SR 08-09-2016 6A
Ci ty C ouncil
Report
City Council Meeting : August 9, 2016
Agenda Item: 6.A
1 of 19
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Planning and Community Development , Planning &
Community Development, City Planning
Subject: Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve Development
Review Permit and Variance (15ENT013 8) to allow the construction of a new
three -story, 32 feet in height, 14,490 square -foot addition to the former United
States Post Office building as part of an adaptive reuse project converting the
existing Landmark building to creative office space. A p arking variance is
also requested to reduce the required number of on -site parking spaces to be
provided from 48 spaces to 25 spaces.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the
Planning Commiss ion to approve a Development Review Permit and Parking Variance
(15ENT -0138) in association with the adaptive reuse and floor area expansion of the
former US Post Office building, located at 1248 5 th Street, as creative office space
based on the findings a nd subject to the conditions described as an attachment to this
report.
Executive Summary
The appellant, Jennifer Kennedy, filed an appeal of the decision of the Planning
Commission to approve a Development Review Permit to adaptively reuse and expand
th e former U.S. Post Office building, a designated City Landmark, with the construction
of 14,490 square feet of new creative office space within a 32 feet tall, three -story
building addition at the rear of the Landmark building. The Planning Commission also
approved a variance to allow a reduction in the amount of parking to be provided in
conjunction with the proposed new construction from 48 spaces to 25. The variance is
also contested by the appellant.
Pursuant to the City’s Downtown Interim Ordinance (IZO) No. 2490 (CCS), which
established interim procedures and regulations for Downtown pending completion of the
Downtown Community Plan, this project is being reviewed for compliance with the 1988
zoning ordinance. The site is located in the C3 -C zoning district.
This report describes the proposed project scope and provides relevant background
information, including a description of t he Planning Commission’s action and analyzes
the issues of appeal raised by the appellant. The report concludes with a
2 of 19
re commendation from staff to uphold the Development Review Permit and Parking
Variance approvals based upon the findings and subject to the conditions adopted by
the Planning Commission on April 20, 2016.
Background
Existing Conditions and Setting
Erected in 1938, the one ‐story post office building with basement and mezzanine is
located at the northwest corner of 5th Street and Arizona Avenue, within the Downtown
district. The massing and detailing of the Santa Monica Post Office are indicative of the
PWA (Public Works Administration) Moderne style. The subject site is bordered by 5th
Street to the east, Arizona Avenue to the south, 4th Court to the west, and the Delphi
Academy playground to the north. Adjacent uses include a two -story retail building and
a two -story church complex to the west across 4th Court, a City -owned surface public
parking lot to the south across Arizona Avenue, a church complex and a six -story mixed
use building to the east across 5th Street, and a playground and multi -use commercial
building to the north directly adjacent to the subject site .
Actions Taken to Ensure Preservation
In August 2013, Council approved a preservation covenant for the former Post Office
building, in order to protect its historic significance. The preservatio n covenant requires
City r eview and approval of any construction, alteration , or rehabilitation on the property
that would affect the historic features of the property which include, among others, the
mass and plan of the main façade, the poured concrete s iding, the wood frame
windows, the ornate gro o ves in exterior walls, pilasters, columns, exterior motifs and the
ornamental metal fence. Specified interior features include the original hanging light
fixtures, marble wainscoting, horizontal wood walls and ceilings, metal staircase rails,
and tall tables. The Covenant further provides that to the extent the Landmarks
Ordinance applies, any alterations require review and approval under the Landmarks
Ordinance. By taking this action, the United States Postal Service was able to proceed
with the sale of the property to a private party, with the preservation covenant attached
as a rider to the grant deed. The property sold to a private party in December 2013 and
the Landmarks Commission proactively filed a Land mark Designation application for the
building in January 2014.
3 of 19
In March 2014, the Landmarks Commission designated the former Post Office building
and the parcel on which it is situated as a Landmark and Landmark parcel. In doing so,
the protection of an y exterior historic feature included in the designation would be
required pursuant to the Landmarks Ordinance, specifically through the issuance of a
Certificate of Appropriateness for any proposed alteration or addition to the property.
However, because the interior was not generally open to the public at the time of the
designation, the designation does not include any interior portion s or elements of the
building . A ccordingly , a s a City Landmark, the Landmarks Commission has no
jurisdiction over the in terior, and a s a result, the protection of any of these identified
interior features, as specified in the historic covenant, can only be accomplished
through Council approval. Under the Landmarks Ordinance and the Preservation
covenant, the Landmarks Comm ission only regulates those features specifically
identified in the Landmark designation.
Project Description
Skydance Productions, a movie/television production company, is proposing to
adaptively reuse the former Post Office building and convert it to creative office space.
In order to accommodate the spatial needs of this creative office use, the scope of work
includes a remodeling of the existing interior floor plans and plate heights, and the
construction of a new building addition. The existing bui lding in its current state is
33,968 square feet in area and consists of a 17,516 square foot first floor and 2,645
square foot mezzanine set above a 13,807 square foot basement. At completion of the
project, the first floor reduces in size to 16,146 squa re feet; the mezzanine level
becomes an 8,508 square foot second floor, and an 8,148 square foot third floor is
added. The basement is increased in size to 16,516 square feet. Overall, the proposed
Floor Area Ratio, which excludes any b asement area in its calculation, is 0.88, well
below the maximum of 2.5 established in the C3 -C zone. As a designated City
Landmark, the project would require sensitivity and consideration of the building’s
historic character -defining features which includes its exterior ele vations as well as the
interior lobby space. Pursuant to the requirements of the Preservation Covenant and
because the property is designated City Landmark, the project requires c onsistency with
4 of 19
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation .
Figure 1: Project Rendering (Arizona Avenue elevation)
On -site parking for 25 vehicles would be provided. Within a gated surface parking lot,
24 vehicles would be accommodated with one additional space located in an isolated
location adjacent to th e loading area. 21 of these spaces are standard size; two are
compact; and two are ADA compliant. Two of the spaces are designated as
“Rideshare”. The parking lot is located within the north side yard. Access to the parking
area is via Fourth Court, alon g the western (rear) elevation. In addition to automobile
parking, in accordance with SMMC 9.04.10.08.050 the applicant is required to provide a
minimum of four bicycle parking spaces on -site. The applicant has exceeded this
minimum requirement and has pr ovided a total of 24 bicycle parking spaces, located
adjacent to the parking lot on the north side of the site. To complement this alternative
transportation mode, the applicant is proposing on -site showers for employee use.
5 of 19
Figure 2: Site Plan
Planni ng Commission Action
On March 16, 2016 and on April 20, 2016, public hearings were held by the Planning
Commission to consider the associated Development Review Permit and Parking
Variance for the project. Testimony from the public was received a nd almost all offered
support for the project, citing the benefits of expanding the creative arts industry in
Downtown. During deliberation, the majority of Commissioners:
expressed strong support for the project, citing its potential as a representative
example of adaptive reuse;
stressed the importance of this Landmark building for maintaining the historic
character of Downtown;
appreciated the sensitive design, scale and massing of the building addition
relative to the existing symmetry of th e Landmark P ost Office building; and
noted its consistency within the surrounding neighborhood context.
6 of 19
The Commission also noted that the addition will be visually understated and almost
completely obscured from the view shed of the typical pedestrian along 5 th Street. The
Commission took formal action on the Development Review Permit and the Parking
Variance on April 20, 2016 . The Planning Commission initially voted 3 -3, resulting in a
technical denial of the project. However, at the same meeting, after voting 6 -0 to
reconsider the initial vote on the project, the Planning Commission held a second vote
on the project where the project was approved 4 -2 with amendments to Condition #60 in
the Planning Commission’s Statement of Official Action (Attachment B). Cond ition #60
originally required the applicant to provide a copy of a written agreement to the City for
23 off -site parking spaces. The Planning Commission’s amendments to Condition #60
included that 23 off -site parking spaces be deed -restricted for guarante ed exclusive use
by the Applicant for the term of any parking lease agreement, which need not be offered
from the same property owner. In addition, the copies of the deed restriction must be
provided annually with the reporting on the project’s required T ransportation Demand
Management program. The Commission also included that the off -site parking shall be
located on a site that is demonstrated to be underutilized for parking, conveniently
accessible to the project through non -motorized forms of trans por tation, and located
outside the Downtown core area. These conditions were intended to require that the
applicant have commitments to 23 off -site parking spaces and that the parking location
does not add to Downtown traffic congestion. The appellant is a member of the
dissenting vote.
As part of its approval, the Commission identified the following specific concerns relative
to the design, colors , and materials of the new construction that should be considered
by the Landmarks Commission during the Certif icate of Appropriateness review for
overall design quality and historic compatibility:
The proposed cladding on the new addition does not appear to relate in its
materiality to historic PWA Moderne buildings of the era;
The amount of ornamentation on the new construction should be limited relative
7 of 19
to the historic building, noting that post offices in Southern California of the PWA
Moderne era were specifically designed with limited ornamentation.
The horizontal orientation of the new construction app ears to clash with the
verticality of the historic building;
The relationship of the fenestration between the historic building and the new
construction needs to be more apparent and compatible;
Given drought conditions, the utility of including a wate r feature within the
project’s landscape design for the site is not apparent, or necessary. If a water
feature is ultimately proposed, its design should not include any type of runnel;
The amount of glazing proposed may warrant consideration for the i nstallation of
solar control for windows, particularly on the south and west elevations; and
The overall design and purpose of the interpretative area on the southeast corner
of the site should be reviewed for relationship to the historical, cultural, an d
architectural importance of the Post Office. The interpretative area should not
include any bicycle parking.
Discussion
A Development Review Permit (DRP) is intended to allow the construction of certain
projects , subject to Planning Commission review a nd approval, for which the design,
siting, and use could result in an adverse impact on the surrounding area. In addition to
the required DRP findings provided in th e City Council’s Draft Statement of Official
Action (Attachment A), the following issues sh ould be considered by the Council in its
de novo review of the proposed project:
Whether the location, size, massing, and placement of the proposed structure on
the site is appropriate and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood;
Whether the loc ation of the proposed uses within the project are appropriate and
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood;
Whether the proposed siting and design should be permitted by weighing the
public need for the benefit to be derived from the proposed site pl an use against
the impact which it may cause; and
8 of 19
Whether the project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code and General
Plan.
The DRP review is necessitated as a result of a 14,490 square -foot, three -story addition
being proposed at the rear of the Landmark building. The addition would replace an
existing, non -historic loading dock and canopy at the rear of the existing building and
would be centered on the building in response to its historic symmetrical form. It would
be setback approximatel y 40 feet from the front elevation of the building (along 5 th
Street) and 24 feet from each of the side edges of the existing building. The proposed
addition would wrap the rear corner of the historic building and fully extend to the
ground level in the vi cinity of 4 th Court, the rear alley. An internal reconfiguration of floor
plates and plate height levels would enable the new addition and third floor roofline to
only extend approximately five feet above the existing roofline of the historic building.
Th e rooftop mechanical equipment screens would be equally recessed to avoid
competing with the Landmark features and maintain a low profile along the street.
Although this addition is contemporary in its design approach and materiality, it subtly
expresse s its historic compatibility by replicating the rhythm of the prominent vertical
pilasters on the historic façade onto the rear addition where bays of equal size are
created. In addition, the design incorporates a distinct break between the historic
build ing and the new construction, giving an overall impression that the addition is
separate and distinct from the historic building. Staff believes that the applicant has
designed a project that has an appropriate mass and scale that is respectful of its
sur roundings.
The historic building is currently sited on the property with a 26 -foot setback from 5 th
Street and a 30 -foot side setback from Arizona Avenue. Although not subject to any
mandatory setback requirements, these open spaces were improved over ti me with
concrete landscape planters. These planters, coupled with a large concrete monument
ground sign, are bulky in design and hamper visibility to the Landmark building. As none
of these features are considered to be historic or character -defining, the se features
would be removed and the spaces would be redesigned to include new landscaping,
9 of 19
site amenities (tables and seating), and water features for general use and enjoyment
by on -site employees.
Prior to the Planning Commission’s review of the DRP a nd Variance, on December 14,
2015, after much discussion and debate, the Landmarks Commission approved a
Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a five -foot in height security fence
on th e perimeter of the property . The Landmarks Commission ’s approval was based on
the visually permeable design and low height of the fence which would allow the historic
building to remain integrated into the public realm of Downtown, while still providing the
desired security sought by the building’s owner. N o appeal of this approval was filed
within the required timeframe for appeal.
When reviewing a DR Permit, the Planning Commission is asked to consider “the
physical location, size, massing and placement of proposed structures on the site".
Because fen ces do not have mass, the Planning Commission does not, as a matter of
long -standing practice, review the location or appropriateness of a fence while reviewing
a DR Permit. Fences are considered part of project landscaping and, therefore, with in
the purvi ew of the design review body. The Landmarks Commission serves as the
design review body for this property because the former Post Office is a designated City
Landmark, and the property on which the former Post Office is located has been
designated as a La ndmark Parcel. Therefore, in light of the Landmarks Commission’s
approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the fence, and because the fence was
not deemed to be within the purview of the Planning Commission scope of review of the
DR permit, the a pproval of the fence is not subject to appeal before Council.
The fence is consistent with the 1988 Zoning Ordinance, which allows for a fence on the
property in the location and at the height that was approved by the Landmarks
Commission. In addition, i n recognition of the building’s historic service to the public as
a community gathering space, the applica nt is proposing a 200 square foo t
“commemorative corner”. The intent is to develop imagery that honors the building’s
past as a Post Office.
10 of 19
As a d esignated City Landmark and pursuant to the Preservation Covenant , all work
performed must be consistent to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties. The project design has been informed by archival
documentation and the applicant has retained a Preservation Architect to oversee the
treatment of the historic exterior and the protected original interior lobby. All exterior
work requires a Certificate of Appropriateness in accordance with the Landmarks
Ordinance and all interior alterations require City Council approval in accordance with
the Preservation Covenant . Staff believes that the project is consistent with the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (“Standards”) specific to “rehabilitation”. Originally
a US Post Office, the building would be repurposed into a creative office. All work
would affect the rear elevation and roof area, which are not character defining features
of the property. This new use would not impact any of the historic and distinctive
mate rials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships in accordance with the Standards.
The proposed addition is contemporary in its design approach and utilization of
materials. Although compatible with the historic building with its subtle references,
inc luding the strong horizontal lines of the existing poured in place concrete and the
size/rhythm of the historic bays on the 5 th Street elevation, there would not be any
sense of false historicism.
Parking Variance
When the building was originally constru cted as a US Post Office in 1938, the use was
not subject to a mandatory parking requirement because it was Federal property and
the City did not have authority to impose zoning requirements . However, over time as
customer and employee need increased, non -required parking was incrementally added
to the site. At the time the building was sold and purchased by the applicant in 2013,
there were 43 spaces onsite. Pursuant to the City’s Downtown Interim Ordinance (IZO)
No. 2490 (CCS), which established interim procedures and regulations for Downtown
pending completion of the Downtown Community Plan, this project is being reviewed for
compliance with the 1988 zoning ordinance. The site is located in the C3 -C zoning
district. The City’s parking requirement stand ards (SMMC Section 9.04.10.08.030 (d))
specify that existing buildings are not subject to the provision of any new parking except
11 of 19
when they are expanded, and at such time, only the new building floor area is
considered for determining a minimum parking req uirement. As a result, the project’s
net amount of 14,490 square feet of new floor area would necessitate a total of 48
parking spaces. Since the redesigned site would only accommodate 25 parking spaces,
pursuant to SMMC 9.04.20.10.030(b), the applicant i s seeking a Variance for a
reduction of 23 parking spaces.
A parking variance is intended to provide a mechanism for relief from the strict
application of the parking requirements as a result of the subject property’s unique and
special conditions. In it s de novo review of the request, the Council must be able to
expressly determine that all 11 of the required variance findi ngs could be met, which
include the following findings that are fully detailed in the Draft Statement of Official
Action (Attachment A):
There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the
property that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity under an identical
zoning classification.
The granting of such variance would not be detrimental nor in jurious to the
property or improvements in the general vicinity.
The strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships, not including economic difficulties or
economic hardships.
Staff believes that as a project that includes the retention of a designated City
Landmark, there are special circumstances and unique hardships that constrain the
project site and impact the ability to accommodate required parking for the proposed
addition. T he property is zoned C3C (Downtown Commercial Overlay) and occupies a
prominent corner in Downtown. The property is improved with a 1938 PWA building
that has been designated as a City Landmark and the property has been designated as
a Landmark Parcel. B eloved by the community for its distinct PWA Moderne style and
elements along its street facing elevations and built -to -last “poured in place” concrete,
12 of 19
the building and its siting offers little opportunity for expansion, and the accommodation
of any addit ional surface or subterranean parking. Consistency with the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards amplifies the challenges as it limits the extent of any expansion
plans both horizontally and vertically. Moreover, the Preservation Covenant protects the
in terior lobby and its high volume ceiling plate height, which further restricts the
establishment of additional floor area within the existing envelope of the building that
could then allow for new parking at the rear.
In addition, the granting of a varia nce would not be in conflict with the general purposes
of the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. As a designated Landmark, the City has
adopted policies throughout its various regulatory land use documents that encourage
or incentivize flexibility indicatin g the importance of preserving historic resources and
encouraging adaptive reuse. The City’s Land Use and Circulation Element of the
General Plan (Policy HP1.5) encourages efforts to “support rehabilitation and
restoration of historic resources through fl exible zoning policies and modifications to
development standards . . . such as . . . reduced parking requirements…”. This
Element further recognizes the import to “develop measures in the Santa Monica
Zoning Ordinance to address appropriate additions to, and adaptive reuse of historic
buildings.”
The proposed parking variance would not be detrimental or injurious to improvements in
the general vicinity with consideration given to the fact that the property was in use as
the City’s main post office for nearly 75 years. When it was operated as a US Post
Office, the property had no customer parking. Per the traffic analysis in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration adopted for the project, the new use is expected to generate 2,242
less daily vehicle trips th an the post office use. In addition, SMMC Section
9.04.20.10.050 specifies that requests for the reduction of the automobile parking space
requirements must be accompanied by a Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
plan that incorporates measures to reduc e parking demand. Council’s review should
determine if the TDM plan that has been proposed would adequately address the
proposed parking shortfall.
13 of 19
In its review of the project, the Planning Commission expressed support for the overall
TDM plan as it in cludes a robust program of measures that are intended to expand
transportation choices by providing employee incentives to reduce single occupancy
vehicle trips to the project site, thus reducing the overall parking demand. Further, any
future employer wo uld be subject to the TDM ordinance (SMMC Chapter 9.53), which
establishes an AVR goal of 2.2 in the Downtown for employers with more than 30
employees. Staff has worked extensively with the applicant to develop a TDM plan that
is tailored to the project o perations and will address any parking shortfall. The TDM
program is required to begin reporting compliance one year after Certificate of
Occupancy for the building and annually thereafter. The following are highlights of the
required TDM program:
An “E mployer Transportation Coordinator” to oversee implementation of the TDM
Plan within the company and a commitment to fund and provide continued
education to the identified employer;
A monthly employee transportation allowance of at least 15% more than the
monthly cost of leased parking provided to employees and not less than
$230/month. A daily option is also provided as an alternative;
24 short -term bike parking spaces (above the municipal code requirement of
four) and the provision of lockers/showers on -site in support of the alternative
transportation mode;
Minimum of 12 secure bicycle parking spaces;
6 free on -site shared bicycles intended only for employee use during the work
day;
On -site bicycle valet during all hours automobile valet is offered;
Prov ide employees with access to a carshare service for business and personal
use during the work day; and
One EV/hybrid company car for business -related use for employees who have
left their car s at home.
Separate from the TDM program requirements is a recom mended condition that
14 of 19
requires 23 off -site parking spaces to be secured through written lease agreement with
another property owner and deed restriction for exclusive use by the applicant during
business hours. As detailed in Condition #60 of the Draft St atement of Official Action
(Attachment A), the location of the of f -site parking should be convenient to the project
site bu t not in the Downtown core area .
Appeal Summary
The appellant filed a timely appeal on May 4, 2016. In the appeal statement, the
appellant expresses concern and an opinion that the proposed project:
C onflicts with the vision, compatibility and pedestrian orientation goals of the
Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) of the General Plan for the Downtown
neighborhood;
Conflicts wi th key preservation issues and directives in the LUCE;
C onflicts with the vision and pedestrian orientation goals of the Draft Downtown
Community Plan;
I ncludes a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program as part of the
project’s conditions of a pproval that raises questions; and
R equires a Conditional Use Permit to allow ground floor office use in the C3 -C
zone.
Appeal Analysis
In contrast to the appellant’s statement, staff believes that the proposed project would
be a successful example of adaptive reuse in the City’s Downtown and would further the
goals, policies, and development parameters specified in the Land Use and Circulation
Element of the General Plan (LUCE) and the Draft Downtown Community Plan (DCP).
