SR 04-23-2019 6A (2)
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: April 23, 2019
Agenda Item: 6.A
1 of 26
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, City Planning
Subject: 1828 Ocean Avenue: Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to
approve Development Review Permit (15ENT-0300) to allow a new five-story
(47 feet) 81,630 square-foot mixed-use housing project consisting of 83
residential units, 2,000 square-feet of ground floor commercial space, and
273 automobile parking spaces within a three-level subterranean parking
garage.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeals and uphold the Planning
Commission’s approval by taking the following actions:
1. Deny Appeal 18ENT-0390;
2. Deny Appeal 18ENT-0391;
3. Deny Appeal 18ENT-0392;
4. Approve Development Review Permit 15ENT-0300;
5. Approve Major Modification 18ENT-0226;
6. Approve Waiver 18ENT-0227; and
7. Adopt the Statement of Official Action, pursuant to the draft findings and
conditions.
Executive Summary
A project has been proposed for the property at 1828 Ocean Avenue. On December 5,
2018, the Planning Commission approved Development Review Permit (DRP) 15ENT-
0300, Major Modification (MM) 18ENT-0226, and Waiver (WVR) 18ENT-0227 to allow a
new five-story (47 feet) 81,630 square-foot mixed-use housing project consisting of 83
residential units, 2,000 square-feet of ground floor commercial space, and 273
automobile parking spaces within a three-level subterranean parking garage. The
Planning Commission staff report, Statement of Official Action (STOA), and additional
attachments to this report are provided as attachments.
2 of 26
The Planning Commission’s approval of the DRP, MM, and WVR were appealed by
three parties, all on December 19, 2019: William Johnson (18ENT-0390), South of
Ocean Avenue (SOAR) (18ENT-0391), and UNITE HERE (18ENT-0392).
The appeal statements raise a variety of concerns regarding the following aspects of the
project: (1) Residents were not offered a fair hearing and challenged the accuracy of
project description for the public notification posting at the site, (2) Emergency access
and public safety risk regarding traffic and CEQA, (3) Compliance with the LUCE and
Consistency with Coastal Act, (4) Proposition S Compliance and the potential for
corporate housing, and (5) Devalued property and SOAR’s request for a 20-foot setback
and 36-foot height limit on Vicente Terrace.
Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.37.130, Council’s review of the DRP approval is de novo.
This report describes the proposed project scope, provides relevant background
information, and analyzes the issues of appeal raised by the appellant. The staff report
concludes by recommending that Council approve the DRP based upon the findings set
forth in the Draft Statement of Official Action (Draft STOA).
Background
Existing Conditions and Setting
The following table provides a brief summary of the project location, existing conditions
and setting.
3 of 26
Site Location Map
Zoning District OF – Oceanfront District and BCH –
Beach Overlay District
Land Use Element Designation Oceanfront District
Parcel Area (SF)/Dimensions 45,120 SF (209.43 x 215.90)
Existing On-Site Improvements Parking lot servicing Casa del Mar Hotel
Rent Control Status N/A
Adjacent Zoning Districts & Land Uses
North: R3 and BCH – Multiple Family
Housing
West: OF and BCH – Shutters Hotel
South: R4 and BCH – Multiple Family
Housing
East: CC and BCH – Viceroy Hotel
Historic Resources Inventory N/A
The subject site consists of a single parcel, approximately 45,120 square feet in size.
The property has three street-facing sides including Pico Boulevard, Ocean Avenue,
and Vicente Terrace. Surrounding uses include hotels, single-family housing, and multi-
family housing. The site is currently occupied by a surface parking lot serving Hotel
Casa del Mar.
Project Description
The proposed project is a five-story building with a maximum height of 47 feet from
Average Natural Grade that includes 2,000 square feet of ground floor commercial
space, 83 residential units (including the four affordable units from the 1921 Ocean
4 of 26
Front Walk project) totaling 80,460 square-feet of residential area, and a floor area ratio
of 1.81. Additionally, the project includes 18,480 square feet of open space consisting of
9,290 square feet of common open space and 9,190 square feet of private open space.
