Loading...
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