Consistency with the LUCE
T he LUCE firmly establishes the importance of preserving the City’s important historic
Downtown buildings and their role in creating a vibrant and progressive district. The
LUCE has identified adaptive reuse as a means of accommodating new growth and
15 of 19
devel opment and encourages new creative uses that may capitalize on the flexibility
and incentives that preservation offers.
The LUCE further establishes a vision for Downtown that is culturally rich, diverse and
attractive. The adaptive reuse of this belove d building would assure that it would
remain an important part of the ever -evolving downtown, and a reflection of the area’s
history. The proposal furthers Downtown Goal D7 to “Create a balanced mix of uses in
the Downtown.” Furthermore, the project is a cutting edge example of adaptive reuse
and furthers the overarching Historic Preservation goal of preserving and protecting
historic resources (Goal HP1) and integrating historic preservation practices into
sustainable development decisions (Goal HP3) and adheres to the policy (D7.5) of
encouraging adaptive reuse of historic resources. The site design proposes a gathering
space at the street corner which will feature an interpretative element that reflects on
the building’s history as a post office. This supports the LUCE goal of enhancing the
quality and character of the streetscape and urban pattern in the Downtown (Goal D9)
and the Transportation goal (T3) of providing streets that are pleasant for all users. The
proposed Parking Variance is consistent with Historic Preservation Policies which
encourages rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources through flexible zoning
practices including reduced parking requirements.
Consistency with the Draft D owntown Community Plan
Although not required, t he proposed project is consistent in its current form with t he
goals and policies preliminarily identified in the Draft Downtown Community Plan (DCP ).
Th e Draft DCP presents a balanced urban design and preservation strategy that
strongly encourages adapti ve reuse that reinforce s the existing and unique character of
Downtown . The proposed historic interpretative element adds variety to the streetscape
and adheres to the goal of creating a balanced and diverse system of high quality open
spaces in Downtown.
Concerning the proposed parking variance, the Draft DCP establishes standards and
regulations that would reduce the parking requirement for the proposed project.
Currently, the project is subject to a parking ratio of one space per 300 square feet of
16 of 19
fl oor area. Hypothetically, if the project was subject to the parking standards
recommended in the Draft Downtown Community Plan, which requires one parking
space per 500 square feet of floor area, the project would have a parking requirement of
29 spaces to tal and the extent of the parking shortfall would be significantly reduced
from 23 spaces down to four spaces. The DCP takes on an even more progressive
stance when considering adaptive reuse as it suggests not requiring any additional
parking if a projec t scope includes the appropriate preservation or restoration of a
designated historic resource . The newly adopted Zoning Ordinance already contains
similar incentives for the adaptive reuse of designated historic resources .
TDM Plan
The recommended TDM p lan is outlined in Condition #58 of the Draft Statement of
Official Action (Attachment A) an d identifies strategies for expanding transportation
choice for employees by incentivizing employees to reduce single -occupancy vehicle
trips to the project site th ereby lessening the demand for parking to be provided in
support of the Parking Variance request. The applicant’s TDM Plan exceeds the
mandatory requirements specified in 1988 Zoning Ordinance Section 9.16.120 for a
development project that is anticipated to generate more than ten p.m. peak period
automobile trips. The applicant anticipates a maximu m of 54 employees after build -out
of the project. Any future employers in the project will be required to comply with the
new TDM ordinance (SMMC Chapter 9.53).
No Additional Land Use Entitlements are Required .
The appellant contends that the project requires a Conditional Use Permit to allow
creative office on the first floor. However, as specified in the Downtown IZO, this project
is being reviewe d for compl iance with the land use regulations described in the 1988
Z oning O rdinance , and staff accordingly has determined that the subject project, as
presented, is not required to obtain a additional Conditional Use Permit. O n June 30,
2014, the zoning conformanc e review for Business License #210156 was completed for
Skye Collection LLC to operate a Creative Office use. The business was described on
the application as follows:
17 of 19
“Creative office use. We coordinate the design and manufacturing of clothing.
Our off ice will include a clothing design studio as well as personnel that
coordinate the manufacturing of such clothing and handle general administrative
tasks including accounting, marketing, public relations and human resources.
Clothing manufacturing will no t take place on -site.”
Since a new creative office use (movie/television production) is proposed in a building
where an existing creative office use (clothing design) is already permitted , it was
determined that no additional land use entitlement (i.e. CUP ) is required.
When the business license zoning conformance review was completed by staff, specific
functions of the clothing design component of the creative office use were restricted
from occurring within certain portions of the building in compliance with pedestrian
orientation requirements.
Conclusion
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the
Planning Commission to approve a Development Review Permit and Parking Variance
(15ENT -0138) in association with th e adaptive reuse and floor area expansion of the
former US Post Office building, located at 1248 5th Street, as creative office space
based on the findings and subject to the conditions described as an attachment to this
report.
Environmental Status
An I nitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to Sections
15063(c) and 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and the City
of Santa Monica CEQA Guidelines to assess the potential environmental effects of the
propos ed project and was adopted on April 20, 2016 by Resolution 16 -003 (Planning
Commission Series). Five environmental factors (Cultural Resources, Geology and
Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise and Construction -related Traffic had
potential issues that required mitigation to result in “Less than Significant” impacts. In
18 of 19
total, 23 mitigation measures have been developed that will be incorporated into the
project’s conditions of approval; 18 of these measures address the impacts on Cultural
Resources including, but not limited to:
• Preparation of a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) report;
• Preparation of a Protection Plan and Materials Conservation report;
• Demolition and Construction monitoring by a qualified architectural historian;
• Salvage a nd reuse of historic materials, when appropriate; and
• Inclusion of commemorative signage, interpretive educational program or public
art.
The remaining mitigation measures address mainly construction -related issues within
the other four environmental fact ors that required attention.
The Planning Commission adopted Resolution #16 -003 (PCS) adopting a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the
project on April 20, 2016 . The appellant did not appeal the Plan ning Commission’s
CEQA determination for the project and therefore, the MND is not part of the Council’s
review.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action required as a result of the
recommended action .
Prepared By: Scott Albright, Senior Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
19 of 19
Attachments:
A. Draft Statement of Official Action (16ENT -0065) (1248 5th St appeal)
B. Planning Commission Statement of Official Action April 20, 2016 (15ENT -0138)
(1248 5th St)
C. Plans for 16ENT -0065 (1248 5th Street appeal)
D. Planning Commission Staff Report April 20, 216
E. Planning Commission Staff Report March 16, 2016
F. Written comments
G. Written comments
H. powerpoint
City of Santa Monica
City Planning Division
CITY COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT INFORMATION
CASE NUMBER: 16ENT -0065
LOCATION: 1248 5 th Street
APPELL ANT: Jennifer Kennedy
APPLICANT: 1248 5 th Street, LLC
PROPERTY OWNER : 1248 5 th Street, LLC
CASE PLANNER: Scott Albright, Senior Planner
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Decision to
Approve Development Review Per mit and Variance
(15ENT0138) allow ing the construction of a new three -
story, 32 feet in height, 14,490 square -foot addition to the
former United States Post Office building as part of an
adaptive reuse project converting the existing Landmark
building to creative office space . A parking var iance is
also requested to reduce the required number of parking
spaces to be provided in accommodation of the added
floor area from 48 spaces to 25 spaces .
CEQA STATUS: An Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration was
prepared pursuant to Sections 15 063(c) and 15070 of
the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and
the City of Santa Monica CEQA Guidelines to assess the
potential environmental effects of the proposed project
and was certified on April 20, 2016 by Resolution 16 -003
(Planning Co mmission Series).
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
2
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
8 /20/2016 D etermination Date
X
Approved based on the following findings and subject to the
conditions below.
Denied.
Other:
EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS IF
NOT APPEALED: Not Appealable
EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS
GRANTED: 1 year
LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE
EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION DATES*: 6 months
* Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City
Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit.
Each and all of the findings and determinations are based on the competent and
substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the
Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on
the substantial e vidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such
summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
FINDINGS :
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS
A. The physical location, size, massing and placement o f proposed structures on the
site and the location of proposed amenities within the project are compatible with
and relate harmoniously to surr ounding sites and neighborhoods in that t he project
design successfully integrates the proposed building addition with the historic
fabric of the former US Post Office building. The new addition will replace an
existing, non -historic loading dock and canopy at the rear of the existing building.
The proposed building mass will maintain the historic symmetry of the b uilding by
extending up the rear building elevation, wrapping the corner and creating a partial
third floor. This addition will be setback approximately 40 feet from the building’s
historic facade along 5th Street and 24 feet from the existing side elevat ions
(including the Arizona Avenue elevation). T he project will provide a working
example of innovative adaptive reuse of a landmark building which is an important
tool for consideration in Downtown and will be consistent in scale and mass with
buildings within the immediate vicinity.
B. The rights -of -way can accommodate autos and pedestrians, including ade quate
parking and access . The property is located on the northwest corner of Arizona
Avenue and Fifth Street, two public streets, and Fourth Court, a pub lic alley. Public
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
3
transit in the project vicinity is provided by both the Big Blue Bus and Metro. Bus
stops are provided nearby along Fourth Street, Arizona Avenue and Wilshire
Boulevard. Furthermore, the property is located within one -half mile of the
f orthcoming Exposition Light Rail line, which will be operational in May 2016. The
project vicinity also provides an extensive network of on -street bike facilities,
including striped bike lanes on Arizona Avenue and Sixth Street. Parking for 25
vehicles an d bike facilities accommodating 24 bicycles will be provided on -site for
employee use.
C. The health and safety services (police, fire, etc.) and public infrastructure (e.g.
utilities) are sufficient to accommodate the new development, in that the proposed
development is located within an urbanized area that is already adequately served
by existing City infrastructure. No new safety services or public infrastructure will
be required by this project.
D. Any on -site provision of housing or parks and public open space, which are part of
the required project mitigation measures required in Part 9.04.10.12 (Project
Mitigation Measures) of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and
Zoning Ordinance, satisfactorily meet the goals of the mitigation program, in that
the project applicant will not be required to pay an in -lieu fee as outlined in the
above referenced code section given that the project does not include the
construction of more than 15,000 net rentable square feet or the addition to an
existing co mmercial project of 10,000 net rentable square feet or more of medical
office floor area.
E. The project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code and General Plan . The
project is required to be in compliance with the goals, policies and development
pa rameters contained in the Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan
as adopted in July 2010. The subject property has been included within
“Downtown Core” land use district, and would be subject to the general goals and
policies established in the Downtown section of Chapter 2.6. In terms of
development parameters, those c ited in Chapter 2.1 for the Downtown Core would
apply. Currently, this section contemplates the development of a specific plan for
the area that will establish maximum height , floor area and other development
parameters in the future. In the interim, the applicable land use designations of
the Bayside District Specific Plan and the 1984 General Plan continue to apply. In
general, the proposal furthers Downtown Goal D7 to “Cr eate a balanced mix of
uses in the Downtown.” Furthermore, the project is a well -executed example of
adaptive reuse and furthers the overarching Historic Preservation goal of
preserving and protecting historic resources (Goal HP1) and integrating historic
preservation practices into sustainable development decisions (Goal HP3) and
adheres to t he policy (D7.5) of encouraging adaptive reuse of historic resources.
The proposed Parking Variance is consistent with Historic Preservation Policy
HP1.5 which encourages rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources
through flexible zoning practic es including reduced parking requirements.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
4
F. Reasonable mitigation measures have been included for all adverse impacts
identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Initial Study/
Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzed environmental i mpacts that would be
potentially affected by the proposed project and determined that potentially
significant impacts with respect to cultural resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Construction -related Traffic would be
r educed to less than significant levels with the incorporation of mitigation measures
imposed on the project. Less than significant or no impacts would occur with
respect to the following issues: Aesthetics/Shadows, Agriculture and Forestry
Resources, Air Q uality, Biological Resources, Construction Effects, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral
Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, Utilities, and Mandatory
Findings of Significance .
VARIANCE FINDI NGS
a) There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the
property involved, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, or
to the intended use or development of the property that do not apply to other
properti es in the vicinity under an identical zoning classification in that the property
is zoned C3C (Downtown Commercial Overlay) and is improved with a 1938 PWA
Moderne building that has been designated as a City Landmark. The building,
including historic feat ures of its interior lobby, is also protected by a Preservation
Covenant imposed by the United States Postal Service at the time of sale. This
restricts the significant remodeling of portions of the existing envelope of the
building , specifically within t he lobby space, and limits the establishment of
additional floor area above. As a designated Landmark and pursuant to the
preservation covenant, consistency to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards is
required, and amplifies the challenges of providing additional parking. The
building’s existing construction of poured in place concrete eliminates the ability to
add any subterranean parking.
b) The granting of such variance will not be detrimental nor injurious to the property
or improvements in the genera l vicinity and district in which the property is located
in that t he property was in use as the City’s main post office for nearly 75 years.
When it was operated as a post office, the property had no customer parking. And
per the City’s Mitigated Negativ e Declaration, the new use is expected to generate
2,242 less daily vehicle trips than did the post office use and hence will have a far
reduced parking demand.
c) The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships, not including economic difficulties or
economic hardships in that i t is not possible to construct additional parking on the
project site. The site is constrained by the existence of the landmark building
whose character defining features must be protected in accordance with the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. The existing conditions of the building,
constructed of poured in place concrete, impacts the ability to excavate the
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
5
property to create a subterranean parking garag e without potentially compromising
the historic building’s integrity.
d) The granting of a variance will not be contrary to or in conflict with the general
purposes and intent of this Chapter, nor to the goals, objectives, and policies of
the General Plan. T he Land Use and Circulation Element, in Policy HP1.5,
encourages efforts to “Support rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources
through flexible zoning policies and modifications to development standards, as
appropriate, subject to discretionary review, required findings and neighborhood
compatibility such as: the in -kind replacement of nonconforming features, reduced
parking requirements, building height, parcel coverage, and building envelope
requirements”. Furthermore, the General Plan has ide ntified a specific Historic
Preservation action in Chapter 2.3 to “Develop measures in the Santa Monica
Zoning Ordinance to address appropriate additions to, and adaptive reuse of
historic buildings.”
e) The variance would not impair the integrity and chara cter of the district in which it
is to be located in that t he requested parking variance fosters and encourages the
preservation and adaptive reuse of this historically important building constructed
in 1938 in the Downtown.
f) The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed variance in that t he need
for the requested parking variance is a result of the retention and preservation of
the landmark building on the subject property. Moreover, per the General Plan
encourages a parking management approach for the Downtown, which is well
served by public transit, including buses and the new Exposition Light Rail Line
Extension, and bike lanes.
g) There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed v ariance would not be detrimental to public
health and safety in that the subject property is located within a developed
urbanized environment that is adequately served by existing infrastructure, public
utilities and services. It is not anticipated that ap proval of the subject application
will create a need for additional utilities or services.
h) There will be adequate provisions for public access to serve the subject variance
proposal. The project site is located in the Downtown, which is a transit priority
area as designated by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
The property is located on the northwest corner of Arizona Avenue and Fifth Street,
two public streets, and Fourth Court, a public alley. Public transit in the project
vicinity is provided by both the Big Blue Bus and Metro. Bus stops are provided
nearby along Fourth Street, Arizona Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard. Furthermore,
the property is located within one -half mile of the forthcoming Exposition Light Rail
line, which will b e operational in May 2016. The project vicinity also provides an
extensive network of on -street bike facilities, including striped bike lanes on
Arizona Avenue and Sixth Street.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
6
i) For the reduction of the automobile parking space requirements, the reduction is
based and conditioned upon an approved parking reduction plan that incorporates
transportation control measures that have been demonstrated to be effective in
reducing parking needs and that are monitored, periodically reviewed for continued
effectivene ss, and enforced by the City as contained in Section 9.04.10.08.050 of
the Chapter. The appli cant has proposed a Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Program which is described in detail and included as part of the project’s
Conditions of Approval.
j) Al l the above specified requirements need not apply to variances which the Zoning
Administrator finds are essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare
and are not in conflict with the General Plan and where the granting of the variance
will no t be materially detrimental nor injurious to property or improvements in the
general vicinity and district in which the property is located , in that the granting of
the requested parking variance will foster the rehabilitation, restoration and
adaptive re -use of this important landmark building in Downtown.
k) The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in unreasonable
deprivation of the use or enjoyment of the property in that due to existing parcel
constraints, the location of exis ting improvements, and/or the placement of
adjacent uses, practical use or enjoyment of the subject parcel would not be
possible. The existing FAR is only 0.54, and the maximum allowable commercial
FAR is 3.5. With housing, the maximum FAR would be up to about 6.5. The
existing height is 25’-7”, the maximum height is 84 feet, and the proposed building
height is 32 feet, consistent with the City’s Interim Zoning Ordinance. Unlike other
properties in the Downtown, the landmark building prevents this proper ty from
approaching anywhere near its maximum development potential, and the cost of
rehabilitating and converting the use of the existing post office building to a
commercially viable and energy -efficient use is exceptional.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL :
PLAN NING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Project Specific Conditions
1. The Landmarks Commission shall pay particular attention to the following design
elements of the project:
a. The material choices for the cladding of the new construction shall be
appropriate and compatible with a typical PWA Moderne architectural style
building;
b. The verticality of design on the Landmark building shall be reflected in the
overall design for the new construction;
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
7
c. The amount of ornamentation on the new construction should be limited.
d. The fenestration on the new construction shall reference the historic pattern
found on the Landmark building
e. Given drought conditions, consider the necessity of in cluding a water
feature within the project’s landscape design for the site;
f. Consider the installation of solar control for windows, particularly on the
south and west elevations; and
g. The overall design and purpose of the Interpretative area given its lo cation
adjacent to a public street corner; and
2. The interpretative area located at the southeast corner of the Project site shall not
include bicycle parking.
3. Applicant is encouraged to present any proposed alterations to the historic interior
lobby to th e Landmarks Commission for their recommendation prior to formal
review of the proposed alterations by the City Council.
Administrative
4. The Planning Commission’s approval, conditions of approval, or denial of this
application may be appealed to the City Council if the appeal is filed with the Zoning
Administrator within fourteen consecutive days following the date of the Planning
Commissio n’s determination in the manner provided in Part 9.04.20.24, Sections
9.04.20.24.010 through 9.04.20.24.040 of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance. Any appeal
must be made in the form required by the Zoning Administrator. The approval of
this permit shall expire if the rights granted are not exercised within two years from
the permit’s effective date. Exercise of rights shall mean issuance of a building
permit to commence construction.
5. Within ten days of City Planning Division transmittal of the Statement of Offi cial
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 gr ounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. By signing
same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights applicant may possess
regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall be returned to the City
Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds
for potential permit revocation.
6. 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
acco rdance with the Zoning Administrator guidelines and shall remain in place until
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
8
a building permit is issued for the project. The sign shall be removed promptly
when a building permit is issued for the project or upon expiration of the Design
Compatibility Permit.
7. 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.
Conformance wit h Approved Plans
8. This approval is for those plans dated February 22, 2016 which includes panel
capacity and conduit stubs for installation of electrical outlets designed to allow the
simultaneous charging of a minimum number of 208/240 V 40 amp, grounded AC
outlets for at least 5 parking spaces. At least three additional parking spaces shall
include electric vehicle charging stations. Space shall be allocated in the Project
for the storage of energy fuel cells that will be used to store energy to power th e
electric vehicle charging stations. A copy of the Project Plans shall be maintained
in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent
with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval.
9. Min or amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of
Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to
Planning Commission Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the
plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission, Landmarks
Commission or Director of Planning.
10. 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.
Fees
11. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with
the requirements of Part 9.04.10.20 of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance of the Santa
Monica Municipal Code, Private Developer Cultural Arts Requirement.
If the developer elects to comply with these requirements by providing on -site
public art work or cultural facilities, no fin al City approval shall be granted until such
time as the Director of the Community and Cultural Services Department issues a
notice of compliance in accordance with Part 9.04.10.20 of the 1988 Zoning
Ordinance.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
9
12. No building permit shall be issued for the p roject until the developer complies with
the requirements of Chapter 9.72 of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance, the Child Care
Linkage Program.
If the developer elects to comply with these requirements by providing facilities in
lieu of fees, no building permits shall be issued for the project until the Director of
Planning and Community Development, in consultation with the Director of the
Commun ity and Cultural Services Department, has issued a notice that the
developer has complied with the requirements of this Chapter.
13. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with
the requirements of Chapter 9.73 of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance, the
Transportation Impact Fee Program.
14. The proposed project is subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.74, Affordable
Housing Commercial Linkage Fee.