The project includes 237 vehicle parking spaces in a three-level subterranean parking
garage for the commercial uses, residential tenants, guests of the building, and
replacement parking for Casa del Mar Hotel. Bicycle parking spaces are proposed at
grade and within the subterranean garage totaling 147 spaces (17 short-term spaces,
130 long-term spaces).
The project’s market-rate residential component consists of residential rental units with
the following overall unit mix:
Unit Type Number of Units % of Market Rate
Units
Average Size
(square feet)
Studio -- -- --
1-Bedroom 44 65.7 740
2-Bedroom 13 19.4 1,090
3-Bedroom 10 14.9 1,400
Table 1: Project Unit Mix – Market-Rate
The project’s affordable housing residential component consists of residential rental
units with the following overall unit mix:
Unit Type Number of Units % of Affordable
Units
Average Size
(square feet)
1-Bedroom
(affordable) 6 50% 680
(Min Req’d: 600)
2-Bedroom
(affordable) 5 41.7% 900
(Min Req’d 850)
3-Bedroom
(affordable) 1 8.3% 1,175
(Min Req’d 1,080)
Table 2: Project Unit Mix – Affordable Housing
In addition to the 12 affordable housing units required for the 1828 Ocean Avenue
project, the four affordable housing units required for the 1921 Ocean Front Walk
project are proposed within the 1828 Ocean Avenue project and consist of the following:
Unit Type Number of Units Percentage of
Entire Project
Number of
bedrooms
1-BR 2 Off-site 2
5 of 26
2-BR 1 Off-site 2
3-BR 1 Off-site 3
TOTAL 4 Off-site 7
Average Number of Bedrooms 1.75
Table 3: Affordable Unit Mix
Figure 1: Project Rendering (Corner of Pico Boulevard and Ocean Avenue)
As shown in Figure 2 below, the ground floor is comprised of one commercial tenant
space at the building frontage totaling approximately 1,170 square-feet in size with a
830 square-foot plaza area adjacent to the corner of Pico Boulevard and Ocean
Avenue. The residential lobby is located along Ocean Avenue, which is accessible to an
elevator and stairs to the residential units on the above and below floor levels. The
upper floors consist entirely of residential units.
6 of 26
Figure 2: Ground Floor Plan
Architectural Review Board Concept Review
Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.40.040 (Development Review Permit - Procedures), a
DRP requires Architectural Review Board (ARB) review and recommendation on the
design of the proposal. The project was presented to the ARB at its July 31, 2017,
meeting. The project design was generally well-received with the ARB expressing
support of the project massing and acknowledging that the location of the new mixed-
use project is challenging due to the site configuration and topography. While the ARB
7 of 26
was positive regarding the overall direction of the project, there were some minor
concerns expressed regarding certain aspects of the design. Staff expressed similar
concerns with the overall project design and met with the applicant to convey these
concerns. While the applicant responded to many of the ARB and staff comments, there
were a few design comments provided by the Architectural Review Board that were not
addressed. The Planning Commission included a condition that the Board pay particular
attention to these issues as pointed out below in the Planning Commission Action
section of this report.
Planning Commission Action
On October 3, 2018 and December 5, 2018, public hearings were held by the Planning
Commission to consider the DRP, MM, and WVR. Public testimony was generally in
opposition to the project, citing design issues along Vicente Terrace, corporate housing,
expansion of hotels, and lack of sufficient affordable housing.
The Commission certified the Environmental Impact Report on October 3, 2018, by a
vote of 7-0. On December 5, 2018, the Planning Commission took formal action on the
DRP, MM, and WVR and voted 5-0 (with 2 absent) to approve the project, with
amendments to Condition #1 in the Planning Commission’s Statement of Official Action
(Attachment B). In approving the project, the Commission included the following
conditions:
• The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as defined in
SMMC Section 9.51.020(A)(2), or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined in
SMMC Section 9.51.030(B)(15), or successor thereto.
