in the Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking
Structure 3. Odor impacts are typically localized. Based
on the type of use, construction of the proposed AMC
Theater Development is not anticipated to result in
significant odor sources. The change in cumulative
conditions would not result in new signifcant
construction odor impacts for the reconstruction of
Parking Structure 6. Odor impacts would be consistent
with those analyzed and as such, would be less than
si nificant.
Issue 4.6.5.4-1 Less Than The proposed AMC Theater Development would Yes
Construction Noise Significant generate construction noise similar to those analyzed in
with Mitigation the Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking Structure 3.
The addition of the proposed AMC Theater
Development to the cumulative conditions for Parking
Structure 6 would potentially cumulatively increase
construction noise impacts. However, as with Parking
Structure 6, the proposed AMC Theater Development
would be required to adhere to the City of Santa Monica
Noise Ordinance standards. Construction noise impacts
would be consistent with those analyzed and as such,
would be less than si nificant with miti ation.
ironmental Impact Due to Consistent
lative Conditions with Final
39
Environmental :Final PEIR Analysis of Environmental Impact Due to Consistent
Issue Impact Change in Cumulative Conditions with. Final
PEIR?
Issue 4.6.5.4-2` . Less Than The proposed AMC Theater Development would Yes
Construction Vibration Significant generate construction vibration similar to those
aralyzed in the Final PEIR for reconstructidn of Parking
Structure 3. Given the distance of the proposed AMC
Theater Development from Parking Structure. 6, no
cumulative vibration .impacts would occur ?he change
in cumulative conditidns would not result in new
significant construction vibration impacts for the
reconstruction of Parking Structure 6. Vibration impacts
wduld be consistent with those analyzed and as such
cwduld be less than si nificant.
Issue 4.6.6-1 less Than The proposed AMC Theater Development would result Yes
Construction Land Significaht in construction lahd use impacts similar to those
.Use with Mitigation analyzed in the Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking
Structure 3. The addition of the proposed AMC Theater
Development to the cumulative conditions fog Parking
Structure 6 would .potentially cumulatively. increase
construction land. impacts as a result of construction
traffic However, as with Parking Structure 6, the
proposed AMC Theater Development would be required
to implement a Construction .Management Plan to
ensure that land use impact would not be significant.
Construction land use impacts would be consistent with
those analyzed and as such, would be less than
si nificant with miti anon.
Issue 4.6.7-1 Less Than The proposed AMC Theater Development would result Yes
Construction-related Significant in construction visual impacts similar to those analyzed
Visual Impacts in the Final PEIR for reconstruction of Parking Structure
3. Cumulative construction-related visual impacts could
occur if two concurrent construction projects are.
geographically located in the same visual range. The
proposed AMC Theater Development would not be in
the same visual range as Parking Structure 6.
Therefore, the change in cumulative conditions would
not result in new significant construction visual impacts
-
for the reconstruction of Parking Structure
6.
Construction activities would remain similar to those
analyzed in the Final PEIR. Construction-related visual
impacts would be consistent with those analyzed and
as such, would be less than si nifcant.
Neighborhood Effects
Issue 4.7.3-1 Traffic Significant Refer to Issue 4.1.5-1 Intersection Operations Yes
and
Unavoidable
Issue 4.7.3-2 Less Than Refer to Issue 4.6.3-1 Parking Shortfall during Yes
Construction Traffic Significant Construction
with Miti anon
Issue 4.7.3-3 Significant Refer to Issue 4.6.4.3-1 Construction Air Quality Yes
Construction Air and
Qualit Unavoidable
Issue 4.7.3-4 Less Than Refer to Issue 4.6.5.4-1 Construction Noise Yes
Construction Noise Significant
with Miti anon
Issue 4.7.3-5 Land Less Than Refer to Issue 4.4.3 Land Use Compatibility Yes
Use Character Si nificant
40
Environmental Final PEIR Analysis'of Environmental Impact Due to Consistent l
Issue Impact Change in Cumulative Conditions with Final
PEIR?
Issue 47.3-5 Less Than Refer to Issues 4.5.1-4.5.4 Aesthetics Yes
Aesthetics-and Visual Significant - -
Quality Less Than
Significant
with Miti anon
41
42
43
Rear Alley Elevation
View from 2"" Street
44
45
4
I
Q UP ~
U Q~ pP
I" A) .6'2/3% AMP LOP
-D DN DI ~ ~ DN
" V
I
I
o ~ ~ ~ ~, oN
U ~ -y UP
,
V
1
__ __ __ __
NOTE: I
CURRENT ZONING CODE
ALLOWS 5°/a MAX. SLOPE ON N ,
PARKING RAMPS
63 LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 t
CITY OP SANTA MONICA nizsi„
- --
-- --
_ ---o
0 E IIP
1{U'.6' 2/3% MP SLOP
o ~ - one
--0
oµ Sr oN
uc ~ -D Ur
i ~
__O
NOTE: N~t"'t-'-I
CURRENT ZONING CODE ~1/
ALLOWS 5% MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
B2 LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6
z
CITY OF SANTA MQNICA
vzc~i~
~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~II
I
I
II -- -- -- -- ~
°~ Upid ELEC RM ~'
OUN° VEL MOTOR LLFS - '
~ \ l~ I
U ~ ~ ~ EX GATE I
T1: ~ l
p ~ /
I1 NT GATE
I /
N fR°{ A
i ROIINGL E SVAL ILEVELS NJ
I I -~ Ili
I I
~' o,~. , AX. 2/3% AMP OP oN
U '-D UP
I
/~
L/
NOTE:
CURRENT ZONING CODE N
.ALLOWS 5 % MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
B1 LEVEL I
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 s
OITY OF SANTA MONICA aizs~~t
I ALLEY
__
%~ __ __
/ _
4
_
m ROM WER i
\
~ ~-
I LEV \~! I
I '
FR M UPPER ! \ RMER'
~ F
= I
'
PAY-0N~FOOT EVE
'