15. The proposed project is subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.75, Parks and
Recr eation Development Impact Fee.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
16. Pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City
Planning Division will coordinate a monitoring and reporting program regarding any
required changes to the projec t made in conjunction with project approval and any
conditions of approval, including those conditions intended to mitigate or avoid
significant effects on the environment. This program shall include, but is not limited
to, ensuring that the City Planning Division itself and other City divisions and
departments such as the Building and Safety Division, the Department of
Environmental and Public Works, the Fire Department, the Police Department, the
Planning and Community Development Department and the Fina nce Department
are aware of project requirements which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a
Building Permit, Certificate of Occupancy, or other permit, and that other
responsible agencies are also informed of conditions relating to their
responsibiliti es. Project owner shall demonstrate compliance with conditions of
approval in a written report submitted to the Planning Director and Building Officer
prior to issuance of a Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy, and, as
applicable, provide periodic reports regarding compliance with such conditions.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
10
Mitigation Measures
17. MM CR -1; Recordation: Prior to any alteration to or removal of building features
for the implementation of the proposed project, a Historic American Buildings
Survey (HABS) Level II recordation document shall be prepared by the applicant.
The work shall be completed by a qualified historic preservation professional who
meets the requirements of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications for history, architectura l history, and/or historic architecture
(pursuant to 36 CFR 61). The HABS document shall record the history of the
property and its contextual relationship to the overall history of the community as
well as the history of post office construction. Its phys ical condition, both historic
and current, should also be described in the document through the use of site
plans; original as ‐built drawings, as available; historical and current maps and
photographs; and written data and text. Field photos and notes shou ld also be
included as supporting exhibit material. All document components should be
completed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and
Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering Documentation (HABS standards).
This recordation d ocument shall include at a minimum:
A written historic and descriptive report completed in narrative format.
A sketch floor plan for each floor level shall accompany the recordation
document.
Large ‐format photographs in accordance with HABS guidelines and
standards shall be included in the report. Views shall include contextual
views, all exterior elevations, details views of significant exterior
architectural features, and interior views of significant historical architectural
features or spaces, includin g the interior “spy walk” and associated
elements . Such photographs shall be logged, tagged, and collected onto a
media storage device for safe archiving and copies provided to those
repositories receiving the HABS finished document.
A site plan coordinate d with the photo log shall also be included.
Available historic photographs and historic and/or current as built plans of
the site and its contributing resources shall be reproduced digitally or
photographically and included in the recordation document.
Th e HABS documentation shall be submitted to NPS for transmittal to the
Library of Congress, and archival copies shall be sent to the City of Santa
Monica Landmarks Commission (Community Development, City Planning
Division). In addition, one original copy of the documentation reproduced on
archival paper as specified above shall be assembled and one set offered
and (if accepted) sent to each of the following entities: The California
Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and Southern California
Coast al Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University,
Fullerton. The archives of the Santa Monica Conservancy. The archives of
the Santa Monica Historical Society. The archives of the City of Santa
Monica Public Library (Main Branch). The archives of the Huntington
Library, Arts Collections, and Botanical Gardens. Digital copies shall be
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
11
available for public review on the City of Santa Monica Historic Preservation
website and the Santa Monica Public Library website.
18. MM CR -2; Compliance with SOI Sta ndards: Any maintenance, repair,
stabilization, rehabilitation, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of any
portion of the Post Office building, including removal of its existing roof and rear
(west) elevation loading dock wall and features, shall be conducted in a manner
consistent with SOI Standards for Rehabilitation.
19. MM CR -3; Rehabilitation Plan Coordination: Any rehabilitation plans shall be
developed in conjunction with a qualified historic architect who satisfies the
Secretary of the Interi or’s Professional Qualification Standards for History,
Architectural History, or Architecture pursuant to 36 CFR 61. The Applicant shall
obtain the services of a qualified historic architect to review and verify the Project
plans comply with the SOI Standa rds.
20. MM CR -4; Santa Monica Landmarks Commission Oversight: Detailed design
plans involving modifications to the building and parcel shall be submitted to the
City’s Landmarks Commission for their review and approval prior to the beginning
of any construct ion work, including grading or demolition activities. A Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA) approved by the Landmarks Commission is also required
from the City for the implementation of the proposed project. Any subsequent
alterations of the property may require additional review and approval by the City’s
Landmarks Commission and/or City staff.
21. MM CR -5; Protection Plan and Materials Conservation Report: A Protection
Plan and Materials Conservation Report consistent with SOI Standards shall be
prepared by a qualified historic preservation professional who satisfies the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History,
Architectural History, or Architecture pursuant to 36 CFR 61. This report shall be
submitted to the City for the ir review and approval.
22. MM CR -6; Salvage and Reuse of Historic Material: In compliance with SOI
Standards, original historic materials, features, and objects shall be salvaged to
the extent feasible and reused in the repair, rehabilitation of the Post Off ice building
in accordance with MM CRs 4 and 5.
23. MM CR -7; Historic Materials Replacement: In compliance with SOI Standards,
in cases where the project would replace a distinctive historic feature or material,
the new feature shall match the original/old in design, color, texture, and other
visual qualities, and, where possible, shall match materials. All such work shall be
accurately reproduced based on historical, pictorial, and physical documentation
and evidence.
24. MM CR -8; Compatible New Construction: Co nsistent with SOI Standards, the
proposed project shall be differentiated from the historic building, but compatible
in terms of size, scale, proportions, massing, height, design, material, color, and
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
12
texture. For any new construction proposed for the Post Office building, a qualified
historic architect, architectural historian, and/or builder familiar with historic
construction techniques, issues, and material shall be consulted during the entire
design process to ensure that the new permanently -built form s of the connecting
addition will evoke a style compatible with the original building. New construction
associated with the connecting building shall be designed and executed in
accordance with the concepts described in the SOI Standards and Preservation
B rief No. 14: New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings, Preservation Concerns
published by NPS. Concept and detailed plans (e.g., architectural, structural, and
mechanical) for the proposed new addition and other associated work to the
historic building and immediate site shall be submitted by the applicant to the Santa
Monica Landmarks Commission for their review and approval prior to issuance of
any permits (i.e. grading, demolition, building) and project implementation.
25. MM CR -9; California Historical Building Code Compliance: All work for code
mitigation such as egress, fire safety, railing heights, door widths, accessibility, etc.
shall utilize and follow the perspective code of the California Historical Building
Code and the relevant guidelines spec ific in the SOI Standards. Access ramps and
lifts, as required, shall be placed along secondary elevations.
26. MM CR -10; Demolition/Construction Monitoring: The project applicant shall
retain a qualified architectural historian, historic architect, or histor ic preservation
professional to conduct on ‐site construction monitoring during the demolition and
construction phases of the project. Newly uncovered features shall be
documented. Additionally, an approved Native American monitor(s) shall be
present for all ground disturbing activities that involve excavation of the proposed
project’s basement level. The monitor shall prepare the necessary written and
illustrated documentation in construction monitoring progress reports or memos.
This document shall incl ude any supporting material, including photographs,. The
completed documentation shall be submitted to the City for inclusion in the
property’s internal landmark file. A final sign ‐off of the project is required by the
consulting monitor in coordination wi th the project contractor/design team and City
building inspector prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
27. MM CR -11; Compatible New Landscape: Project landscape plans shall adhere
to SOI Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings and, as applicable, to SOI Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural landsc apes. According to
these Standards, it is recommended that landscape features that are important in
defining the historic character of the site should not be removed. Any plans
involving the removal or replacement of noted important landscape features shou ld
be developed in conjunction with a qualified architectural historian, historic
architect, historic preservation professional, or historic landscape architect who
satisfies the SOI Professional Qualification Standards in their respective field(s),
pursua nt to 36 CFR 61. Any plan for removal or replacement of such landscape
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
13
features shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Santa Monica’s Landmarks
Commission.
28. MM CR -12; Canary Island Palm Tree Protection: The mature Canary Island
palm tree located sou th of the subject property shall be retained as part of the
proposed project’s future landscaping unless its removal is authorized in
compliance with the City’s Landmarks Ordinance. If it is determined that the tree’s
removal is authorized pursuant to the City’s Landmark Ordinance, a photographic
documentation report shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian,
historic architect, historic preservation professional, or historic landscape architect
who satisfies the SOI Professional Qualificatio n Standards in their respective
field(s), pursuant to 36 CFR 61. This report shall document the significance of the
Canary Island palm tree and its association with the site and post office as well as
its physical condition, both historic and current throu gh photographs and text.
Photographic documentation should be taken digitally (high resolution) by a
photographer familiar with the recordation of historic features and resources.
Copies of the report shall be provided to the Landmarks Commission (Planning
and Community Development, City Planning Division) and the City’s Public Library
(Main Branch). This documentation can be covered in the HABS documentation
required by MM CR -1.
29. MM CR -13; Structural and Shoring Plans: The structural and shoring plans
prep ared for the Project shall comply with the SOI Standards; State Historical
Building Code, as applicable; and other relevant preservation briefs, bulletins,
references and guidelines. Such plans shall be reviewed for SOI Standards
compliance by a qualified historic architect.
30. MM CR -14; Seismic Plans: The seismic plans prepared for the Project shall
comply with the SOI Standards; State Historical Building Code, as applicable; and
other relevant preservation briefs, bulletins, references, and guidelines. Such
plans shall be reviewed by a qualified historic architect to ensure compliance with
SOI Standards.
31. MM CR -15; Mechanical Plans: The mechanical plans prepared for the Project
shall comply with the SOI Standards; State Historical Building Code, as applicabl e;
and other relevant preservation briefs, bulletins, references, and guidelines. Such
plans shall be reviewed by a qualified historic architect to ensure compliance with
SOI Standards.
32. MM CR -16; Interpretative Signage and/or Educational Program, or Publi c
Artwork: To assist the public in understanding the historical, cultural, and
architectural importance of the Post Office building, the applicant shall design and
install an interpretative sign, artwork/ display, and/or plaque adjacent to or near the
reha bilitated building. Public signage or artwork installed at the site may
incorporate salvaged “period appropriate” items from the structure and any
historical information, photographs, plans, postcards, etc. of the property in a
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
14
creative medium accessible o r visible to the public. Any signage or artwork should
include or interpret information specific to the history and architecture of the site
and its historical association with the U.S. Postal Service. This signage or artwork/
display shall be developed wi th the assistance of a qualified architectural historian
or historic preservation professional who satisfies the applicable SOI Professional
Qualifications Standards pursuant to 36 CFR 61 and in coordination with the City
and shall be approved by the Landm arks Commission.
33. MM CR -17; Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources: In the event
of any inadvertent discovery of prehistoric or historic -period archaeological
resources during construction, the applicant shall immediately cease all work
within 5 0 feet of the discovery. The applicant shall immediately notify the City of
Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department and shall retain
a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) to evaluate the significance of the
discovery prior to res uming any activities that could impact the site/discovery. This
investigation must be driven by a Treatment Plan that sets forth explicit criteria for
evaluating the significance of resources discovered during construction and
identifies appropriate data r ecovery methods and procedures to mitigate project
effects on significant resources. The Treatment Plan shall be prepared by an RPA
familiar with both historical resources and prehistoric archaeological resources
prior to further excavation or site investi gation following initial discovery. The
Treatment Plan shall also provide for a final technical report on all cultural resource
studies and for the curation of artifacts and other recovered remains at a qualified
curation facility, to be funded by the appl icant. If the archaeologist determines that
the find may qualify for listing in the California Register, the site shall be avoided
or a data recovery plan shall be developed. Any required testing or data recovery
shall be directed by an RPA prior to resumi ng construction activities in the affected
area. Work shall not resume until authorization is received from the City.
34. MM CR -18; Inadvertent Discovery of Paleontological Resources: In the event
that a paleontological resource is discovered, the find shall be assessed by a
qualified paleontologist for scientific significance and collected for curation, if
necessary. If significant resources are encountered, curation will occur according
to accepted standards as recommended by the Paleontologist in consultati on with
City staff.
35. MM GEO -1 : The proposed project shall be designed to comply with the most
recent Santa Monica Municipal Code and Santa Monica Building Code
requirements addressing geotechnical safety, as well as the recommendations of
the final design level geotechnical report addressing seismic and soils hazards.
These requirements and recommendations, as established in the Geotechnical
Report for the proposed project (Geotechnologies, Inc., Revised June 2015). Any
subsequent revisions, shall be implem ented in the design of the project, including
but not limited to measures associated with grading, foundation design, and
temporary excavations. Permits shall not be issued for grading or construction until
the City has reviewed and approved project plans.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
15
36. MM HAZ -1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the contractor shall
conduct a comprehensive survey of lead based paint (LBP) and asbestos
containing materials (ACM). If such hazardous materials are found to be present,
the contractor shall follow all applicable local, state and federal regulations, as well
as best management practices related to the treatment, handling, and disposal of
LBP and ACM.
37. MM HAZ -2 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the project shall have a
contingency plan to be implemented in the event that contaminants or structural
features that could be associated with contaminants or hazardous materials are
suspected or discovered, including the presence of discovered underground
storage tanks or onsite wastewater treatme nt systems. The contingency plan shall
stipulate that if contaminants or buried equipment are found or suspected, work
around the area shall temporarily cease and appropriate measures shall be
undertaken. The contingency plan shall include a provision stat ing at what point it
is safe to continue with the excavation or demolition, and identify the person and/or
agency authorized to make that determination. The contingency plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the City’s Office of Sustainability or the Santa Monica
Fire Department, whichever applicable.
38. MM NOI -1 Construction Noise Management Plan . A Construction Noise
Management Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the City.
The Plan would address noise and vibration impacts and outline measures that
would be used to reduce impacts. Measures would include:
• To the extent that they exceed the applicable construction noise limits,
excavation, foundation -laying, and conditioning activities shall be restricted
to between the hours of 10:00 a.m . and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
in accordance with Section 4.12.110(d) of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code.
• The applicant’s construction contracts shall require implementation of the
following construction best management practices (BMPs) by all
con struction contractors and subcontractors working in or around the
project sites to reduce construction noise levels:
o The applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall ensure
that construction equipment is properly muffled according to
manufactures specifications or as required by the City’s Department
of Building and Safety, whichever is the more stringent.
o The applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall place
noise -generating construction equipment and locate construction
staging areas away from sensitive uses where feasible, to the
satisfaction of the Department of Building and Safety.
o The applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall implement
noise attenuation measures which may include, but are not limited
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
16
to, noise barriers or noise blankets to the satisfaction of the City’s
Department of Building and Safety.
• The applicant’s contracts with its construction contractors and
subcontractors shall include the requirement that construction staging
areas, construction worker parkin g and the operation of earthmoving
equipment within the project site, are located as far away from vibration -
and noise -sensitive sites as possible. Contract provisions incorporating the
above requirements shall be included as part of the project’s constru ction
documents, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City.
• The applicant shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded
trucks used during construction shall be routed away from residential streets
to the extent possible. Contract spe cifications shall be included in the
proposed project’s construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the
City prior to issuance of a grading permit.
39. MM TRAN -1 Construction Impact Mitigation Plan : The applicant shall prepare,
implement, and maintain a Construction Impact Mitigation Plan for review and
approval prior to issuance of a building permit to address and manage traffic during
construction.
The Plan shall be designed to:
• Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding street network.
• Minimize parki ng impacts both to public parking and access to private
parking to the greatest extent practicable.
• Ensure safety for both those constructing the project and the surrounding
community.
• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods.
• Fa cilitate coordination with adjacent or nearby construction projects.
The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall be subject to review and approval
by the following City departments: Public Works, Fire, Planning and Community
Development, and Police to e nsure that the Plan has been designed in accordance
with this mitigation measure and meets City standards. This review shall occur
prior to issuance of grading or building permits. It shall, at a minimum, include the
following:
Ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction
A detailed Construction Impact Mitigation Plan for work zones shall be
maintained. At a minimum, this shall include parking and travel lane
configurations; warning, regulatory, guide, and directional signage; and
are a sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes. The Plan shall include
specific information regarding the project’s construction activities that may
disrupt normal pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures to address
these disruptions. Such plans shall b e reviewed and approved by the
Strategic and Transportation Planning Division prior to commencement of
construction and implemented in accordance with this approval.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
17
Work within the public right -of -way shall be performed between 9:00 AM
and 4:00 PM. This w ork includes dirt and demolition material hauling and
construction material delivery. Work within the public right -of -way outside of
these hours shall only be allowed after the issuance of an after -hours
construction permit.
An applicant -funded onsite moni tor shall be present to ensure safety more
dangerous activities are occurring (e.g., raising of heavy equipment to roof
levels). The Plan shall identify the activities that would prompt the presence
of an onsite monitor.
Streets and equipment shall be clea ned in accordance with established
Public Works Department requirements.
Trucks shall only travel on a City -approved construction route. Truck
queuing/ staging shall not be allowed on Santa Monica streets. Limited
queuing may occur on the construction site itself.
Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the
preferred location for materials is to be onsite, with a minimum amount of
materials within a work area in the public right -of -way, subject to a current
Use of Public Property P ermit.
Any requests for work before or after normal construction hours within the
public right -of -way shall be subject to review and approval through the After
Hours Permit process administered by the Building and Safety Division.
Provision of off -street p arking for construction workers, which may include
the use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined
necessary by the City of Santa Monica.
Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to
Commencement of Const ruction
• The applicant shall advise the traveling public of impending construction
activities (e.g., information signs, portable message signs, media
listing/notification, and implementation of an approved Construction Impact
Mitigation Plan).
• The applicant shall obtain a Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation
Permit, Sewer Permit, and/or Oversize Load Permit, as well as any Caltrans
permits required, for any construction work requiring encroachment into
public rights of way, detours, or any other work wi thin a public right -of -way.
• The applicant shall provide timely notification of construction schedules to
all affected agencies (e.g., Big Blue Bus, Police Department, Fire
Department, Public Works Department, and Planning and Community
Development Departme nt) and to all owners and residential and
commercial tenants of property within a radius of 500 feet.
• The applicant shall coordinate construction work with affected agencies in
advance of start of work. Approvals may take up to two weeks per each
submittal .
• The applicant shall obtain Strategic and Transportation Planning Division
approval of any haul routes for earth, concrete, construction materials,
and/or equipment hauling.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
18
Project Operations
40. This project’s primary use shall be for creative office space, and for uses and
activities ancillary to the primary uses.
41. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to
surrounding properties or residents by reason of light s, noise, activities, parking or
other actions.
42. The project shall at all times comply with the provisions of the Noise Ordinance
(SMMC Chapter 4.12).
Final Design
43. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash enclosures, and signage shall
be sub ject to review and approval by the Landmarks Commission as a Certificate
of Appropriateness.
44. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 9.04.10.04 (Landscaping
Standards) of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance including use of water -conserving
landscaping mater ials, landscape maintenance and other standards contained in
the Subchapter.
45. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in
accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.130, 140, and 150 (1988 Zoning
Ordinance). Refuse areas shall b e of a size adequate to meet on -site need,
including recycling. The Landmarks Commission 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, an d shall be located in such a
way as to minimize noise and visual impacts to surrounding properties. Unless
otherwise approved by the Landmarks Commission, rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be located at least five feet from the edge of the roof. Except for
solar hot water heaters, no residential water heaters shall be located on the roof.
46. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the required front or street side
yard setback areas. The Landmarks Commission in its review shall pay particular
attention to the location and screening of such meters.
47. Prior to consideration of the project by the Landmarks Commission, the applicant
shall review disabled access requirements with the Building and Safety Division
and make any necessary changes in the project design to achieve compliance with
such requirements. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall pay particular
attention to the aesthetic, landscaping, and setback impacts of any ramps or other
features necessitated by accessibility requiremen ts.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
19
Construction Plan Requirements
48. Final building plans submitted for approval of a building permit shall include on the
plans a list of all permanent mechanical equipment to be placed indoors which may
be heard outdoors.
Demolition Requirements
49. Until such time as the demolition is undertaken, and unless the structure is
currently in use, the existing structure shall be maintained and secured by boarding
up all openings, erecting a security fence, and removing all debris, bushes and
planting that inhibi t 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.
50. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, applicant shall prepare for Building
Division approval a rodent and pest control plan to insure that demolition and
construction activities at the site do not create pest control impacts on the project
neighborhood.
Construction Period
51. 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.
52. 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 Sant a Monica with written certification that all trucks
leaving the site are covered in accordance with this condition of approval.
53. Developer shall prepare a notice, subject to the review by the Director of Planning
and Community Development, that lists all c onstruction 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.
54. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consistent with the public
hearing sign requirements which shall identify the addres s and phone number of
the owner and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and
complaints during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours
of permissible construction work.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
20
55. A copy of these conditions shall be post ed in an easily visible and accessible
location at all times during construction at the project site. The pages shall be
laminated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy.
Standard Conditions
56. Final approval of any mechanical equipment in stallation 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.
57. Construction period signage shall be subject to the approval of the Landmarks
Commissi on.