• Condition #1 required the ARB to pay particular attention to the following design
elements:
o The relationship of the building along Vicente Terrace and Pico Boulevard and
the connectivity to the public sidewalk.
o The ground floor commercial tenant space and the connectivity to the sidewalk
along Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
8 of 26
o The building design on Vicente Terrace and compatibility to the adjacent low
density neighborhood.
o The planting design details throughout the project.
o The landscaped and open space area on the corner of Ocean Avenue and
Vicente Terrace.
o The terraced landscaping on Vicente Terrace should not be dominated by
concrete planter boxes and should create a more natural, soft-planted area.
o The pedestrian experience on Pico Boulevard by establishing a visual sense of
arrival at the project site that can be anticipated from up the block.
o On the Pico Boulevard side of the project, consider providing an interactive
feature, work of public art, or other element that would be of interest to
pedestrians on route to the beach.
The City Council Draft Statement of Official Action (STOA) (Attachment A) includes this
recommendation as Condition #1.
Discussion
The proposed project is five-story (47 feet) in height and has a 1.81 floor area ratio
(FAR). The project exceeds the maximum Tier 1 limits (3 stories (36 feet) / 1.5 FAR) for
the OF zoning district for projects that include on-site affordable housing in compliance
with the minimum requirements of the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP).
Aside from the Major Modification and Waiver requests as outlined below, the project
complies with all development standards applicable to the site and is within the
established maximums to qualify as a Tier 2 project (no limitation of stories and 47 feet
high / 2.0 FAR) with on-site affordable housing provided.
Development Review Permit
According to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.40.020, a DRP is
required for any project that proposes to exceed Tier 1 development standards. A DRP
is intended to allow the City to review certain projects for which the design, siting, and
9 of 26
location of uses within the project could result in an adverse impact on the surrounding
area. As such, the DRP allows for the discretionary review of:
A. the location, size, massing, and placement of proposed structures;
B. the location of proposed uses within the project;
C. the project’s compliance with fixed and established land use standards; and
D. whether the proposed siting and design should be permitted by weighing the
public need for the benefit to be derived from the proposed site plan use
against the impact which it may cause.
Pursuant to SMMC 9.40.050, in order to approve a DRP, Council on appeal must make
the following findings in an affirmative manner:
A. The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and
placement of proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses
within the project are consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible
and relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods;
B. The rights-of-way can accommodate autos, bicycles, pedestrians, and multi-modal
transportation methods, including adequate parking and access;
C. The health and safety services (police, fire etc.) and public infrastructure (e.g.,
utilities) are sufficient to accommodate the new development;
D. The project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code, General Plan, and any
applicable Specific Plan;
E. Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have
been reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures
incorporated in the project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been
adopted;
F. The project promotes the general welfare of the community;
G. The project has no unacceptable adverse effects on public health or safety; and
H. The project provides Community Benefits consistent with Chapter 9.23.
Major Modification + Waiver
10 of 26
The subject site is unique in that it has three street frontages along Ocean Avenue, Pico
Boulevard, and Vicente Terrace. The property is also unique in that it slopes 0.6 percent
(1 foot 4 inches over approximately 218 feet in length) downward from Vicente Terrace
to Pico Boulevard and it slopes seven percent (16 feet) from Ocean Avenue to the
westerly property line adjacent to Shutters Hotel. On a property such as the subject site,
complying with development standards that are envisioned for primarily flat parcels can
be difficult. The Zoning Ordinance provides additional allowance for sloped parcels with
a grade change of ten percent or more, however, the subject site does not meet that
criterion. Therefore, in order to address unique situations, the Zoning Ordinance allows
applicants to request Modifications and Waivers to provide some relief from the strict
application of development standards. Pursuant to SMMC 9.43.100, in order to approve
the Waiver and Major Modification, Council on appeal must make the following findings
in an affirmative manner:
A. The requested modification is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable
area or specific plan;
B. The project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the applicable zone
districts;
C. The approval or conditional approval of the requested modification will not be
detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working
on the site or result in a change in land use or density that would be inconsistent
with the requirements of this Ordinance;
D. The approval of the requested modification is justified by environmental features,
site conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees;
E. The proposed design meets the Design Objectives of the Santa Monica Design
Guidelines; and
F. The proposed project will not significantly affect the properties in the immediate
neighborhood as a result of approval or conditional approval of the major
modification or be incompatible with the neighborhood character.