~ I
~
~~ .~ ro
~PPE TGRAG i ~ I
~ E
-/ ti'°
i; ~
%
iOIOWER
~ o NTVJN
5 INC. F.M.
SM INC, PARKING SUMMARY:
' y LvELS LOWER LEVELS
- ~ " ~~ 'v STD SPACES = 211
I _
I °- § COMPACT SPACES = 0
SPACER ABOVE SIGN I
`
~ I S STD ACS SPACES = 4
SPACES BELOW SIGN ~ ;i ~ ~
'~
~ VAN ACS SPACES = 5
B S.~ %
~ ~ RETAI ~ ~ smNiNC~ SUBTOTAL =220
} a§ N
. P
I j
`-.i I UPPER LEVELS
wnvFwmrvc ro ~ STD SPACES = 507 I
FREEWAY SIGN ;.,f
COMPACT SPACES= 0 j
I .
~
~
~ I
, ? STD ACS SPACES = 9
"-"'-- _ - -
-` ---~-
XI EXIT ENTR "
- - VAN ACS SPACES = 10
i
- _ = x SUBTOTAL =526
I
I
__
_ TOTAL SPACES =746 ~
I PAY-0Nf00T I
~ MACNINES
_ _---". ."_ _
--".. ____. _ "IukSx
"
/ ry~\
sau NOTE: NI-y-I
' ces ee~ow
SECOND STREET CURRENT ZONING CODE VJ
slcn REQUIRES 76' DEPTH FOR
RETAIL SPACES
~ GROUND LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 4
CITY OF SANTA M4NICA
_" _
_.. 4iz6i11
~
---- --- -__--
~~ QQQQ Q
IIII __-- -
Q Q Q Q QQ
V I I I II -- - ----- -
QQ
II --- -- ---1
'~~
-- - ~,
-- --
.;
iGATE -
I
I
MA)
. 6 2/ nn^^
G~0 M~
GROVN~IG
VEL
~
iGATE
I
o f E
'
0 ~ w ERO
GROIINGL VEL NiPYG TES
EPACE ILE ELSIGN
A iG PG G
I V/
I
U i~ UP I
o r ~ orv II
I
I i ~ ~ I
I
I .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. ..
NOTE: I
N~
CURRENT ZONING CODE
ALLOWS 5°/a MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
SECOND LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 e
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
l _.__ aizs;~i
--
a
-- --
-
-- o i
D1 ~
A
" A) 6 /3°/a AMP LOPE' ~"
~
- ~ ~
una- ~uv
or ~
NOTE:
CURRENT ZONING CODE N
ALLOWS 5%MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
THIRD LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 s
.CITY QP SANTA MONICA
nizeiri
~~ C IA) 6 /3% AMP LOPE' °N
ur
n
~
~
~ ~
E~
"p 0
-. of
~
~
~ . ~
0 _ O
NOTE:
CURRENT ZONING CODE ~~;~~
N
ALLOWS 5% MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
FOURTH LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 ~
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
vzsni
_ - -----
1
-- -- ''
-- --
--o
,
' D1 ~ IA) 6 /3% AMP LOPE °p
~ I
I
or ~
I i
O
. . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. ..
~s. I
NOTE: N~
CURRENT ZONING CODE
ALLOWS 5%MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
FIFTH LEVEL ~~
PARKING STRUCTURE #8
a
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
~ _
_.. aizs/i7
' ~~ ~ IA) 6 /3% AMP LOPE' ~ ~"
ur n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~ uv
ai
~
~
NOTE: ~~
N
CURRENT ZONING CODE
ALLOWS 5% MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
SIXTH LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 y
CITY OF SANTA MGNICA
~:. __ nizs~i~
_. _ . _ _ __
i
I ~ ~
- ~ N 6 /3% MP LOPE' 'gip I
I
-
- 0
-
- - - -0
U PS Q Up
or
y
~
I
I
v. i
N~ ~
NOTE:
CURRENT ZONING CODE
ALLOWS 5% MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
SEVENTH LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 ~o
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
_... aizsi,i
__
r
~~~~
, _ _ __ _
- - -- -- - - ~
--o
A 2/3% AM ~ °t ~ t\ IA) 6 2/3% MP LOPE ~"
~O
or
i
O
i
N
NOTE:
mil/
CURRENT ZONING CODE ,
ALLOWS 5%MAX. SLOPE ON
PARKING RAMPS
EIGHTH LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE #6 ~~
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
,~~zb~„
I
_1
~~ ~~~a~
I
i
pow
I
i I I I
PHOTOVOLTAIC SUPPORTS ROOF PLAN
i/8" =1'-0" ~ 1/32" = 1'-0"
aExx~s~xAR=~~.E~E~ PARKING STRUCTURE #6
~-~.~4= CITY OF SANTA MONICA
P9 12
4/2&111
-- _- _ ~_ _ ___ ~L-~_I_-
13 a~r.o r~ ,. «,."a~ . .... ........ ..... ......... ....... ...... _..-.-. -.. _ ........... __. _........' :d ec..x~. FI" --~~--.14',f ROJ6CLION LIMI'~-
r
" 11'0" ~ IOP FAfiI(ING LEVEL I
~~.-~.