Variance Conditions
58. As part of the applicant’s request to reduce the automobile parking requirements
by 23 parking spaces, a Transportation Demand Management program shall be
required. One year following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the
building, and annually thereafter for the life of the project, the building owner shall
be required to submit to the City a report that details compliance with the following
Transportation Demand Management program:
A. Employee Transportation Coordin ator . Applicant shall designate an
Employee Transportation Coordinator (“ETC”) to manage all aspects of the
Transportation Demand Management ("TDM") Program and participate in
City -sponsored workshops and information roundtables. The ETC shall
provide new employee orientation, which includes TDM education and
training, commuter matching services, and creation of alternative
transportation plans upon commencement of employment. The ETC shall
be responsible for making information materials available on o ptions for
alternative transportation modes and opportunities, particularly programs
that involve commuter subsidies such as parking cash out and vanpool
subsidies. In addition, transit fare media and day/month passes will be
made available through the ET C to employees and visitors during typical
business hours. In the event that the ETC is changed, Developer shall
provide written notification to the City of the contact information for the new
ETC for the Project within 15 days of such change. If availab le, ETC
services may also be provided through a TMA.
B. Transportation Allowance. Applicant (or Applicant's successors and
assigns) shall offer a transportation allowance of at least 15% more than
the monthly cost of leased parking provided to employees and no less than
$230/month. An employee accepting the transportation allowance shall be
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
21
required to execute a contract agreeing that said employee will not utilize a
single occupancy vehicle for the majority (at least 51%) of their daily
commute distance mor e than an average of one day per week. The contract
shall also specify the employee’s alternative commute mode (e.g., transit,
bike, walk, Uber Pool or Lyft Line). As an alternative to the transportation
allowance program, the Applicant shall offer a dai ly transportation
allowance option (i.e. monthly transportation allowance divided by 20).
Employees participating in the daily transportation allowance program shall
not be required to execute the contract described above.
C. Guaranteed Return Trip . Applica nt (or Applicant's successors and assigns)
shall provide employees who participate in the Transportation Allowance
with a return trip to their point of commute origin at no additional cost to the
employee, when a personal emergency situation or unplanned o vertime
requires it.
D. Company Car. Applicant shall provide one compact EV or hybrid vehicle
for use specifically by employees who have left their vehicles at home and
need transportation specifically for business related purposes.
E. Car Share Account. A pplicant shall provide employees with access to a car
share service for business or personal use during the work day.
F. Transportation Information Center . Applicant (or Applicant's successors
and assigns) shall provide on -site transportation information l ocated where
the greatest number of employees and visitors are likely to see it. Such
transportation information may be provided in an on -site physical location,
such as a bulletin board or kiosk, through other media, such as on a website
or other digital means or both. Information shall include, but is not limited
to, the following:
Current maps, routes, and schedules for public transit routes within
one -half mile of the project site;
Transportation information including regional ridesharing agency,
loca l transit operators, and certified TMA where available;
Ridesharing promotions material supplied by commuter -oriented
organizations;
Bicycle route and facility information, including rental and sales
locations, regional/local bicycle maps and bicycle safet y information
within one -half mile of the project site;
A list of facilities available for carpoolers, vanpoolers, bicyclists,
transit riders and pedestrians at the site;
Walking and biking maps for employees and visitors, which shall
include but not be li mited to information about convenient local
services and restaurants within walking distance of the project; and
Information to employees of the project regarding local rental
housing agencies and rail -adjacent rental housing opportunities.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
22
G. Secured Storage For Bicycle Commuters . Applicant shall provide a location
in the Project for secure bicycle parking for bicycle commuters for
employees working in the building for a minimum of twelve (12)
bicycles. For purposes of this requirement, secure bicycle parkin g may
mean bicycle lockers, a locked cage, or other secure parking area.
H. On -site Bicycle Valet . Applicant shall provide bike valet, free of charge,
during all automobile valet operating hours.
I. Short -Term Bicycle Parking . Applicant shall provide a minimum of twenty -
four (24) bicycle parking spaces for short -term visitor use as shown on the
Project Plans.
J. On -site Company Bicycles . Applicant shall provide six (6) free on -site
shared bicycles intended for employee use during the work day (e.g.
Bike@Work Progr am). There shall be three male and three female
bicycles. Applicant shall provide bicycle helmets, front and back active
lights, reflective material on bikes and gloves, bike locks, bike bags, water
bottle holder.
K. Bicycle Education Program . Applicant sh all provide complimentary learn to
ride and bike education programs (e.g. Santa Monica’s Sustainable
Streets). The program shall include teaching adults how to ride, road safety,
and bike maintenance classes.
L. On -Site Showers and Lockers . A minimum of two (2) unisex showers and
thirty -six (36) clothing lockers shall be provided for on -site employees who
bicycle or use another active means, powered by human propulsion, of
getting to work or who exercise during the day. Lockers shall be distributed
with prio rity given to those who utilize commutes.
M. Rideshare Parking . Applicant (or Applicant's successors and assigns) shall
provide preferential parking correlated to demand, for employees who
commute to work in employer registered carpools.
N. Bicycle Parking Stand ards . Bicycle parking provided in the Project shall
meet the requirements of SMMC Section 9.28.140 (2015 Zoning
Ordinance).
O. Remote Office . Applicant shall provide employees with the option to work
remotely from home (or off -site) on occasion.
59. Applicant sh all provide an on -site parking attendant to assist with stacked parking
in the drive aisles during normal business hours.
60. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall secure 23 of f -site parking
spaces through written lease agreement (s) between the A pplicant and another
property owner (or owners) of a private parking facility. N ot all 23 spaces need to
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
23
be from the same property owner. In addition, t he leased parking spaces shall be
deed r estricted for exclusive use by the Applicant for the ter ms of any parking
lease. A ny deed restriction (s) shall be subject to approval of the City Attorney’s
office and shall be provided prior to certificate of occupancy and annually thereafter
to the Planning Director together with the copy (or copies) of the executed lease(s)
for those 23 spaces . The off -site private parking facility shall:
Be demonstrated to be underutilized through a peak parking demand study of
the off -site private parking facility, to be reviewed and approved by the City;]
Shall be conveniently accessible to the Project through non -motorized, active
transportation means (e.g. walk, bike); and
Shall be located anywhere within the Downtown Core LUCE designation but
outside the area bound by Wilshire Boulevard, 4 th Court alley, I -10 Fre eway,
and 2 nd Street (“Core Area”).
If the applicant is unable to secure 23 off -site parking spaces outside of the Core
Area within 180 days after undertaking documented good faith attempts to do so
prior to certificate of occupancy of the project, the app licant may then secure off -
site parking anywhere within the Downtown Core LUCE designation. A copy of
the written agreement stating the number of off -site spaces leased shall be
provided annually with the Project’s annual employer trip reduction plan subm ittal
to the City.
STRATEGIC AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
61. Final auto parking, bicycle parking and loading layouts specifications shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Strategic and Transportation Planning
Division:
http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Transportation/Transportation
_Management/ParkingStandards.pdf
62. Where a driveway, garag e, parking space or loading zone intersects with the public
right -of -way at the alley or sidewalk, hazardous visual obstruction triangles shall
be provided in accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.090. Please reference
the following standards:
http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Transportation/Transportation
_Management/HVO.pdf
63. Slopes of all driveways and ramps used for ingress or egress of parking facilities
shall be designed in accordance with the standards established by the Strategic
and Transportation Planning Manager but shall not exceed a twenty percent slope.
Please reference the following standards:
http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Transportation/Transportation
_Management/RampSlope.pdf
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
24
PUBLIC LANDSCAPE
64. Street trees shall be maintained, reloc ated or provided as required in a manner
consistent with the City’s Urban Forest Master Plan, per the specifications of the
Public Landscape Division of the Community & Cultural Services Department and
the City’s Tree Code (SMMC Chapter 7.40). No street tr ees shall be removed
without the approval of the Public Landscape Division.
65. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit all street trees that are adjacent to or
will be impacted by the demolition or construction access shall have tree protection
zones es tablished in accordance with the Urban Forest Master Plan. All tree
protection zones shall remain in place until demolition and/or construction has
been completed.
66. Replace or plant new street trees in accordance with Urban Forest Master Plan
and in consu ltation with City Arborist.
OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
67. Developer is hereby informed of the availability for free enrollment in the Savings
By Design incentive program where available through Southern California Edison.
If Developer ele cts to enroll in the program, enrollment shall occur prior to submittal
of plans for Landmarks Commission review and an incentive agreement shall be
executed with Southern California Edison prior to issuance of a building permit.
68. The project shall comply with requirements in section 8.106 of the Santa Monica
Municipal code, which adopts by reference the California Green Building
Standards Code and which adds local amendments to that Code. In addition,
unless expressly exempt, the project shall meet the lan dscape water conservation
and construction and demolition waste diversion requirements specified in Section
8.108 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
RENT CONTROL
69. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary
to demolish, convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental unit(s) from the
housing market, the owner of the property shall first secure a removal permit under
Section 1803(t), an exemption determination, an approval of a vested rights claim
from the Rent Control Board, or have withdrawn the controlled rental unit(s)
pursuant to the provisions of the Ellis Act.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PW)
General Conditions
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
25
70. Developer shall be responsible for the payment of the following Public Works
Department (PWD) per mit fees prior to issuance of a building permit:
a. Water Services
b. Wastewater Capital Facility
c. Water Demand Mitigation
d. Fire Service Connection
e. Tieback Encroachment
f. Encroachment of on -site improvements into public right -of -way
g. Construction and Demolition Wast e Management – If the valuation of a
project is at least $50,000 or if the total square feet of the project is equal to
or greater than 1000 square feet, then the owner or contractor is required to
complete and submit a Waste Management Plan. All demoliti on projects are
required to submit a Waste Management Plan. A performance deposit is
collected for all Waste Management Plans equal to 3% of the project value,
not to exceed $30,000. All demolition only permits require a $1,000 deposit
or $1.00 per squar e foot, whichever is the greater of the two.
Some of these fees shall be reimbursed to developer in accordance with the City’s
standard practice should Developer not proceed with development of the Project.
In order to receive a refund of the Construction and Demolition performance
deposit, the owner or contractor must provide receipts of recycling 70% of all
materials listed on the Waste Management Plan.
71. Any construction related work or use of the public right -of -way will be required to
obtain the approv al of the City of Santa Monica, including but not limited to: Use
of Public Property Permits, Sewer Permits, Excavation Permits, Alley Closure
Permits, Street Closure Permits, and Temporary Traffic Control Plans.
72. Plans and specifications for all offsite improvements shall be prepared by a
Registered Civil Engineer licensed in the State of California for approval by the
City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit.
73. Until completion of construction, a sign shall be posted on the property in a manne r
consistent with the public hearing sign requirements, which shall identify the
address and phone number of the owner, developer and contractor for the
purposes of responding to questions and complaints during the construction
period. Said sign shall als o indicate the hours of permissible construction work.
74. 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 Building & Safety Division. The report shall consist of a hazardous materials
survey for the structure proposed for demolition. The report shall include a section
on asbestos and in accordance with the South Coast AQMD Rule 1403, the
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
26
asbestos survey shall be performed by a state C ertified 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.
Water Resources
75. Connections to the sewer or storm drains require a sewer permit from the PWD -
Civil Engineering Division. Connections to storm drains owned by Los Angeles
County require a permit from the L.A. County Department of Public Works.
76. Parking areas and structures and other facilities generating wastewater with
potential oil and grease content are required to pretreat the wastewater before
discharging to the City storm drain or sewer system. Pretreatment will require that
a clarifier or oil/water separator be installed and maintained on site.
77. If the project involves dewatering, developer/contractor shall co ntact the LA
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to obtain an NPDES Permit for
discharge of groundwater from construction dewatering to surface water. For more
information refer to: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/ and search for
Order # R4 -2003 -0111.
78. Developer shall not directly connect to a public storm drain pipe or direct site
drainage to the public alley. Commercial or residential units are required to either
have an individ ual water meter or a master meter with sub -meters.
79. All existing sanitary sewer “house connections” to be abandoned, shall be removed
and capped at the “Y” connections.
80. The fire services and domestic services 3 -inches or greater must be above ground,
on the applicant’s site, readily accessible for testing.
81. Developer is required to meet state cross -connection and potable water sanitation
guidelines. Refer to requirements and comply with the cross connections
guidelines available at:
http://www.lapublichealth.org/eh/progs/envirp/ehcross.htm . Prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy, a cross -connection inspection shall be completed.
82. All new restaurants and cooking facilities at the site are required to install Gravity
Grease Interceptors to pretreat wastewater containing grease. The minimum
capacity of the interceptor shall be determined by using table 10 -3 of the 2007
Uniform Plumbing Code, Section 1014.3. All units shall be fit ted with a standard
final -stage sample box. The 2007 Uniform Plumbing Code guideline in sizing
Gravity Grease Interceptors is intended as a minimum requirement and may be
increased at the discretion of PWD, Water Resources Protection Program.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
27
83. Ultra -low flo w 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.
Urban Water Runoff Mitigation
84. To mitigate storm water and surface runoff from the project site, an Urban Runoff
Mitigation Plan shall be required by the PWD pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter
7.10. Prior to submittal of landscape plans for Landmarks Commission approval,
the applicant shall contact PWD to determine applicable requir ements, such as:
a. The site must comply with SMMC Chapter 7.10 Urban Runoff Pollution
Ordinance for the construction phase and post construction activities;
b. Non -storm water runoff, sediment and construction waste from the
construction site and parking area s is prohibited from leaving the site;
c. Any sediments or materials which are tracked off -site must be removed the
same day they are tracked off -site;
d. Excavated soil must be located on the site and soil piles should be covered
and otherwise protected so that sediments are not tracked into the street or
adjoining properties;
e. No runoff from the construction site shall be allowed to leave the site; and
f. Drainage control measures shall be required depending on the extent of
grading and topography of the site.
g. Deve lopment sites that result in land disturbance of one acre or more are
required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to submit
a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Effective September 2,
2011, only individuals who have been certifi ed by the Board as a “Qualified
SWPPP Developer” are qualified to develop and/or revise SWPPPs. A copy
of the SWPPP shall also be submitted to the PWD.
85. Prior to implementing any temporary construction dewatering or permanent
groundwater seepage pumping, a permit is required from the City Water
Resources Protection Program (WRPP). Please contact the WRPP for permit
requirements at least two weeks in advance of planned dewatering or seepage
pumping. They can be reached at (310) 458 -8235.
Public Streets & R ights -of -Way
86. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, all required
offsite improvements, such as AC pavement rehabilitation, replacement of
sidewalk, curbs and gutters, installation of street trees, lighting, etc. shall be
desi gned and installed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and
Public Landscape Division.
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
28
87. All off -site improvements required by the Public Works Department shall be
installed. Plans and specifications for off -site improvements shall be prepared by
a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer.
88. Unless otherwise approved by the PWD, all sidewalks shall be kept clear and
passable during the grading and construction phase of the project.
89. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveway s which need replacing or removal
as a result of the project or needed improvement prior to the project, as determined
by the PWD shall be reconstructed to the satisfaction of the PWD. Design,
materials and workmanship shall match the adjacent elements in cluding
architectural concrete, pavers, tree wells, art elements, special landscaping, etc.
90. Street and alley sections adjacent to the development shall be replaced as
determined by the PWD. This typically requires full reconstruction of the street or
alle y in accordance with City of Santa Monica standards for the full adjacent length
of the property.
Utilities
91. No Excavation Permit shall be issued without a Telecommunications Investigation
by the City of Santa Monica Information Systems Department. The
telecommunications investigation shall provide a list of recommendations to be
incorporated into the project design including, but not limited to measures
associated with joint trench opportunities, location of tie -back and other
underground installations, telecommunications conduit size and specifications,
fiber optic cable specifications, telecommunications vault size and placement and
specifications, interior riser conduit and fiber optic cable, and adjacent public right
of way enhancements. Developer s hall install two Telecommunications Vaults in
either the street, alley and/or sidewalk locations dedicated solely for City of Santa
Monica use. Developer shall provide two unique, telecommunication conduit
routes and fiber optic cables from building Telec ommunications Room to
Telecommunications Vaults in street, alley and/or sidewalk. Developer will be
responsible for paying for the connection of each Telecommunications Vault to the
existing City of Santa Monica fiber optic network, or the extension of co nduit and
fiber optic cable for a maximum of 1km terminating in a new Telecommunications
Vault for future interconnection with City network. The final telecommunications
design plans for the project site shall be submitted to and approved by the City of
S anta Monica Information Systems Department prior to approval of project.
a. Project shall comply with City of Santa Monica Telecommunications
Guidelines
b. Project shall comply with City of Santa Monica Right -of -Way Management
Ordinance No. 2129CCS, Section 3 (part), adopted 7/13/04
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
29
92. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, provide new
street -pedestrian lighting with a multiple circuit system along the new street right -
of -way and within the development site in compliance with the PWD S tandards
and requirements. New street -pedestrian light poles, fixtures and appurtenances
to meet City standards and requirements.
93. Prior to submittal of plan check application, make arrangements with all affected
utility companies and indicate points of co nnection for all services on the site plan
drawing. Pay for undergrounding of all overhead utilities within and along the
development frontages. Existing and proposed overhead utilities need to be
relocated underground.
94. Location of Southern California Edi son electrical transformer and switch
equipment/structures must be clearly shown on the development site plan and
other appropriate plans within the project limits. The SCE structures serving the
proposed development shall not be located in the public righ t -of -way.
Resource Recovery and Recycling
95. Development plans must show the refuse and recycling (RR) area dimensions to
demonstrate adequate and easily accessible area. If the RR area is completely
enclosed, then lighting, ventilation and floor drain connec ted to sewer will be
required. Section 9.04.10.02.151 of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance has dimensional
requirements for various sizes and types of projects. Developments that place the
RR area in subterranean garages must also provide a bin staging area on th eir
property for the bins to be placed for collection.
96. Contact Resource Recovery and Recycling RRR division to obtain dimensions of
the refuse recycling enclosure.
97. Prior to issuance of a building permit, submit a Waste Management Plan, a map
of the enclosu re and staging area with dimensions and a recycling plan to the RRR
Division for its approval. The State of California AB 341 requires any multi -family
building housing 5 units or more to have a recycling program in place for its
tenants. All commercial businesses generating 4 cubic yards of trash per week
must also have a recycling program in place for its employees and
clients/customers. Show compliance with these requirements on the building
plans. Visit the Resource Recovery and Recycling (RRR) webs ite or contact the
RRR Division for requirements of the Waste Management Plan and to obtain the
minimum dimensions of the refuse recycling enclosure. The recycling plan shall
include:
a. List of materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans,
and glass to be recycled;
b. Location of recycling bins;
c. Designated recycling coordinator;
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
30
d. Nature and extent of internal and external pick -up service;
e. Pick -up schedule; and
f. Plan to inform tenants/ occupants of service.
98. For temporary excavation and shoring that includes tiebacks into the public right -
of -way, a Tieback Agreement, prepared by the City Attorney, will be required.
99. Nothing contained in these Conditions of Approval shall prevent Developer from
seeking relief pursuant to any Application for Alternative Materials and Methods of
Design and Construction or any other relief as otherwise may be permitted and
available under the Building Code, State Historic Building Code, Fire Code, or any
other provision of the SMMC.
Construction Period Mitigation
100. A const ruction period mitigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant for
approval by the following City departments prior to issuance of a building permit.
Public Works, Fire, Planning and Community Development, and Police. The
approved mitigation plan shal l be posted on the site for the duration of the project
construction and shall be produced upon request. As applicable, this plan shall:
a. Specify the names, addresses, telephone numbers and business license
numbers of all contractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and
architect;
b. Describe how demolition of any existing structures is to be accomplished;
c. Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erection/construction;
d. Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or sidewalk is proposed
to be used in conjunction with construction;
e. Set forth the extent and nature of any pile -driving operations;
f. Describe the length and number of any tiebacks which must extend under
the property of other persons;
g. Specify the nature and extent of any dewate ring and its effect on any
adjacent buildings;
h. Describe anticipated construction -related truck routes, number of truck
trips, hours of hauling and parking location;
i. Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling;
j. State whether any construction activity beyond normally permitted hours is
proposed;
k. Describe any proposed construction noise mitigation measures, including
measures to limit the duration of idling construction trucks;
l. Describe construction -period security measures including any fencing,
lighting, and security personnel;
m. Provide a grading and drainage plan;
n. Provide a construction -period parking plan which shall minimize use of
public streets for parking;
o. List a designated on -site construction manager;
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
31
p. Provide a construction materi als recycling plan which seeks to maximize
the reuse/recycling of construction waste;
q. Provide a plan regarding use of recycled and low -environmental -impact
materials in building construction; and
r. Provide a construction period water runoff control plan.
VO TE : 16ENT -0065
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
16ENT -0065
City Council Statement of Official Action
32
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of
this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6,
which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section
1.16.010.
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final
determination of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica.
_____________________________ _____________________________
Tony Vazquez , Mayor Date
Acknowledgement by Permit Holder
I hereby agree to the above conditions of approval and acknowledge that failure to comply
with such conditions shall constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit
approval.