Major Modification Request
11 of 26
The applicant has also submitted a Major Modification application seeking relief from
the Active Commercial Design Standards (ACD) standard which requires the ground
floor (floor to floor) height to be within 11 feet to 16 feet. Due to the slope of the parcel,
the applicant is requesting a deviation from the ACD standard to allow for a 19-foot floor
to floor height from the café. In this case, in an effort to align the ground floor of the café
at sidewalk grade on Ocean Avenue and align the residential units above the café with
the residential levels, the floor height exceeds the maximum 16 feet. The applicant has
proposed a design in which the floor to ceiling height would be 15 feet and is therefore
trying to comply with the intent of ACD standard. From the interior and exterior of the
building, the project will have the appearance of code compliance. As depicted on Sheet
A50 of the project plans, the ceiling will have a 4-foot ceiling thickness.
Waiver Request
The applicant has submitted a Waiver application seeking relief from the Active
Commercial Design (ACD) Standard which requires the ground floor level along
commercial boulevards not to exceed 18 inches lower or higher from the adjacent
sidewalk. The applicant has created an exhibit on Sheet A49 of the project plans
depicting the proposed project on the subject site. In this case, the proposed ground
floor commercial space is level with the sidewalk on Ocean Avenue. However, since the
sidewalk slopes seven percent (36 inches) along the front of the café on Pico
Boulevard, the applicant is seeking relief from the ACD standard as it will exceed the
18-inch maximum allowed for this development standard.
As part of staff’s review of the Major Modification and Waiver requests, the applicant
provided plans showing a project without the Major Modification and Waiver requests.
This information was also provided to Planning Commission at its December 5, 2018
hearing. Based on staff’s review of this information, both versions of the project design
would meet the DRP findings for approval. However, the proposed project, with
incorporation of the requests to modify the two active commercial design standards
outlined above, provides for a superior project design and enhanced pedestrian
orientation:
12 of 26
• Superior design – the floor levels are all on the same plane in elevation which is
aesthetically preferred and the floor plans minimize the need for additional stairs
and lifts to access the corner units at Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
• Pedestrian orientation – the ground floor of the corner café and outdoor patio
would be level with the sidewalk on Ocean Avenue. In the Code Compliant
project, the ground floor would be 18” lower than the adjacent sidewalk grade.
Tier 2 Community Benefits
According to Chapter 9.23 of the Zoning Ordinance, projects that exceed the maximum
height or FAR allowed for Tier 1 projects are required to provide the community benefits
outlined in subsection 9.23.030 of the Chapter. The purpose of the community benefits
is to ensure that projects are allowed to exceed the base height and FAR of a
respective zoning district, and in return provide community benefits that enhance the
City’s community character.
The project provides the required community benefits identified in Chapter 9.23
(Community Benefits) of the Zoning Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. This includes at least
50% more affordable housing units than would be required by Section 9.64.050
(Affordable Housing Production Program) of the Zoning Ordinance, and a unit mix of at
least 15% 3-BR units, at least 20% 2-BR units, and no more than 15% Studio units.
Also, the average number of bedrooms for all of the affordable housing units in a Tier 2
project shall be equal to or greater than the average number of bedrooms for all of the
market rate units in the project. Further, the project provides the augmented fees and
TDM requirements established in Chapter 9.23 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Building Massing & Modulation
The project is in compliance with the maximum height limitation of 47 feet (no limitation
of stories) in the OF District based on the measurement of height using ANG. As a
result of the sloped property, using ANG as the basis for height measurement, and
identifying Pico Boulevard as the front parcel line, the building massing is three stories
at Ocean Avenue and five stories at the westerly property line adjacent to Shutters. The
13 of 26
building does not step down with the natural slope of the property. However, the project
is compatible with the neighborhood context by striking balance between two large
hotels (Shutters to the west and Viceroy across Ocean Avenue) and stepping down to
the lower-scale residential district across Vicente Terrace by providing large setbacks
on the ground floor for patios and upper-floor step backs with balconies.