-. _..I ......_LZew=m.> ~• _._ _._.._._.--_. -_ ~.... __. ~ .. _. _ ........ ..7 84' ABOVE AVERAGE GRADE
~~
0,-T„
L' li i
~ i
I
]'-5Y2 i
I i '
I ~ I
i s'-3Y,' ICI
fi'-10" I Ali
g mm~"a:uo- lali m.ei.t
it
io a 3,.2•'
m & - ~'
j
~,i
J
off: ~~
~ -a
4; 4
~ ~ FARMER'S MARKET STORAGE
2ntlyL5T-RE•17ET yL--•1~ 6,-0„ dSTREET COURT
~II~ k
26' 0"
relan.,o~enonuoar~
TRANSVERSE SECTION
v1 s^ = r-o~
I
note: anent zonlnB requirement is lB'iloor to hoer at relall
aEfifils=NAR~~~TEINEH PARKING STRUCTURE #6 °IOCetlnnofVUbllcadT9.0'•
~=~*~_~=~ CITY OF SANTA MONICA pg13
4/26/11
o
N ~SY
g a ~ %§
B ' RETAIL I
~
p
g ~
i
I
$[F_NM "MI inR _____
MLLY_EL___ __ T
Po6-].]B
sx~x LF~'¢ ____ _____
DEL' Ili
$6-0.90
~'LLN~ ____ _____
vtt T ~..
~~e~
1.
SM
mm
Q
~~ 1 I E
l A
~
fL 0
~fln
__ 1'__ __
Y~i
~~ I ..(.. E-~
5'
Q
p !
~~~
TRANS TRASH PUMP~~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~'~
ii FARMER'S GEN HVAG
i ~ ~ MARKET
i I I I I
I
I
I~
I
I
$R )1A9 L
NOTE: ~ __
________ ________ ________ ________ __
THE ART COMPONENT IS IN DEVELOPMENT AND
WILL BE APPROVED BY THE PUBLIC ART
COMMITTEE AND ARTS COMMISSION.
EAST ELEVATION
PARKING STRUCTURE #6
GITY OF SANTA MGNIGA
AIR INT~KE STAIR ~2
' I I
______ ______~ ~~nc~
_ __E_
NOTE:
ELEVATION TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY
THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
14
arzen 7
IAI
r
H
C.
U
Y
G
/~ I\1H
~~ ~. ,.. _I ~..
IAI
J
F
4
(a
K
6
14' PRGJECIIQN.LIMII
_ 89~poyyAVg.@AG'L ~RAQE
LfOP PARKING SURFACE)
.x~ Fen I y .¢ m
!~~ r e
' # ~t n~ -.
~ ~~~~
(VEHICULAR ENTRV ;BIKE STORAGE ! RETAILBTOREFRONTS I'i (PEDESTRIAN F~NTRY
I I I I I I I I
Street ELEVATION
1'A"
note: BBC2 DlsVlcl zoning max 56'entl 4 slorles
~_+'+ .14CHPRCNIiEKiEN OCafIOn Of Public art T.B.D ••
9ENN PARKING STRUCTURE #6
Y` ~~"` CITY OF SANTA MONICA
" '~°"'"~""~ 4/26111 ,
_ ,, ,
I(~FlR`GI1~71~~5[SP T~1TFiC1~€Ci~H1~Ri PItYF!b9iH'P'INIGrtl1411i~"n,e EUi""` "^ratai a~t,iznnt~xa,3^^
2nd Street Contextual Elevation
nol to scale ~ - - - - - __
aEaa~s=a^ac~~~tK,ta PARKING STRUCTURE #~
CITY OF SANTA MC7NICA pn.,,
AY2Fir'7 I
NORTH CoSM PARKING STRUCTURE #6
)to Sanla Monica Bivd.) SOUTH
(to Broadway)
Street Perspective -Rendering _ ____
not to scale ~ ~~~~~~~-- -'"' ~~~~~~----
_ 9ENNISCN 0.'tLF.li'NiEN i~f }• Ril'NY.L t~Ti\V 1tT~lli_ }'~'~
_ CITY OF SFlNTA ~JNICA p9.18
A124711'i