Print Name and Title Date
Applicant’s Signature
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Thursday, August 04, 2016 2:47 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: August 9, 2016 hearing Item 6-A
Attachments:Skydance letter August 3 2016.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
From: Steve Kofsky [mailto:Steve@rcprods.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 12:26 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: August 9, 2016 hearing Item 6 ‐A
Dear All,
Please see the attached letter regarding the appeal of the Skydance Media project approval. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Steven Kofsky
Add to
08-09-2016
Add to
08-09-2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 8:09 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 6-A, August 9, 2016, Skydance Media appeal
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
From: Heather Somaini [mailto:hsomaini@lionsgate.com]
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 5:18 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 6 ‐A, August 9, 2016, Skydance Media appeal
Dear Mayo r Vazquez and Honorable Councilmembers,
My name is Heather Somaini. I am Chief of Staff at Lionsgate, which is located on Colorado Avenue in the Mid ‐City area
of Santa Monica.
I am writing in support of Skydance Media’s application for a Development Review Permit and Variance to allow the
construction of a three story addition to the landmarked US Post Office building, essential elements of an adaptive reuse
project that will enable Skydance to realize its vision of transforming a beloved Landmark building to creative office
space.
I understand that the Planning Commission’s approval was appealed, and would like to add Lionsgate’s name to the list
of local supporters of the project.
First, I will disclose that Lionsgate and Skydance have formed a global television distribution pact to launch Skydance
International, which will include Skydance’ s popular series “Grace and Frankie” and “Manhattan.” We feel very
fortunate to have forged this relationship with a company as innovative and honorable as Skydance.
This letter, however, is focused on Skydance’ s desire to become a contributing and important member of Santa
Monica’s Downtown creative community.
Over the past two decades, the Mid City neighborhood has been transformed by the migration of well ‐known
entertainment and technology brands – like Lionsgate – to the area. Startups and independent post ‐production and tech
companies have established themselves in the area, helping create synergies that did not previously exist.
The same revolution is now taking place in downtown Santa Monica. Skydance’ s investment in the iconic Post Office
building and its plan to add additional creative office space presents an opportunity to bring an important
entertainment/technology firm into the heart of the city, one that will provide good ‐paying jobs and tax revenues, as
well as celebrate Santa Monica’s amazing history.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
I hope the City will embrace that opportunity. I respectfully ask you to deny the appeal that will be before you at your
August 9 hearing.
Sincerely,
Heather Somaini
cc: City Manager Rick Cole
Heather Somaini Chief of Staff LIONSGATE www.lionsgate.com w:310.255.3815 f:310.255.3780 c:310.779.3338
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 8:18 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 6-A (1248 Fifth Street)
Attachments:Letter to CC.pdf; Fence Building Permit.pdf ; LMC STOA (fence).pdf; MND Land Use
Assessment.pdf; Business License Re newal 2016-2017.pdf; Chattel Report.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
From: Kenneth Kutcher [mailto:kutcher@hlkklaw.com]
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 4:53 PM
To: Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Pam OConnor <Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd
<kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Tony
Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; David Martin <David.Martin@SMGOV.NET>; Jing Yeo <Jing.Yeo@SMGOV.NET>;
Roxanne Tanemori <Roxanne.Tanemori@SMGOV.NET>; Scott Albright <Scott.Albright@SMGOV.NET>; Marsha Moutrie
<Marsha.Moutrie@SMGOV.NET>; Heidi von Tong eln <Heidi.vonTongeln@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 6 ‐A (1248 Fifth Street)
Dear Councilmembers,
Attached is a letter submitted on behalf of the applicant requesting that the pending appeal be denied.
Also attached are various background documents referenced in the letter.
Printed copies of this letter and the referenced attachments will be delivere d to City Hall on Monday.
Thank you.
Ken
Kenneth L. Kutcher | Attorney at Law
1250 Sixth Street, Suite 200 | Santa Monica, CA 90401
O: (310) 451 ‐3669 | F: (310) 392 ‐3537 | kutcher@hlkklaw.com
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
(310) 451-3669
August 5, 2016
VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Agenda Item 6.A
Appeal of Planning Commission's decision approving DRP and Parking
Variance (15ENT0138)
Address: 1248 Fifth Street
Our client: 1248 5th Street, LLC
Appellant: Jennifer Kennedy
Our File No. 22200.001
Dear Councilmembers:
I am writing in support of the Planning Commission’s 4-2 vote approving this
modest 14,490 sf addition and the associated parking variance. I am also writing in
support of the Staff Report recommending that the pending appeal be denied and the
Planning Commission decision be upheld.
Unfortunately, the appeal is holding up the proposed and adaptive reuse of this
important historic building, which includes a $12.25 million investment for historical/
preservation related items. The project has been found to be consistent with The
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. See Final
MND (Mar. 2016) at p. 55 (“Based on the survey of the property, historic data, review of
project work scopes, and involvement and oversight by a qualified historic preservation
architect, implementation of all required mitigation measures associated with the project
would result in compliance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment
of Historic Properties”).
I wish to draw the City Council’s attention to the following excerpts from the Staff
Report:
“During [the Planning Commission’s March 16] deliberation,
the majority of [Planning] Commissioners expressed strong
support for the project, citing its potential as a representative
example of adaptive reuse.” (Staff Report, p. 5.)
kutcher@hlkklaw.com
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 2
“Staff believes that the applicant has designed a project that
has an appropriate mass and scale that is respectful of its
surroundings.” (Id. at p. 8.)
“[I]n light of the Landmarks Commission’s approval of the
Certificate of Appropriateness for the fence, and because the
fence was not deemed to be within the purview of the
Planning Commission scope of review of the DR permit, the
approval of the fence is not subject to appeal before
Council.” (Id. at p. 9.)
“Staff believes that the project is consistent with the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards specific to
‘rehabilitation.’ ” (Id. at p. 10.)
“Staff has worked extensively with the applicant to develop a
TDM plan that is tailored to the project operations and will
address any parking shortfall.” (Id. at p. 13.)
“In contrast to the appellant’s statement, staff believes that
the proposed project would be a successful example of
adaptive reuse in the City’s Downtown and would further the
goals, policies, and development parameters specified in the
LUCE and Draft DCP.” (Id. at p. 14.)
“The project is a cutting edge example of adaptive reuse.”
(Id. at p. 14.)
“The proposed Parking Variance is consistent with Historic
Preservation Policies.” (Id. at p. 15.)
“Since a new creative office use (movie/television
production) is proposed in a building where an existing
creative office use (clothing design) is already permitted, it
was determined that no additional land use entitlement
(i.e. CUP) is required.” (Id. at p. 17.) (A copy of the most
recent Business License Renewal #210156 is enclosed.)
“The appellant did not appeal the Planning Commission’s
CEQA determination for the project and therefore, the MND
is not part of the Council’s review.” (Id. at p. 18.)
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 3
This project merits the City Council’s enthusiastic support. The project is 32 feet
in height, it contains only three above-grade stories, it involves rehabilitation of an
important landmark building for its adaptive reuse, it reduces daily car trips by more
than 2,200 trips to the site, it is urban infill, the site is well served by public transit, the
project will not impact any residential neighborhoods, and there are no adverse
environmental impacts.
BACKGROUND
This letter is submitted on behalf of our client, 1248 Fifth Street, LLC. Our client
is the owner of the former US Post Office building at Fifth and Arizona. The property
was purchased from the Federal Government in December 2013, subject to a
Preservation Covenant. In March 2014, with the property owner’s consent, the Santa
Monica Landmarks Commission designated the exterior of the building as a City
Landmark and the property as a Landmark Parcel.
The appeal challenges two permits that were approved by the Planning
Commission, subject to 100 Conditions of Approval including 18 cultural resource
mitigation measures. The challenged permits are:
• A development review permit for the 14,490 sf addition, and
• A parking variance for 23 parking spaces that cannot be accommodated on-
site due to the retention of the landmark building.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL SHOULD BE
AFFIRMED AND THE APPEAL SHOULD BE DENIED
A. The Development Review Permit For The Addition Was Properly
Approved By The Planning Commission.
The subject of the development review permit is the addition along the alley. The
addition is purposefully located at the rear of the property, so as not to detract from the
landmark building. The addition consists of only three floors (plus expansion of an
existing basement) and is only 32 feet in height. The location, size and scale of the
addition has the unanimous support of the Landmarks Commission and is widely
supported by the preservation community. Preservation architect Robert Chattel has
also confirmed that the addition is in the proper location and of the proper scale. (See
enclosed report.)
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 4
The addition is consistent with the applicable height and density standards from
the 1984 LUCE:
Maximum allowable height: 84 feet
Maximum allowable floors: six floors
Maximum allowable FAR: 3.5 FAR
The project is 32 feet, three floors and 0.88 FAR.
The key DRP finding is therefore satisfied because Section 9.04.20.14.040(a) of
the 1988 Zoning Ordinance provides:
“The size of the project shall be deemed compatible with and
relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods
provided the project is consistent with the height and density
standards set forth in the Land Use Element of the General
Plan.” (Emphasis added.)
Because the addition is consistent with the height and density of the 1984 LUCE,
and because the addition is properly located at the rear of the landmark building so as
not to detract from the historic character of the property, the Planning Commission
properly approved the DRP, and the City Council should affirm that approval and deny
the appeal. Such an outcome is consistent with the Staff Report and draft STOA.
B. The Parking Variance Was Properly Approved By The Planning
Commission, Subject to A Robust TDM Plan.
The Planning Commission’s approval of a parking variance associated with the
addition should also be affirmed by the City Council at the appeal hearing. Because this
property is located in the Downtown, it is not subject to the 2015 Zoning Ordinance;
rather, it is governed by the 1988 Zoning Ordinance. The 1988 Zoning Ordinance
provides that additions to commercial buildings must provide code parking for the
addition (1988 Zoning Ordinance § 9.04.10.08.030(e)(1)) or seek a parking variance.
A parking variance can be granted for the quantity of parking otherwise required.
(1988 Zoning Ordinance § 9.04.20.10.030(b).) Moreover, the granting of such a parking
variance is encouraged by the Landmarks Ordinance as a “preservation incentive.”
(Landmarks Ordinance § 9.36.270(d).) Parking variances for historic properties are also
encouraged by the 2010 LUCE. (LUCE Policy HP1.5.)
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 5
In this instance none of the existing parking spaces is required parking. After the
addition is built, 25 parking spaces (plus two loading spaces and 24 outdoor short-term
bike parking spaces and indoor storage for at least 12 long-term bike parking spaces)
will be achieved on site. An on-site valet will assist with stacked parking to increase the
on-site parking supply (STOA Condition #59), as well as bike valet parking. (STOA
Condition #58H.)
For the 14,490 sf addition, a total of 48 parking spaces would be required under
the 1988 Zoning Ordinance. (Note: Under the Draft DCP only 29 parking spaces would
be required.) An application for a parking variance for 23 spaces was filed because
only 25 spaces can be accommodated onsite due to the existence of the landmark
building and its siting on the property.
To make up for the shortfall, the applicant has agreed to lease 23 off-site spaces
in one or more locations to augment its parking supply prior to issuance of a certificate
of occupancy for the addition. Furthermore, as part of the Planning Commission
approval, the applicant has agreed to obtain deed-restrictions ensuring that those 23
off-site spaces are reserved for the exclusive use of the building during the term of the
lease. There is an annual reporting requirement to confirm that this requirement is
satisfied. (STOA Condition #60.)
By agreeing to secure 23 off-site deed-restricted parking spaces for the exclusive
use of the building, the applicant has essentially negated the need for the parking
variance (see 1988 Zoning Ordinance § 9.04.10.08.190(a)), although these off-site
spaces will not necessarily be located within the radius that could be used without the
need for a parking variance.
Regardless, the parking variance should be approved, given the following:
• the size and location of the existing landmark building within the landmark
parcel leaves no opportunity for providing additional on-site parking,
• the property’s location in the Downtown is well served by public transit,
including the new Expo Light Rail station,
• a robust TDM plan has been developed with City Staff (STOA Condition #58),
including a generous $230/month cash out program,
• responsible urban planning policies discourage single-occupancy vehicles,
• ample opportunities exist for biking and walking, including the Breeze bike
share and six company bikes,
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 6
• the advent and popularity of Uber and Lyft,
• reduced car ownership by millennials, and
• increasing capability and opportunities to telecommute and work off-site.
C. Contrary To The Appeal, This Project Is Consistent With The LUCE As
Well As The Preservation Element.
This important preservation project is consistent with the LUCE, especially its
historic preservation policies. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (which was not
appealed and is a final decision) confirms the project’s consistency with the City’s land
use policies. (Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Mar. 2016), pp. 82-88
(copies enclosed).) And as noted above, the project is consistent with the development
standards contained in the 1984 LUCE.
Following are key 2010 LUCE and Historic Preservation Element objectives,
goals and policies providing abundant support for approval of this project:
The Downtown
• Santa Monica’s Downtown Core designation maintains and enhances the
Downtown area as the heart of the City and as a thriving, mixed-use urban
environment in which people can live, work, be entertained and be culturally
enriched. The Downtown has the greatest concentration of activity in the City.”
(LUCE, p. 2.1 – 51)
• The Downtown Core designation allows for the broadest mix of uses and highest
intensity development. The area is the City’s major regional retail and
employment district. (Id .)
• LUCE GOAL D7: Create a balanced mix of uses in the Downtown that reinforces
its role as the greatest concentration of activity in the City.
o POLICY D7.1 Encourage a broad mix of uses that creates dynamic
activity in both the daytime and evening hours including retail, hotels,
office, high-density residential, entertainment and cultural uses in the
Downtown.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 7
o POLICY D7.5 Explore options for the adaptive reuse or retention of
historic resources. Require new buildings constructed in proximity to
existing historic resources to respect the context and character-defining
features of the historic resource.
o POLICY D7.6 Utilize the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to preserve
identified character-defining features of historic resources.
Historic Preservation
• LUCE GOAL HP1: Preserve and protect historic resources in Santa Monica
through the land use decision-making process.
o HP1.5 Support rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources through
flexible zoning policies and modifications to development standards, as
appropriate, subject to discretionary review, required findings, and
neighborhood compatibility such as: the in-kind replacement of
nonconforming features, reduced parking requirements, building height,
parcel coverage, and building envelope requirements.
• LUCE GOAL LU12: Encourage Historic Preservation Citywide – Preserve
buildings and features which characterize and represent the City’s rich heritage.
o LU12.3 Rehabilitation of Historic Resources. Promote adaptive reuse of
historic structures and sensitive alterations where changes are proposed.
New construction or additions to historic structures shall be respectful of
the existing historic resource.
o LU12.4 Sustainability. Recognize adaptive reuse as a sustainable policy,
and encourage sustainable technologies, such as solar panel installation
and energy retrofitting, that respect character-defining features.
• Preservation Element GOAL 1: Develop and implement a comprehensive,
citywide, historic preservation program.
o OBJECTIVE 1.11: Promote historic preservation as sustainable
development and promote sustainable reuse of historic properties.
POLICY 1.11.4: Encourage the use of sustainable energy systems
in historic buildings.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 8
POLICY 1.11.5: Encourage repair not replacement of historic
materials in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation.
• Preservation Element GOAL 3: Increase public awareness of the history of Santa
Monica and historic preservation in the City.
o OBJECTIVE 3.5: Promote the City's historic and cultural resources
through a variety of programs and activities related to all cultural and
ethnic groups in Santa Monica.
POLICY 3.5.4: Establish a program of walking tours.
o OBJECTIVE 3.8: Encourage the installation of plaques and/or public art
related to historic buildings and sites in the City.
POLICY 3.8.2: Implement a program to increase the number of
signs or markers at historic places in the City.
• Preservation Element GOAL 4: Protect historic and cultural resources from
demolition and inappropriate alterations.
o OBJECTIVE 4.1: Discourage the demolition or inappropriate alteration of
historic buildings.
POLICY 4.1.3: Allow for appropriate additions to and adaptive
reuse of historic resources.
• Preservation Element GOAL 6: Integrate historic preservation into the community
and economic development strategies.
o OBJECTIVE 6.1: Use historic preservation as a basis for neighborhood
improvements and community development.
POLICY 6.1.5: Explore the possibility of linking historic preservation
efforts to neighborhood-based and youth development activities.
o OBJECTIVE 6.3: Promote historic places.
POLICY 6.3.3: Publish heritage tourism materials.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 9
POLICY 6.3.4: Highlight preservation success stories in print
materials and on the website.
Sustainability
• “Sustainable Benefits from Historic Preservation. The benefits of historic
preservation are widely accepted in terms of aesthetic, cultural and social results,
but the inherent sustainability aspects of this conservation approach have often
not been fully appreciated. Today, however, it is widely recognized that the most
sustainable building is the one already built and that the adaptive reuse or
rehabilitation of existing buildings and the preservation of historic structures
reduces consumption of raw materials, material production and the resulting
carbon impact. The LUCE embraces historic preservation not only for its
important role in preserving the character-defining features which make Santa
Monica unique, but also for the critical contribution it makes in helping the
community achieve its sustainability goals.” (LUCE, p. 2.3 – 4)
• LUCE GOAL HP3: Integrate historic preservation practices into sustainable
development decisions.
o HP3.1 Develop incentives to encourage preservation and adaptive reuse
of historic buildings as a means of reducing the use of raw materials and
realizing sustainable development goals.
o HP3.2 Ensure that the promotion of sustainability technologies, such as
solar panel installations and sustainable retrofitting are incorporated in
such a way as to not adversely impact historic resources.
Economic Benefits
• “The City of Santa Monica recognizes that its residents’ sense of well-being
stems in large part from the quality of the municipal services the City provides.
The City also recognizes that this high quality of services is dependent upon a
healthy and diverse economy. Commercial and industrial uses are important
components of the City’s economic diversity and rich heritage in that they provide
a source of local jobs and generate a significant portion of the City’s municipal
revenues.” (LUCE, p. 3.4 – 1)
• “Principles for a Sustainable Local Economy. Accordingly, this chapter lays
out the goals, policies and actions that the City will undertake to maintain its
economic base of businesses that generate employment and promote the overall
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 10
economic health and vitality of the community, yet also reflect the need for
greater ecological awareness and the importance of reducing their impact on the
environment. Given the above concerns, the goals, policies and actions of the
LUCE are designed in concert with the principles for a sustainable economy
identified in the City’s forthcoming Strategy for a Sustainable Local Economy,
particularly:
o “Encouraging sectors that generate high revenues relative to their impact
on land, including information, professional, scientific and technical
services … entertainment and recreation” (LUCE, p. 3.4 – 3)
• “There are a number of reasons for encouraging the growth of Creative
Industries in Santa Monica. First, it would be consistent with the City’s broader
goals and commitment to support the creative arts and related activities within
the community. Second, given the large number of residents currently employed
in the creative fields or interested in such activities, this type of employment can
be viewed as local-serving in character. Finally, traffic studies indicate that many
of these businesses such as Post-Production companies have commuting
patterns which cause substantially less stress on peak period traffic conditions
than other more conventional businesses.” (LUCE, p. 3.4 – 12, 13)
• LUCE GOAL E3: Facilitate the growth of creative-related business uses in the
City.
o POLICY E3.1 Support creative industries such as film and music
production and post-production facilities in the major business districts
including the Industrial Conservation and Mixed-Use Creative Districts.
The Creative Industry
• “[R]elative to the rest of the country, Creative Arts employment is roughly seven
times as prevalent in Santa Monica.” (LUCE, p. 3.4 – 12)
• “There are a number of reasons for encouraging the growth of Creative
Industries in Santa Monica. First, it would be consistent with the City’s broader
goals and commitment to support the creative arts and related activities within
the community. Second, given the large number of residents currently employed
in the creative fields or interested in such activities, this type of employment can
be viewed as local-serving in character. Finally, traffic studies indicate that many
of these businesses such as Post-Production companies have commuting
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 11
patterns which cause substantially less stress on peak period traffic conditions
than other more conventional businesses.” (LUCE, p. 3.4 – 12, 13)
• As of the most recent count, in 2006, Creative Arts employment as a percentage
of Total Employment in the City of Santa Monica was 15.3%, significantly higher
than the percentage of Creative Arts employment as a percentage of Total
Employment for the United States as a whole, 2.2%. (LUCE, A – 14)
• As of the most recent count, in 2006, the Film, Radio and Television sectors of
Santa Monica’s creative industries accounted for 44.3% of total creative industry
employment in the city, by far the highest percentage of total creative industry
employment in the city. (LUCE, A – 14)
D. The Fence Is Not Within The Purview Of The Appeal.
Regardless of how the fence is viewed, it is not a part of the City Council’s
jurisdiction when ruling on this appeal. The fence is not and never was part of the
development review application. (15ENT-0138.)
The fence is being constructed on a landmark parcel. (14LM-002.) Pursuant to
Landmarks Ordinance Section 9.36.270(a)(2), “All additions to, modifications of,
alterations of, or new construction on a landmark parcel” are reviewed by the
Landmarks Commission via a certificate of appropriateness process rather than by the
Architectural Review Board.
On August 20, 2015, our client duly filed a Certificate of Appropriateness
application for the fence. (15ENT-0291.) The application was considered by the
Landmarks Commission on September 17 and was continued for redesign. On
October 29, 2015, our client filed revised plans for the fence.
On December 14, 2015, the Landmarks Commission unanimously approved the
revised fence. (A copy of the STOA is enclosed.) Furthermore, Finding #1 provides in
pertinent part:
“[T]he installation of a five foot high maximum security fence
will not detrimentally change, destroy or adversely affect any
exterior feature of the landmark Post Office building.”
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 12
Similarly, preservation architect Robert Chattel’s report dated December 2015 found:
“The fence, as proposed, sensitively encloses the space
while retaining visibility of the site and its character-defining
features. The enlarged commemorative corner better relates
with the sidewalk and will engage passing pedestrians. The
reduced fence height, widely spaced pickets, and the
removal of contemporary concrete planters and monument
sign ensure and enhance visibility of the site.”
Pursuant to Landmarks Ordinance Section 9.36.180(b):
“Any person may appeal a determination or decision of the
[Landmarks] Commission by filing a notice of appeal with the
City Planning Division on a form furnished by the Planning
Division. Such notice of appeal shall be filed within ten
consecutive days commencing from the date that such
determination or decision is made by the Commission . . .
The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee required
by law. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, any member
of the [Landmarks] Commission or City Council may request
a review by the [Landmarks] Commission or City Council of
any determination or decision of the [Landmarks]
Commission without the accompaniment of such fee in the
amount required by law.”
In this instance, no appeal was filed. Accordingly, the decision of the Landmarks
Commission approving Certificate of Appropriateness #15ENT-0291 is a final and
binding decision. That decision cannot be collaterally attacked in the context of this
separate proceeding concerning the DRP for the building addition. See Citizens for
Responsible Development v. City of West Hollywood , 39 Cal. App. 4 th 490, 505, 45 Cal.
Rtpr. 2d 917 (1995) (where, in the context of a neighborhood challenge to an affordable
housing project involving the rehabilitation and restoration of two designated landmark
buildings, the Court held, “The decision [to designate the historic structures] was never
challenged and is, therefore, final. California courts have consistently held that an
administrative decision which has not been overturned through administrative
mandamus is absolutely immune from collateral attack. [Citations omitted]”).
Furthermore, on May 10, 2016, the City issued Building Permit #16BLD-0333 for
the fence. A copy of that building permit is enclosed. Construction of the fence began
on August 2, 2016.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica City Council
August 5, 2016
Page 13
The owner has therefore secured a vested right to construct the fence. (See
Avco Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast Reg’l Comm’n, 17 Cal. 3d 685 (1976).
It would be unlawful for the City to interfere with that right in the context of ruling on this
appeal.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, we urge the City Council to deny the appeal and uphold
the Planning Commission approval based on the findings and subject to the conditions
of approval set forth in the draft Statement of Official Action as prepared by City Staff.
Very truly yours,
Kenneth L. Kutcher
Enclosures
cc: Rick Cole (w/ encls.)
David Martin (w/ encls.)
Jing Yeo (w/ encls.)
Roxanne Tanemori (w/ encls.)
Scott Albright (w/ encls.)
Marsha Jones Moutrie (w/ encls.)
Heidi von Tongeln (w/ encls.)
Antony Biddle (w/ encls.)
Nancy Reid (w/ encls.)
Robert Chattel (w/ encls.)
Sejal Sonani (w/ encls.)
Andy Waisler (w/ encls.)
22200\Cor\CC.1003.KLK.docx
A t tachments:
Final MND excerpts relating to Land Use Impact Assessment
Chattel Report dated March 11, 2016 relating to building addition and rehabilitation
Landmarks Commission STOA approving fence
Building Permit for fence
Business License Certificate of renewal (2016-17)
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Santa Monica Post Office
Productions
Final Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration
March 2016
Prepared for:
City of Santa Monica
Planning and Community Development
Department 1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Prepared by:
Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
104 West Anapamu Street, Suite 204A
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 82
March 2016
XII. Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
(LTS) or LTS
with
Mitigation
No
Impact
Within the
Scope of
Analysis in
the Plan
Level EIR
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniform
Applicable
Development
Policies
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to,
the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental
effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
Existing Setting
The City of Santa Monica is located on the western edge of Los Angeles County. The City
is directly accessible via I-10 freeway and I-405, as well as Pacific Coast Highway
(PCH)/Palisades Beach Road links the City of Santa Monica to Malibu. The City of Santa
Monica occupies approximately 8.25 square miles, and is mostly all developed with
residential, commercial, light industrial, and institutional uses. The Downtown Core, as
designated by the LUCE, is comprised of a diverse mix of dense uses including retail,
restaurants, office, hotel, entertainment, and residential uses. Over the past decades, a
number of mixed use projects have been de veloped throughout the Downtown District,
particularly along 5 th , 6 th , and 7 th Streets. The land uses surrounding the project site include
a variety of commercial buildings, a church, and mixed use and residential buildings.
The project site is approximately 37,388 sf in size; currently only 33,968 sf of the site is
developed with the former Post Office building . The building is setback from the property
line along 5 th Street, Arizona Avenue, and 4 th Court, and surface parking space on the
north and south of the building. The sidewalk along 5 th Street, fronting the site, is lined with
mature Indian laurel fig trees. Access to the surface parking lot is provide via 4 th Court,
and pedestrian access to the existing building is provide through entrances along the 5 th
Street frontage.
Discussion
a) No Impact. The project site is located in the urbanized Downtown District of the City
and it is zoned Downtown Core under the LU CE. The proposed project would adaptively
reuse the former Post Office building for creative office. Additionally, since all proposed
construction work would be contained onsite, the project would not disrupt surrounding
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 83
March 2016
land uses. As a result, the project would no t divide any established community. Therefore,
no impacts would occur.
b) Less Than Significant Impact . The project site is located in the Downtown Core as
designated in the LUCE and is zoned “Downtown Specific Plan”. The updated Zoning
Ordinance was recently adopted in July 2015 and was comprehensively updated to
reflect the LUCE vision, goals, and policies. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide
standards for the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP), as it is anticipated that the standards for
the Downtown would be addressed in the DSP.
Pending adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan, an interim zoning ordinance (IZO 2487)
for the Downtown was adopted by the City Council in June 2015. Under the IZO, projects
over 7,500 sf would continue to be administratively approved. Projects over this threshold
would be subject to discretionary review. Additionally, Downtown projects over 32 feet
in height would be subject to a developm ent agreement. Since the project exceeds
7,500 sf but would not exceed 32 feet in height, a Development Review Permit would be
required for project implementation. The following provides an analysis of the project with
the applicable plans and development standards:
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
The proposed project would be supportive of SCAG’s 2012-2035 Regional Transportation
Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategies (R TP/SCS), which emphasizes new land uses
within existing urbanized areas to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT), congestion, and
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The proposed project would adaptively reuse the
former historic Post Office building to provide new creative office uses in the urbanized
Downtown District. As a result, the proposed project would be easily accessible by public
transit, as well as by walking and biking. Refer to Table 10, Project Consistency with the
Goals and Policies of SCAG and LUCE .
2010 Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE)
The project site is located within the Downtown District, which is defined in the LUCE as
that area generally bounded by Wilshire Boulevard on the north; Lincoln Boulevard on
the east; the Santa Monica Freeway on the south; and Ocean Avenue on the west. The
LUCE recognizes that the Downtown District includes the broadest mix of uses and
activities in Santa Monica, and that the recently completed and planned residential
development assures that the Downtown is a complete neighborhood, serving both local
residents and residents of the Los Angeles region.
The project site has a land use designation of Downtown Core. The Downtown Core
designation allows for a broad mix of uses, including commercial and residential uses.
The LUCE envisions Downtown as a thriving urban district, with the addition of new
commercial and residential uses, with opportunit ies for increased activity near the future
Expo LRT station. Further, the LUCE encourages a balance of high quality uses that would
generate activity during both daytime and evening hours, including mixed residential,
restaurants, entertainment, and retail uses.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 84
March 2016
The LUCE did not establish maximum building heig ht limits, floor-area ra tios (FAR), or other
specific development standards, such as setbacks and step backs for new buildings
within the Downtown Core designation, defe rring such standards to a future Downtown
Specific Plan (DSP). The Draft DSP was released in February of 2014 and is currently
undergoing environmental review. Until the adoption of the DSP, the existing land use
development standards set forth in the 1984 LUCE continue to apply in the Downtown
which includes the project site.
Table 10, Project Consistency with the Goals and Policies of SCAG and LUCE, below
outlines the project’s consistency with the applicable goals and policies of the LUCE. As
shown in Table 10, the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the LUCE as the
proposed project would adaptively reuse a hi storic landmarked building to provide new
creative office opportunities in the Downtown.
Table 10 Project Consistency with the Goals and Policies of SCAG and LUCE
Policy Relationship to Project
SCAG R EGIONAL T RANSPORTATION P LAN / S USTAINABLE C OMMUNITIES S TRATEGY (RTP/SCS)
RTP Goal : Maximize the
productivity of our transportation
system.
Consistent . The proposed project would support and
maximize the productivity of the transportation
system by locating new creative office uses in the
Downtown, within walking distance of the future
Expo LRT Downtown station. Future employees of the
project would have the opportunity to use the Expo
LRT to travel to and from the Downtown. The project
site is also easily accessed by a number of Big Blue
Bus and Metro transit lines that operate in the
Downtown. Additionally, per the City’s Transportation
Demand Ordinance, the project would implement a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to
increase alternative transportation usage and to
further improve the productivity of the regional
transportation system.
RTP Goal : Encourage land use and
growth patterns that facilitate
transit and non-motorized
transportation.
Consistent . The project site is located in Downtown
Santa Monica, near existing and future public transit
opportunities provided by the Big Blue Bus, Metro,
and the future Expo LRT. Additionally, the project is
easily accessible via the Downtown’s extensive bike
and pedestrian network. Therefore, project
employees would have easy access to alternative
transportation options.
S CS Goa l 1. Better Placemaking :
The strategies outlined in the 2012–
2035 RTP/SCS promote the
development of better places to
live and work through measures
that encourage more compact
development, varied housing
options, bike and pedestrian
Consistent . The proposed project is a compact,
adaptive reuse project that would provide new
creative office uses in the transit rich Downtown.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 85
March 2016
Policy Relationship to Project
improvements, and efficient
transportation infrastructure.
S CS Goal 5: Improved Access and
Mobility : Strategies contained
within the 2012–2035 RTP/SCS will
help the region confront
congestion and mobility issues in a
variety of ways, including
improvements to bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. Land use
strategies in the 2012–2035 RTP/SCS
will improve mobility and access
by placing destinations closer
together and decreasing the time
and cost of traveling between
them.
Consistent. The proposed project would support
improved access and mobility by providing new
creative office uses within walking distance of the
future Expo LRT Downtown station and in close
proximity to bicycle lanes on Arizona Avenue and 5 th
Street.
SCAG Compass/ Growth Visioning Principles
To realize the Growth Vision Principles, the Growth Vision encourages:
(1) Focusing growth in existing and
emerging centers and along major
transportation corridors.
Consistent. The project site is located in the
Downtown District, which is the economic center of
the City. The project site is also located near public
transit opportunities provided by the Big Blue Bus,
Metro, and the future Expo LRT as well as in the
vicinity of Interstate 10.
(2) Creating significant areas of
mixed use development and
walkable communities.
Consistent. The proposed project would contribute
new creative office space to the walkable mixed
use Downtown District.
(3) Targeting growth around
existing and planned transit
stations.
Consistent . The project site is located in Downtown
Santa Monica, near current and future public transit
opportunities provided by the Expo LRT station, Big
Blue Bus, and Metro. Specifically, the project site is
located within walking distance (less than ¼ mile) of
the future Downtown Station for the Expo LRT.
(4) Preserving existing open space
and stable residential areas.
Consistent . The project would not develop or
encroach onto existing open space and stable
residential areas.
2010 LUCE
Policy LU1.4 Retention of Existing
Structures – Encourage and
incentivize preservation of historic
structures and older buildings that
add to the character of residential
district through the development
Consistent . The proposed project would adaptively
reuse the historic former U.S. Post Office building for
new creative office uses.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 86
March 2016
Policy Relationship to Project
Development Rights and
conservation easements
Policy LU3.1 Reduce Regional-
serving Commercial Uses : Reduce
regional office and commercial
uses and encourage smaller floor
plate office uses, housing and
local serving retail and services
Consistent . The proposed project would not develop
a large floor plate regional office. The proposed
project would adaptively reuse the former Post
Office building for new creative office uses.
Policy LU6.2 Vital Downtown :
Support the continued transition of
Downtown to a thriving, mixed use
urban environment for people to
live, work, be entertained, and be
culturally enriched.
Consistent. The proposed project would contribute
to the Downtown’s thriving mixed use environment
by providing new creative office uses.
Policy LU12.1 Maintain Character :
Rehabilitation of Historic Resources
– Promote adaptive reuse of
historic structures and sensitive
alterations wher e changes are
proposed. New construction or
additions to historic structures shall
be respectful of the existing historic
resource.
Consistent . The project would adaptively reuse the
historic former U.S. Post Office building for new
creative office space. All proposed work would be
completed in accordance wi th the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards to ensure that the historic
character of the building would be preserved.
Policy LU112.4 Sustainability :
Recognize adaptive reuse as a
sustainable policy and encourage
sustainable technologies, such as
solar panel installation and energy
retrofitting, that respect character-
defining features
Consistent. The project would include energy
efficient technologies including the use of solar
voltaic panels to make the existing building more
sustainable.
Policy LU15.3 Context-S ensitive
Design: Require site and building
design that is context sensitive and
contributes to the City’s rich urban
character.
Consistent . All proposed work would be completed
in accordance with the Se cretary of the Interior’s
Standards to ensure that th e historic character of the
building would be preserved. Furthermore, the
proposed minor increase in height for the existing
building would not be out of context with the
surrounding land uses.
Policy HP1.8: Encourage the
preservation and regular
maintenance of mature trees and
landscaping that contribute to the
unique character of a
neighborhood.
Consistent. The proposed project would preserve
and protect existing street trees. All existing street
trees would remain in place, and project
construction activities would not impact or damage
existing street trees. The four palms along the east
frontage are proposed to be removed and would
be replanted offsite.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 87
March 2016
Policy Relationship to Project
Downtown Core Policies
Policy D7.1 : Encourage a broad
mix of uses that create dynamic
activity in both the daytime and
evening hours including retail,
hotels, office, high-density
residential, entertainment and
cultural uses in the downtown.
Consistent . The project would adaptively reuse a
former Post Office facility for new creative office
space. This project would help meet the demand for
office space in the Downtown.
Policy D7.5 Explore options for the
adaptive reuse or retention of
historic resources. Require new
buildings constructed in proximity
to existing historic resources to
respect the context and
character-defining features of the
historic resource.
Consistent . The project would adaptively reuse the
historic, former Post Office facility for new creative
office space. All proposed work would be
completed in accordance wi th the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards to ensure that the historic
character of the building would be preserved.
Policy D7.6 Utilize the Secretary of
the Interior’s Stan dards to preserve
identified character-defining
features of historic resources
Consistent . All proposed work would be completed
in accordance with the Se cretary of the Interior’s
Standards to ensure that th e historic character of the
building would be preserved.
Historic Preservation Policies
HP1.3 Ensure that new
development alterations, or
remodeling on, or adjacent to,
historic properties are sensitive to
historic resource and are
compatible with the surrounding
historic context.
Consistent . The project would adaptively reuse the
historic, former Post Office facility for new creative
office space. All proposed work would be
completed in accordance wi th the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards to ensure that the historic
character of the building would be preserved.
HP1.5 Support rehabilitation and
restoration of historic resources
through flexible zoning policies and
modifications to development
standards, as appropriate, subject
to discretionary review, required
findings, and neighborhood
compatibility such as: the in-kind
replacement of nonconforming
features, reduced parking
requirements, building height,
parcel coverage, and building
envelope requirements.
Consistent . The project would adaptively reuse the
historic, former Post Office facility for new creative
office space. The proposed project would be utilizing
the State Historic Building Code, for reduced ADA
requirements. Additiona lly, a parking variance
would be required for reduced parking on the
project site.
Circulation Element
Policy T15.7 : Monitor and
coordinate construction activity to
Consistent . A Construction Impact Mitigation Plan
would be prepared to address traffic impacts from
demolition, site preparation, and ongoing
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
F INAL I NITIAL S TUDY /M ITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION (IS/MND)
Santa Monica Post Office Productions 88
March 2016
Policy Relationship to Project
minimize disruption on the
transportation system.
construction activities. Components of the plan
would include measures to address vehicular and
pedestrian safety, notification of local business,
identification of construction parking, construction
traffic and route design, and construction
scheduling. The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan
would be subject to approval by the City prior to
issuance of a building permit. The approved
mitigation plan would be posted and available at
the project site for the duration of construction and
would be produced upon request.
Policy T19.2 : Impose appropriate
Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) requirements
for new development.
Consistent . The project’s applicant would implement
a TDM plan that minimizes vehicle trip and meet AVR
targets consistent with the City’s TDM ordinance.
Potential measures may include, but not be limited
to, transportation information, transit pass subsidies,
unbundled parking, and participation in
Transportation Management Association.
Policy T21.3: TDM program
requirements shall be triggered for
new development consistent with
the LUCE performance standards.
Consistent . See discussion for Policy T19.2.
Policy T25.2 : Require that parking
be accessed only from alleys,
where alley access is available.
Consistent . Primary automobile access for the
proposed project would be provided via 4th Court
alley.
Policy T25.3 : Minimize the width
and number of driveways at
individual development projects.
Consistent . The project would not construct any new
driveways.
Policy T25.7 : Encourage installation
of electrical outlets in loading
zones, including signage, to
reduce vehicle idling associated
with operating refrigeration for
delivery trucks.
Consistent . Loading of deliveries are anticipated to
occur at the rear of the building, and would take
place on 4th Court in the loading area. The project
proposes for the electrical room to be placed near
the loading zone, which would provide electrical
outlets.
Policy T26.4: Adjust parking
requirements for projects when it
can be demonstrated that a lower
parking demand is appropriate.
Consistent . The proposed project would provide
reduced parking as it is lo cated in proximity to the
future Downtown Station for the Expo LRT. A parking
variance would be required for the project.
As summarized above the project would be consistent with applicable plans, policies, or
regulations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) No Impact . As previously stated, no habitat cons ervation plan applies to the project
site. The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of any applicable
habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Ad
d
to
6-
A
08
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
6
Ad
d
to
6-
A
08
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
6
Ad
d
to
6-
A
08
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
6
Ad
d
to
6-
A
08
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
6
Ad
d
to
6-
A
08
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
6
Ad
d
to
6-
A
08
/
0
9
/
2
0
1
6
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
MEMORANDUM
DATE : March 11 , 2016
TO : Mr. Ken Kutcher
Harding Larmore Kutcher & Kozal, LLP
FROM : Robert Chattel, AIA, President
Sarah Vonesh , Associate II
Chattel, Inc.
RE: Santa Monica Post Office, 1248 Fifth Street, Santa Monica, California
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards c onformance r eview relating to building addition
and rehabilitation
Introduction
The applicant proposes to rehabilitate and enlarge the Landmark former Santa Monica Post Office
(historic building ) for use as creative offices by Skydance Productions and related companies.
Chattel, Inc. Historic Preservation Consultants (Chattel) assumed a key role with the project team
from the initial purchase through the present. Chattel’s goal is to ensure features conveying
historical, cultural, and architectural value of the historic building are retained and rehabilitated
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s S tandards for the Treatment o f Historic Properties
(Secretary’s Standards). The historic building is located at the northwest corner of Fifth Street and
Arizona Avenue. The front façade faces east on to Fifth Street while the rear elevation faces west on
to Fourth Court or alley . The historic building was designed in 1937 in the P ublic W orks
A dministration (PWA) Moderne style by the U.S. Treasury Department with local consulting architect
Robert Dennis Murray. It was dedicated in 1938 and remained in use as a post office until June 29,
2013. The property transferred out of federal ownership on December 20, 2013 . At the time of the
transfer, a preservation covenant was recorded as part of the grant deed providing for long term
preservation of the exterior and interior lobby. The Santa Monica City Council is tasked with
enforcing the preservation covenant. T he historic building was designated as a Santa Monica
Landmark on March 10, 2014.
This memo summarizes the overall rehabilitation of the historic building and associated new
construction of a rooftop and rear addition (proposed project). P articular attention is paid to the
proposed addition in light of the pending Santa Monica Planning Commission hearing.
Project Description
The historic building is rectangular and symmetrica l, consisting of two stories plus basement. The
building is constructed of reinforced concrete with a board formed finish. The exterior walls were
originally left in a natural exposed state, but have since been painted . The front façade contains two
entran ces, both with double doors set within monumental entry portals. Fenestration consists of tall,
six-light windows that are evenly spaced across the east, north, and south elevations. The west
elevation has a loading dock spanning most its length, and fenestration for ventilation and other
utilitarian purposes. The alley provides automobile access to a surface parking lot north of the
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
S anta Monica Post Office Conformance Review
March 11, 2016
Page 2
historic building . The existing hardscape and landscape are generally contemporary and not
historically significant .
The proposed project entail s rehabilitation of the historic building, demolition of portions of the rear
elevation, new construction of a rear and rooftop addition , seismic retrofit, new infrastructure , and
sustainability provisions, along with new hardscape a nd landscape . A D evelopment R eview P ermit,
P arking V ariance, C ertificate of A ppropriateness are required. The interior lobby, protected by the
preservation covenant, will be restored in a future phase of work. All proposed work on the lobby is
subject to approval by City Council. A C ertificate of A ppropriateness has previously been granted by
the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission for the installation of a property line fence.
Key elements of demolition include :
• Altered loading dock and second floor or me zzanine along the rear elevation including the
entirety of the center portion
• Flat roof containing skylights
• Contemporary window frames and sash
• Contemporary doors
• H ardscape and landscape in the east and south setbacks
Key elements of rehabilitation inclu de:
• E xterior wall finishes
• New wood window frames and sash
• New wood entry doors
Key elements of new construction include:
• Rear and rooftop addition with expanded basement
• Screened mechanical equipment at the upper roof
• New roof with skylights, including one large skylight covering an enclosed atrium
• Private patio at new lower roof
• Rear addition setback from north and south elevations with open stairs serving to separate
new from old
• Rear addition fenestration and materia ls including terra cotta selected to draw inspiration
from and complement historic building
Conformance Review
The Secretary’s Standards contain four approaches; the appropriate approach for this project is
rehabilitation. The rehabilitation standards are as follows:
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal
change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a
property will be avoided.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes
that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or
elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be
retained and preserved.
5. Distin ctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
S anta Monica Post Office Conformance Review
March 11, 2016
Page 3
in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features
will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means
possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be
disturbed, mitigation m easures will be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic
materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work
will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features,
size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its
environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner
that, if r emoved in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its
environment would be unimpaired.
The Secretary’s Standards are not intended to be prescriptive, but instead provide general guidance.
They are intended to be flexible and adaptable to specific project conditions to balance continuity
and change while retaining historic building fabric to the maximum extent feasible. Their
interpretation requires exercise of professional judgment and balance of the various opportunities
and constraints of any given project based on use, materials retention and treatment, and
compatibility of new construction. Not every standard necessarily applies to every aspect of a
project, nor is it necessary to comply with every standard to achieve conformance.
The Secretary Standards contain various recommendations for new additions to historic buildings.
These recommendations include the fol lowing:
• Constructing a new addition so that there is the least possible loss of historic materials and
so that character -defining features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed.
• Designing a new addition in a manner that makes clear what is historic and what is new.
• Design for the new work may be contemporary or may reference design motifs from the
historic building… it should always be clearly differentiated from the historic building and be
compatible in terms of mass, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and color.
• Designing a rooftop addition, when required for the new use, that is set back from the wall
plane and as inconspicuous as possible when viewed from the street.
Conclusion
Consistent with the Secretary Standards, the new addition would occur on a secondary, rear
elevation. A portion of the rear elevation would be demolished to accommodate the new addition.
This area has been altered over time and does not contain any historic features , thus it is the
a ppropriate l ocation for alteration to occur. The rooftop addition is substantially setback from the
exterior elevations, such that it is not generally visible from the street. Recessed stairs serve as
hyphens , clearly demarcating new from old . The fenestration and use of materials on the addition
complement the historic building in a contemporary and compatible manner. The rear and rooftop
additions conform with the Secretary’s Standards because they are compatible in mass, scale and
proportion and are appropriately located and detailed so as to allow the historic building to retain its
prominence.
The former Santa Monica Post Office is a designated City Landmark because of its association with
the growth and history of the community and as an excellent example of PWA Moderne style . The
proposed project and investment will ensure the building’s protection and longevity through the
historic building’s rehabilitation and future restoration of the interior lobby. T he adaptive reuse as a
private creative office space will bring new life to the historic building and enhance the vibrant
downtown character of Santa Monica.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Santa Monica City Manager's Office
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 8:30 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:David Martin
Subject:FW: Item 6-A, August 9, 2016, Skydance Media appeal
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
FYI
From: Heather Somaini [mailto:hsomaini@lionsgate.com]
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 5:18 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 6 ‐A, August 9, 2016, Skydance Media appeal
Dear Mayo r Vazquez and Honorable Councilmembers,
My name is Heather Somaini. I am Chief of Staff at Lionsgate, which is located on Colorado Avenue in the Mid ‐City area
of Santa Monica.
I am writing in support of Skydance Media’s application for a Development Review Permit and Variance to allow the
construction of a three story addition to the landmarked US Post Office building, essential elements of an adaptive reuse
project that will enable Skydance to realize its vision of transforming a beloved Landmark building to creative office
space.
I understand that the Planning Commission’s approval was appealed, and would like to add Lionsgate’s name to the list
of local supporters of the project.
First, I will disclose that Lionsgate and Skydance have formed a global television distribution pact to launch Skydance
International, which will include Skydance’ s popular series “Grace and Frankie” and “Manhattan.” We feel very
fortunate to have forged this relationship with a company as innovative and honorable as Skydance.
This letter, however, is focused on Skydance’ s desire to become a contributing and important member of Santa
Monica’s Downtown creative community.
Over the past two decades, the Mid City neighborhood has been transformed by the migration of well ‐known
entertainment and technology brands – like Lionsgate – to the area. Startups and independent post ‐production and tech
companies have established themselves in the area, helping create synergies that did not previously exist.
The same revolution is now taking place in downtown Santa Monica. Skydance’ s investment in the iconic Post Office
building and its plan to add additional creative office space presents an opportunity to bring an important
entertainment/technology firm into the heart of the city, one that will provide good ‐paying jobs and tax revenues, as
well as celebrate Santa Monica’s amazing history.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
I hope the City will embrace that opportunity. I respectfully ask you to deny the appeal that will be before you at your
August 9 hearing.
Sincerely,
Heather Somaini
cc: City Manager Rick Cole
Heather Somaini Chief of Staff LIONSGATE www.lionsgate.com w:310.255.3815 f:310.255.3780 c:310.779.3338
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Santa Monica City Manager's Office
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 1:05 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Elaine Polachek; David Martin
Subject:FW: City Council Item 6-A, August 9, 2016
Attachments:2016_08_08_11_46_27.pdf
FYI
From: Rand Gladden [mailto:RGladden@fotokem.com]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 12:09 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: City Council Item 6 ‐A, August 9, 2016
Ladies and Gentle men of the Santa Monica City Council.
Please review our letter attached as it relates to the outstanding redevelopment opportunity
pending before the council for Sky Dance Media.
Thank You
Rand Gladden
RAND M GLADDEN
Senior Vice President
rgladden@fotokem.com
www.fotokem.com
2801 W. Alameda Ave, Burbank, CA 91505
o: 818.846.3101 ext. 212 | m: 818.535.3084
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
RmKEM
F I LM .V I DEO .DATA
August 5, 2016
Mayor Tony Vazquez and City Councilmembers:
My name is Rand Gladden. I am Senior Vice President at Fotokem Incorporated, one of the
premier providers of pre* and post-production services for entertainment firms. Our brand
may be familiar to you. Fotokem has been in business since 1963, and our name has
appeared on crawls on numerous major motion pictures. The range of services Fotokem
provides is comprehensive^ color, 3-D, sound and visual effects services for major
entertainment concerns.
Our Margarita Mix division, with facilities in Hollywood and Santa Monica, concentrates on
audio services for commercial advertising, television, video games and DVD.
There were many reasons we located studios in Santa Monica. First, the City has created a
welcoming environment for entertainment and technology companies like ours, which are,
to a large extent, low-impact uses. Second, the concentration of such companies simplifies
our interactions with customers.
Skydance Media is one of those entertainment firms, now based in Santa Monica, which is
very fortunate to have purchased a special location in the downtown area for its new
headquarters.
As you know, their project involves the preservation and rehabilitation of a notable historic
building and the addition of creative office space.
The additional space will be essential to the creation of content for films, television and
interactive products. As I understand the agenda, that is the issue being heard this
evening.
The Skydance team has done an outstanding job of designing a building that is visually
non-intrusive, meshes well with the historic building, and remains below the 32-foot height
limit. They've done a tremendous job carrying over certain design elements of the original
post office, while maintaining the difference required by the Secretary of the Interior
guidelines. The new building has "rhythm." Finally, the presence of the building and its
workforce will undoubtedly create a more secure environment in the downtown area.
We're in complete support of Skydance's project. Please vote to deny the appeal, and let
Skydance move ahead.
Thank you for your time.
sincerely
Rand Gladden
Foto-Kem Industries Inc* 2801 West Alameda Ave • Burbank CA 91505
818846 3101 'Fax 818841 2130 •www.fotokem.com
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 4:34 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: City Council Item 6-A, August 9, 2016
Attachments:2016_08_08_11_46_27.pdf
From: Rand Gladden [mailto:RGladden@fotokem.com]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 12:09 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: City Council Item 6 ‐A, August 9, 2016
Ladies and Gentle men of the Santa Monica City Council.
Please review our letter attached as it relates to the outstanding redevelopment opportunity
pending before the council for Sky Dance Media.
Thank You
Rand Gladden
RAND M GLADDEN
Senior Vice President
rgladden@fotokem.com
www.fotokem.com
2801 W. Alameda Ave, Burbank, CA 91505
o: 818.846.3101 ext. 212 | m: 818.535.3084
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
RmKEM
F I LM .V I DEO .DATA
August 5, 2016
Mayor Tony Vazquez and City Councilmembers:
My name is Rand Gladden. I am Senior Vice President at Fotokem Incorporated, one of the
premier providers of pre* and post-production services for entertainment firms. Our brand
may be familiar to you. Fotokem has been in business since 1963, and our name has
appeared on crawls on numerous major motion pictures. The range of services Fotokem
provides is comprehensive^ color, 3-D, sound and visual effects services for major
entertainment concerns.
Our Margarita Mix division, with facilities in Hollywood and Santa Monica, concentrates on
audio services for commercial advertising, television, video games and DVD.
There were many reasons we located studios in Santa Monica. First, the City has created a
welcoming environment for entertainment and technology companies like ours, which are,
to a large extent, low-impact uses. Second, the concentration of such companies simplifies
our interactions with customers.
Skydance Media is one of those entertainment firms, now based in Santa Monica, which is
very fortunate to have purchased a special location in the downtown area for its new
headquarters.
As you know, their project involves the preservation and rehabilitation of a notable historic
building and the addition of creative office space.
The additional space will be essential to the creation of content for films, television and
interactive products. As I understand the agenda, that is the issue being heard this
evening.
The Skydance team has done an outstanding job of designing a building that is visually
non-intrusive, meshes well with the historic building, and remains below the 32-foot height
limit. They've done a tremendous job carrying over certain design elements of the original
post office, while maintaining the difference required by the Secretary of the Interior
guidelines. The new building has "rhythm." Finally, the presence of the building and its
workforce will undoubtedly create a more secure environment in the downtown area.
We're in complete support of Skydance's project. Please vote to deny the appeal, and let
Skydance move ahead.
Thank you for your time.
sincerely
Rand Gladden
Foto-Kem Industries Inc* 2801 West Alameda Ave • Burbank CA 91505
818846 3101 'Fax 818841 2130 •www.fotokem.com
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 4:34 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 6-A, August 9, 2016, appeal of Skydance approval
From: Joanne Leavitt [mailto:joanneleavitt5@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 2:45 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 6 ‐A, August 9, 2016, appe al of Skydance approval
Hon. City Councilmembers:
I am writing to express my support for the 1248 Fifth Street (Post Office) project, and to commend the
applicant on its vision for the adaptive re use of this important historic asset.
As a longtime Santa Monican, I feel a special attachment to the Post Office. For 80 years, it was a place where
local residents reached out to their families and friends via the US Mail, celebrating birthdays, weddings and
holidays with cards and letters. It was also a place where local businesses connected with customers and
merchants when paper and postage stamps – and Air Mail, which was pioneered here in Santa Monica –
represented the state of the art.
The fact that the building was create d as a project of the Public Works Ad ministration is especially meaningful,
a reminder of our country’s ability to pull itself togeth er in challenging times and create infrastructure that
would last for decades.
The applicant’s plan to undertake a first-rate restoration of the build ing is truly laudable.
When the US Postal Service closed the facility, ma ny options were explored for a new use. Its size and
configuration did not work for many applications. Skyda nce’s proposal to adaptivel y reuse the structure for
creative office space by constructing a modest and appropriate addition to the Post Office building is, I believe,
a workable concept. The plan considered by the Planning Commission last Spring – which earned the
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
Commission’s approval – is viable a nd attractive. The addition provides the space needed by the company to
conduct its business properly and attract and retain a young, talented workforce.
Skydance’s work with the lo cal preservation community is particularly important to me and the scores of Santa
Monicans who treasure our past. I would applaud a plan to include an occasi onal tour of the historic portion of
the building only, arranged as part of the Santa Monica Conserva tory’s Docent-Guided Wa lking Tours. It would
help acquaint Santa Monicans, young and old, with their city’s rich history and architectural heritage.
This project deserves your support. I urge you to deny the appeal, and uphold the Planning Commission’s
approval.
Sincerely,
Joanne Leavitt
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 4:34 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Post Office Project: email to City Council
From: Hany Iskander [mailto:hsiskander@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 4:31 PM
To: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Fwd: Post Office Project: email to City Council
August 5, 2016
To: Mayor Tony Vazquez
Councilmembers Davis, Himmelrich, McKeown, O’Connor, O’Day, Winterer
My name is Hany Iskander. I represen t the Saint Peter and Saint Paul Cop tic Orthodox Church, which is located
at 1245 Fourth Street, dir ectly across the alley from the proposed project.
I strongly support the restor ation and adaptive reuse of the former Po st Office building and the construction of
new “creative office” space at 1248 Fifth Street.
The historic Post Office building has been vacant fo r three years, and the downtown neighborhood has missed
having activity on the site.
Keeping our congregation feeling safe and secure is always a concern for us and our congregation. We keep a
busy schedule, including services fo r seniors and children. During Lent, for instance, we hold services on
Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday – sometimes in the evening hours. The presence of
Skydance Media will make our area much safer for ev eryone because the company is committed to provide
robust security measures along the al ley. We appreciate that very much.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
Skydance is a prestigious entertainment company with th e resources to do a very good job on the restoration
and new construction. We have been assured by Skydan ce that any impacts on our church will be minimized
during construction, and that they will respond to a ny concerns we may have.
Skydance’s significant investment in th e property will beautify and enliven the intersection of Arizona and Fifth
Street – a benefit for the entire downt own district – and will allow Skydance to conduct its business at one site.
Although the following comment is not directly related to the matter before you tonight, I support the
installation of a low fence, as propo sed, on the applicant’s property. Skydan ce should be entitled to define the
perimeter around the older building to keep the non-S kydance public away from the exterior walls of the
historic structure, and discour age well-meaning people from trying to use the Post Office.
We welcome Skydance to our neighborhood. I respectfully ask you to follow City Staff’s recommendation and
deny the appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Hany Iskander
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Ruthann Lehrer <ruthannpreserves@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 9:00 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 6A on August 9 agenda
August 8, 2016
Item 6A: DRP and Variance for former Post Office Landmark
Dear Mayor Vasquez and Councilmembers,
This letter urges you to deny the appeal before you.
I was on the Landmarks Commission when the sale of the Post Office came
before the City, and when the stringent preservation covenant was adopted;
and I have followed the Skydance Productions project with great interest. In
my view, it will be one of the City’s most important accomplishments in the
adaptive reuse of a major landmark building.
The creative arts industry makes a significant contribution to our local
economy and to the image of Santa Monica as a leader in this business
sector. Yet the applicants from Skydance Productions have kept their
addition to a very modest scale, working with the existing building in a
skillful adaptive reuse in which the addition is visually subordinant to the
landmark. A low-scale addition of just three stories is placed behind the
landmark building, and from the pedestrian view along Fifth Street, is not
even visible. The Landmarks Commission, including two experienced
historic preservation architects, has had considerable input into the design of
the addition, ensuring that it meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
for compatibility, with a contemporary design that references design themes
from the landmark but does not introduce a false historicism. The applicant
team includes Robert Chattel, a respected architect with extensive historic
preservation expertise.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
I completely sympathize with those sentiments that regret the loss of this
public institution and its conversion into private property. While we mourn
this loss, a new reality is before us. That was the rationale for the Landmarks
Commission designating the entire parcel as historic, giving them jurisdiction
over all changes to the site. The placem ent of the structure on the site with
surrounding open spaces necessitated a perimeter fence for security. The
design approved by the Landmarks Commission calls for a visually
permeable fence with widely spaced narrow pickets, low enough not to
obstruct views of the landmark. After working with the applicants to reduce
the fence height and make the design visually unobtrusive, Landmarks
Commission approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for the fence.
Despite the Planning Commission’s extensive discussion of a fence, this item
was never within their purview.
Numerous planning documents adopted in Santa Monica call for the
preservation of historic landmarks and their adaptive reuse, with incentives
for code compliance flexibility – the LUCE, the draft DCP, the Historic
Preservation Element. The parking variance requested is consistent with
these policy documents, and is necessitated by the physical constraints
imposed by the preservation of the landmark. As a policy matter, the new
zoning code even reduces parking requirements for the adaptive reuse of
designated historic structures. What is being requested is not a reduction of
the code-required parking, but the re-location of some of the parking off-site.
That seems a very reasonable and justifiable request.
I would like to point out that the dedication of 200 square feet to a public
space with an interpretive art element at the corner of 5 th and Arizona was
entirely voluntary on the applicant’s part, and adds a significant dimension to
the pedestrian experience. The concept design for this element uses images
of U.S. postal stamps to chronicle our local and national history in a creative
and exciting way. It is widely recognized that the preservation of historic
structures enriches the pedestrian ex perience; the commemorative public art
at the corner brings it to a whole new level. Substantial public benefits will
be achieved with this project.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
3
The project team has worked cooperatively for several years with public and
private agencies (such as the Santa Monica Conservancy) to make their
project responsive to community concerns. After so much time and effort,
this project now deserves your support. Please deny the appeal and allow the
project to move forward.
Thank you for your consideration.
Ruthann Lehrer
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Ruthann Lehrer <ruthannpreserves@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 9:28 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 6A
Attachments:Post Office CC appeal.docx
Please see attached letter, sent also on a prior email.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
August 8, 2016
Item 6A: DRP and Variance for former Post Office Landmark
Dear Mayor Vasquez and Councilmembers,
This letter urges you to deny the appeal before you.
I was on the Landmarks Commission when the sale of the Post Office came before the City, and
when the stringent preservation covenant was adopted; and I have followed the Skydance
Productions project with great interest. In my view, it will be one of the City’s most important
accomplish ments in the adaptive reuse of a major landmark building.
The creative arts industry makes a significant contribution to our local economy and to the
image of Santa Monica as a leader in this business sector. Yet the applicants from Skydance
Productions have kept their addition to a very modest scale, working with the existin g building
in a skillful adaptive reuse in which the addition is visually subordinant to the landmark. A low ‐
scale addition of just thr ee stories is placed behind the landmark building, and from the
pedestrian view along Fifth Street, is not even visible. The Landmarks Commission, including
two experienced historic preservation architects, has had considerable input into the design of
the addition, ensuring that it meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for compatibility,
with a contemporary design that referen ces design themes from the landmark but does not
introduce a false historicism. The applicant team includes Robert Chattel, a respected architect
with extensive historic preservation expertise.
I completely sympathize with those sentiments that regret the loss of this public institution and
its conversion into privat e property. While we mourn this loss, a new reality is before us. That
was the rationale for the Landmarks Commission designating the entire parcel as historic, giving
them jurisdiction over all changes to the site. The placement of the structure on the site with
surrounding open spaces necessitated a perimeter fence for security. The design approved by
the Landmarks Commission calls for a visually permeable fen ce with widely spaced narrow
pickets, low enough not to obstruct views of the landmark. After working with the applicants to
reduce the fence height and make the design visually unobtrusive, Landmarks Commission
approved a Certifi cate of Appropriateness for the fence. Despite the Planning Commission’s
extensive discussion of a fence, this item was never within their purview.
Numerous planning documents adopted in Santa Monica call for the preservation of historic
landmarks and their adaptive reuse, with incentives for code compliance flexibility – the LUCE,
the draft DCP, the Historic Preservati on Element. The parking variance requested is consistent
with these policy documents, and is necessitated by the physical constraints imposed by the
preservation of the landmark. As a policy matter, the new zoning code even reduces parking
requirements for the adaptive reuse of designated historic structures. What is being requested
is not a reduction of the code ‐required parking, but the re ‐location of some of the parking off ‐
site. That se ems a very reasonable and justifiable request.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
I would like to point out that the dedication of 200 square feet to a public space with an
interpretive art element at the corner of 5 th and Arizona was entirely voluntary on the
applicant’s part, and adds a significant dimension to the pedestrian experience. The concept
design for this element uses images of U.S. postal stamps to chronicle our local and national
history in a creative and exciting way. It is widely recognized that the preservation of historic
structures enriches the pedestrian experience; the commemorative public art at the corner
brings it to a whole new level. Substantial public benefits will be achieved with this pro ject.
The project team has worked cooperatively for several years with public and private agencies
(such as the Santa Monica Conservancy) to make their project responsive to community
concerns. After so much time and effort, this pr oject now deserves your support. Please deny
the appeal and allow the project to move forward.
Thank you for your consideration.
Ruthann Lehrer
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Carol Lemlein <lemlein@aol.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 6:12 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 6A
Mayor Vazquez and Council Members,
I am writin g you on behalf of the board of the Santa Monica Conservancy to state ou r
stron g support of the Plannin g Commission’s April 20, 2016 approval of a Development
Review Permit and Variance fo r the adaptive reuse of the 5 th Street Post Office by
Skydance Productions.
We urge you to deny the appeal which is befo re you tonight. We see no conflict between
the pro j ect as presented with the key preservation issues and directiv es in the LUCE, no r
with the draft Downtown Commu nity Plan, nor with any other aspect of the historic
preservation policies of the City of Santa Mo nica or with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
LUCE Policy HP1.5 specifically calls out the need to “Support rehabilitation and restoration
of historic resources through flexible zoning policies such as the in-kind replacement o f
non-conforming features and reduced parking requirements .”
Similarly, the proposal conforms to reco mmendations in the Draft Downtown Plan,
specifically Action HP1.6A “Allow flexibility in parkin g , g reen buildin g , and other zonin g
standards, such as exemption from on ‐site parkin g and open space requirements, when
buildings are substantially and appropriatel y preserved or restored as part of a
development pro j ect. Review and, if necessary, re vise standards that may discoura g e
historic rehabilitation and adaptive reuse,” as well as recommendations that “New
buildings, additions, or alterations should re spect the form and materials of the existin g
buildings. It is also possible to be responsi ve to the historic resources by j uxtaposin g
different but complementary forms and materi als to distinguish between old and new.”
The project team includes a well-respected preservation architect and has been workin g
closely with the Landmarks Commission (and with the Conservancy) as the plans have
been developed. Extensive research has been conducted to understand the ori g inal
appearance of the building and ensure that its restoration will be appropriate.
We have also been very pleased to see that the pro j ect team is workin g on an innovative
interpretive plan for the corner of 5 th and Arizona which will have a very positive impact
on the pedestrian experience in the area, an excellent ex ample of proposed DCP Policy
HP2.3 “Where appropriate, Downtown Signage, events, art installations and othe r
activities should include interesting and engaging information that educates the public
about Santa Monica’s history.”
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
These facts and others described in your staff report provide stron g support for the
Plannin g Commission’s approvals. We ur g e you to deny this appe al and allow the adaptive
reuse of this important Santa Mo nica Landmark to move forward.
Sincerely,
Carol Lemlein
President, Santa Monica Conservancy
P.S. Our April 20 letter to the Planning Comm ission, attached below, adds additional
detail on how this proposal co nforms to Santa Monica’s histor ic preservation policies and
standards.
-----Original Message-----
From: Carol Lemlein <lemlein@aol.com >
To: richard <richard@richardmckinnon.com >; andersonsmpc
<andersonsmpc@yahoo.com >; mario <mario@fbharchitects.com >; freddycan
<freddycan@freddycan.net >; jenniferfkennedy <jenniferfkennedy@gmail.com >;
gnewbold <gnewbold@gmail.com >; parryplan <parryplan@gmail.com >
Sent: Wed, Apr 20, 2016 2:09 pm
Subject: Item 8A on tonight's Planning Commission Agenda
Chair McKinnon, Vice-Chair Anderson, and Planning Commissioners
The Board of the Santa Monica Co nservancy strongly supports this Development Review
Permit and Variance request in re g ards to all aspects which have to do with historic
preservation.
We strongly support the issuance of the Parkin g Variance. The buildin g was built ori g inally
without any parking. Allowing parking variances for adaptive reuse of desi g nated
properties is an incentive recognized in our own Landmarks Ordinance as well as in many
other municipalities which encourage adaptive re use of historic properti es. In addition, an
extensive TDM policy is being put in place to minimize or eliminate any ne g ative
effects resulting from the parking variance.
We have followed the development of this design very closely, attendin g each of the
informal and formal reviews with the La ndmarks Commission and have participated
in several meetin g s with the pro j ect team to g ive our feedback. We are comfortable with
the direction the pro j ect has taken and its adherence to the Secretary of the Interio r
Standards. The design is appropriate in scale and massing and has evolved to reco g nize
both the vertical and horizontal elements of the landmark buildin g . The selection o f
materials for the addition is bein g carefully thou g ht out to complement the historic
building.
We look forward to participating in the Certificate of Appropriateness hearin g for these
plans at the Landmarks Co mmission, and to seein g this important buildin g restored and
returned to an active use after being closed by the Post Office almost three years ago.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
3
Best,
Carol Lemlein
President, Santa Monica Conservancy
www.smconservancy.org
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
1
Anne Samartha
From:Santa Monica City Manager's Office
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 9:03 AM
To:councilmtgitems; David Martin; Elaine Polachek
Subject:FW: Post Office Project: email to City Council
FYI
From: Hany Iskander [mailto:hsiskander@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 4:31 PM
To: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Fwd: Post Office Project: email to City Council
August 5, 2016
To: Mayor Tony Vazquez
Councilmembers Davis, Himmelrich, McKeown, O’Connor, O’Day, Winterer
My name is Hany Iskander. I represen t the Saint Peter and Saint Paul Cop tic Orthodox Church, which is located
at 1245 Fourth Street, dir ectly across the alley from the proposed project.
I strongly support the restor ation and adaptive reuse of the former Po st Office building and the construction of
new “creative office” space at 1248 Fifth Street.
The historic Post Office building has been vacant fo r three years, and the downtown neighborhood has missed
having activity on the site.
Keeping our congregation feeling safe and secure is always a concern for us and our congregation. We keep a
busy schedule, including services fo r seniors and children. During Lent, for instance, we hold services on
Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday – sometimes in the evening hours. The presence of
Skydance Media will make our area much safer for ev eryone because the company is committed to provide
robust security measures along the al ley. We appreciate that very much.
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
2
Skydance is a prestigious entertainment company with th e resources to do a very good job on the restoration
and new construction. We have been assured by Skydan ce that any impacts on our church will be minimized
during construction, and that they will respond to a ny concerns we may have.
Skydance’s significant investment in th e property will beautify and enliven the intersection of Arizona and Fifth
Street – a benefit for the entire downt own district – and will allow Skydance to conduct its business at one site.
Although the following comment is not directly related to the matter before you tonight, I support the
installation of a low fence, as propo sed, on the applicant’s property. Skydan ce should be entitled to define the
perimeter around the older building to keep the non-S kydance public away from the exterior walls of the
historic structure, and discour age well-meaning people from trying to use the Post Office.
We welcome Skydance to our neighborhood. I respectfully ask you to follow City Staff’s recommendation and
deny the appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Hany Iskander
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
3
Anne Samartha
From:Santa Monica City Manager's Office
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 9:04 AM
To:councilmtgitems; David Martin; Elaine Polachek
Subject:FW: Item 6-A, August 9, 2016, appeal of Skydance approval
FYI
From: Joanne Leavitt [mailto:joanneleavitt5@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 2:45 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 6 ‐A, August 9, 2016, appe al of Skydance approval
Hon. City Councilmembers:
I am writing to express my support for the 1248 Fifth Street (Post Office) project, and to commend the
applicant on its vision for the adaptive re use of this important historic asset.
As a longtime Santa Monican, I feel a special attachment to the Post Office. For 80 years, it was a place where
local residents reached out to their families and friends via the US Mail, celebrating birthdays, weddings and
holidays with cards and letters. It was also a place where local businesses connected with customers and
merchants when paper and postage stamps – and Air Mail, which was pioneered here in Santa Monica –
represented the state of the art.
The fact that the building was create d as a project of the Public Works Ad ministration is especially meaningful,
a reminder of our country’s ability to pull itself togeth er in challenging times and create infrastructure that
would last for decades.
The applicant’s plan to undertake a first-rate restoration of the build ing is truly laudable.
When the US Postal Service closed the facility, ma ny options were explored for a new use. Its size and
configuration did not work for many applications. Skyda nce’s proposal to adaptivel y reuse the structure for
creative office space by constructing a modest and appropriate addition to the Post Office building is, I believe,
a workable concept. The plan considered by the Planning Commission last Spring – which earned the
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
4
Commission’s approval – is viable a nd attractive. The addition provides the space needed by the company to
conduct its business properly and attract and retain a young, talented workforce.
Skydance’s work with the lo cal preservation community is particularly important to me and the scores of Santa
Monicans who treasure our past. I would applaud a plan to include an occasi onal tour of the historic portion of
the building only, arranged as part of the Santa Monica Conserva tory’s Docent-Guided Wa lking Tours. It would
help acquaint Santa Monicans, young and old, with their city’s rich history and architectural heritage.
This project deserves your support. I urge you to deny the appeal, and uphold the Planning Commission’s
approval.
Sincerely,
Joanne Leavitt
Add to 6-A
08/09/2016
Ap
p
e
a
l
o
f
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
,
2
0
1
6
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
:
•
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
P
e
r
m
i
t
•
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
(f
o
r
m
e
r
U
S
P
o
s
t
O
f
f
i
c
e
)
•
N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
5
th
St
r
e
e
t
/
A
r
i
z
o
n
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
•
C
3
-
C
(
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
)
•
1
5
0
’
X
2
5
0
’
l
o
t
(
3
7
,
3
8
8
s
.
f
.
)
•
O
n
e
-
s
t
o
r
y
w
i
t
h
b
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
m
e
z
z
a
n
i
n
e
(3
3
,
9
6
8
s
.
f
o
f
f
l
o
o
r
a
r
e
a
)
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
S
e
t
t
i
n
g
•
m
u
l
t
i
-
u
s
e
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
b
u
il
d
i
n
g
/
p
l
a
y
a
r
e
a
(
n
o
r
t
h
)
•
a
C
i
t
y
-
o
w
n
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
l
o
t
(
s
o
u
t
h
)
•
a
c
h
u
r
c
h
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
a
n
d
a
s
i
x
-
s
t
o
r
y
m
i
x
e
d
u
s
e
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
(
e
a
s
t
)
•
t
w
o
-
s
t
o
r
y
r
e
t
a
i
l
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
/
t
w
o
-
s
t
o
r
y
c
h
u
r
c
h
co
m
p
l
e
x
(
w
e
s
t
)
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Introduction
Ae
r
i
a
l
P
h
o
t
o
(
2
0
1
4
)
20
1
4
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
(
t
i
m
e
o
f
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
)
19
3
8
-
2
0
1
2
PW
A
M
o
d
e
r
n
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
e
r
v
e
d
a
s
U
S
P
o
s
t
Of
f
i
c
e
Au
g
u
s
t
2
0
1
3
Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
;
s
a
l
e
to
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
p
a
r
t
y
c
a
n
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
3
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
s
o
l
d
Ma
r
c
h
2
0
1
4
De
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
a
s
a
C
i
t
y
L
a
n
d
m
a
r
k
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
5
Ce
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
o
f
A
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
n
e
s
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
fo
r
p
e
r
i
m
e
t
e
r
f
e
n
c
e
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Background
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
P
o
s
t
C
a
r
d
I
m
a
g
e
(
1
9
3
8
)
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Perimeter Fence
Au
g
u
s
t
2
0
,
2
0
1
5
Ce
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
o
f
A
p
p
r
o
p
r
ia
t
e
n
e
s
s
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d plans submitted for
an
e
i
g
h
t
-
f
o
o
t
h
i
g
h
pe
r
i
m
e
t
e
r
f
e
n
c
e
.
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
1
6
,
2
0
1
5
Re
v
i
s
e
d
p
l
a
n
s
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
r
e
d
u
c
i
n
g
f
e
n
c
e
h
e
i
g
h
t
t
o
6
.
5
f
e
e
t
.
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
1
7
,
2
0
1
5
(i
n
i
t
i
a
l
p
u
b
l
i
c
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
)
La
n
d
m
a
r
k
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
ma
t
t
e
r
w
i
t
h
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
t
o
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
ne
e
d
s
w
i
t
h
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
s
t
r
e
e
t
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
a
n
d
t
o
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
v
i
s
u
a
l
p
r
o
m
i
n
e
n
c
e
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
1
4
,
2
0
1
5
(c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
p
u
b
l
i
c
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
)
La
n
d
m
a
r
k
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
s
the Certificate of
Ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
n
e
s
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
p
l
a
n
s
de
p
i
c
t
i
n
g
a
f
i
v
e
f
o
o
t
h
i
g
h
f
e
n
c
e
,
n
o
t
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
a
n
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
w
a
s
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d
a
n
d
t
h
e
la
n
d
m
a
r
k
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
m
o
r
e
p
r
o
m
i
n
e
n
t
.
Th
i
s
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
w
a
s
n
o
t
a
p
p
e
a
l
e
d
.
Pr
i
o
r
S
i
t
e
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
Re
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
D
e
p
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
e
n
c
e
Ad
a
p
t
i
v
e
R
e
u
s
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Su
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
1
9
8
8
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
Cr
e
a
t
i
v
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
(
F
i
l
m
/
T
e
l
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
)
32
-
F
e
e
t
-
T
a
l
l
/
3
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
b
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
12
,
6
4
2
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
e
e
t
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
(3
3
,
9
6
8
s
.
f
.
(
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
)
/
4
8
,
4
5
8
s
.
f
.
(
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
)
0.
8
8
F
l
o
o
r
A
r
e
a
R
a
t
i
o
(2
.
5
I
Z
O
,
3
.
5
G
P
)
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
East Elevation –As Planned
So
u
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
–
A
s
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
North Elevation –As Planned
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
s
t
o
b
e
m
a
d
e
i
n
t
h
e
a
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
v
e
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
P
e
r
m
i
t
•
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
s
i
z
e
,
m
a
s
s
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
pl
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
o
n
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
i
s
a
p
p
r
op
r
i
a
t
e
a
n
d
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
w
i
t
h
th
e
s
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
n
e
ig
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
;
•
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
u
s
es
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
r
e
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
a
n
d
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
le
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
;
•
P
u
b
l
i
c
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
si
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
d
e
s
i
g
n
o
u
t
w
e
i
g
h
an
y
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
;
a
n
d
•
C
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
M
u
n
i
ci
p
a
l
C
o
d
e
a
n
d
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
P
l
a
n
.
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
•
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
c
i
r
c
u
m
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
o
r
e
x
ce
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
;
•
S
t
r
i
c
t
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
ov
i
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
h
i
s
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
wo
u
l
d
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
di
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
i
e
s
o
r
u
n
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
ha
r
d
s
h
i
p
s
;
•
T
h
e
g
r
a
n
t
i
n
g
o
f
s
u
c
h
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
w
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
b
e
d
e
t
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
no
r
i
n
j
u
r
i
o
u
s
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
r
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
i
n
t
h
e
ge
n
e
r
a
l
v
i
c
i
n
i
t
y
.
In
i
t
i
a
l
S
t
u
d
y
/
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
w
a
s
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
,
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
a
n
d
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
.
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Entitlements Proposed Project Model
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
A
c
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
t
o
b
e
H
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
an
d
C
o
n
t
e
x
t
u
a
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
•
S
y
m
m
e
t
r
i
c
a
l
M
a
s
s
i
n
g
;
S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
e
Pl
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
•
V
i
s
u
a
l
l
y
U
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
t
e
d
•
C
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
o
f
S
c
a
l
e
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
th
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
,
c
o
l
o
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
w
i
t
h
Se
c
r
e
t
a
r
y
o
f
t
h
e
I
n
t
e
r
i
o
r
’
s
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
:
•
C
l
a
d
d
i
n
g
/
O
r
n
a
me
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
•
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
i
t
y
v
s
.
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
•
F
e
n
e
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
•
W
a
t
e
r
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
•
S
o
l
a
r
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
•
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
v
e
a
r
e
a
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
A
c
t
i
o
n
–
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
P
e
r
m
i
t
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
–
S
o
u
t
h
(
A
r
i
z
o
n
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
)
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
–
N
o
r
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
c
o
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
th
a
t
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
C
i
r
c
u
m
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
a
n
d
Un
i
q
u
e
H
a
r
d
s
h
i
p
s
e
x
i
s
t
:
•D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
L
a
n
d
m
a
r
k
•P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
•E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
C
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
s
•G
e
n
e
r
a
l
P
l
a
n
/
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
En
h
a
n
c
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
D
e
m
a
n
d
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
:
•F
u
n
d
e
d
E
m
p
l
o
y
e
r
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
•$
2
3
0
/
m
o
n
t
h
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
A
l
l
o
w
a
n
c
e
(D
a
i
l
y
O
p
t
i
o
n
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
)
•2
4
s
h
o
r
t
t
e
r
m
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
•B
i
c
y
c
l
e
s
(
6
)
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
u
s
e
•E
V
/
h
y
b
r
i
d
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
c
a
r
•C
a
r
s
h
a
r
e
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
•A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
t
o
s
e
c
u
r
e
2
3
d
e
e
d
-
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
s
c
o
n
v
e
n
i
e
n
t
t
o
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
i
t
e
.
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
A
c
t
i
o
n
–
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Issues of Appeal
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
–
S
o
u
t
h
(
A
r
i
z
o
n
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
)
/
E
a
s
t
(
5
th
St
r
e
e
t
)
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ti
m
e
l
y
a
p
p
e
a
l
f
i
l
e
d
o
n
M
a
y
4
,
2
0
1
6
Is
s
u
e
s
o
f
C
o
n
c
e
r
n
:
•
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
,
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
o
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
g
o
a
l
s
,
a
n
d
k
e
y
pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
s
u
e
s
a
n
d
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
La
n
d
U
s
e
a
n
d
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
.
•
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
o
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
g
o
a
l
s
o
f
t
h
e
D
r
a
f
t
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Pl
a
n
;
•
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
D
e
m
a
n
d
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
(
T
D
M
)
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
as
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
’
s
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
r
a
i
s
e
s
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
;
a
n
d
•
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
e
n
t
i
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
a
l
l
o
w
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
o
f
f
i
c
e
u
s
e
.
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
Appeal Analysis
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
M
o
d
e
l
–
E
a
s
t
(
5
th
St
r
e
e
t
)
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
La
n
d
U
s
e
a
n
d
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
Su
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
o
f
a
n
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
a
d
a
p
t
i
v
e
r
e
u
s
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
t
h
a
t
i
n
t
eg
r
a
t
e
s
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
p
r
e
s
e
r
va
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
i
n
t
o
su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
s
Co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
D
r
a
f
t
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
P
l
a
n
Ad
h
e
r
e
s
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
t
h
a
t
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
s
a
d
a
p
t
i
v
e
r
e
u
s
e
t
h
a
t
r
e
i
n
f
o
r
c
es
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
u
n
i
q
u
e
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
of
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
.
En
h
a
n
c
e
d
T
D
M
P
l
a
n
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
In
c
e
n
t
i
v
i
z
e
s
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
c
h
o
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
re
d
u
c
e
s
i
n
g
l
e
-
o
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
t
r
i
p
s
.
No
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
E
n
t
i
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
c
o
m
p
l
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
on
s
o
f
1
9
8
8
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
.
12
4
8
5
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
-
A
p
p
e
a
l
o
f
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
(
1
6
E
N
T
-
0
0
6
5
)
St
a
f
f
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
St
a
f
f
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
De
n
y
t
h
e
a
p
p
e
a
l
a
n
d
u
p
h
o
l
d
t
h
e
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
of
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
t
o
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
a
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
P
e
r
m
i
t
a
n
d
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
Va
r
i
a
n
c
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
to
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
D
r
a
f
t
St
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
O
f
f
i
c
i
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
.
Fr
o
n
t
E
n
t
r
y
(
2
0
1
6
)
Lo
b
b
y
(
2
0
1
6
)