Open Space
The proposed project contains 83 units, which requires a minimum of 8,300 square-feet
of overall open space for the project. As described previously, the project includes
18,140 square-feet of open space consisting of a 9,240 square-feet of common open
space and 8,900 square-feet of private open space. The 8,900 square-feet of private
open space proposed would be provided as balconies and distributed amongst the 83
units for an average of 107 square-feet of private open space per unit. Further, all
individual balconies would be a minimum of 60 square-feet which complies with the
minimum private open space requirements identified above.
Pedestrian Orientation/Active Commercial Design
The ground floor commercial tenant space has a depth of 44’-10” for the ground floor
frontage along Pico Boulevard. Since the subject property does not have alley access;
vehicle ingress and egress, loading, and the trash room is located on Pico Boulevard.
However, the applicant has designed this southern side of the project with landscaping,
outdoor dining, and a residential patio in an effort to create pedestrian orientation to the
sidewalk along Pico Boulevard. As outlined below, due to the 7% slope of the property
along Pico Boulevard, it is not possible to comply with all of the Active Commercial
Design standards required by SMMC Section 9.14.030(A) and Table 9.14.030.
Specifically, the finished ground floor level along a commercial boulevard shall not
exceed 18 inches lower or higher than the adjacent finished grade of the adjacent
sidewalk. In addition, ground floor height for nonresidential uses are required to have a
minimum of 11 feet and maximum of 16 feet. As previously discussed, the applicant
has submitted two requests to deviate from the Active Commercial Design standards:
14 of 26
• Waiver to exceed the maximum 18 inches higher or lower than the finished grade
of the adjacent sidewalk; and
• Major Modification to exceed the 16-foot maximum ground floor (floor to floor)
height.
The project includes a commercial tenant space with a ground floor level 36 inches
higher than the adjacent sidewalk grade on Pico Boulevard and a 19-foot-tall ground
floor (floor to floor) height. The deviation from the code requirements are unique to this
property with three street fronts and a significant slope.
Parking & Access
A three-level subterranean garage with driveway access from Pico Boulevard is
proposed and includes a total of 273 parking spaces to accommodate residents, guests,
and commercial visitors. Code requirements specify a minimum of 130 long-term and 17
short-term bicycle parking spaces be provided in combination. The project meets this
requirement by providing 147 total spaces.
General Plan Consistency
The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies in the
LUCE in that the project is located in Oceanfront District land use designation in the
2010 LUCE. The development parameters in the LUCE are implemented in the Zoning
Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. The proposed project complies with all of the
development standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed development is
also consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies in the LUCE. Specifically, Policy
D18.2 seeks to respect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas
in the design and construction of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages visitor
serving uses consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue
between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
15 of 26
The proposed building complies with the 47-foot building height requirements in the
LUCE and Oceanfront District. Additionally, the proposed project complies with these
goals and policies in that it is a mixed-use building with one small (maximum 2,000
square-feet) ground floor café facing Ocean Avenue with residential as the proposed
use on the upper floors. The Oceanfront District designation is intended to maintain and
enhance the Oceanfront District as an important visitor serving destination with lodging,
restaurants, shopping and recreation, as well as to protect the existing residential
enclaves in the area. The unique character and scale of the area is maintained,
centering on the landmark Santa Monica Pier. New residential and commercial uses are
consistent with the character of existing buildings.
The proposed project complies with these goals and policies in that the mixed-use
residential and commercial building is designed with an inviting and activated ground
floor (the restaurant is a maximum 2,000 square-feet consistent with Proposition S),
includes a variety of housing unit types and affordability, and formed in a manner that is
sensitive to the context of the adjacent properties and surrounding neighborhoods.
Housing Accountability Act (HAA)
The Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 65589.5) ("the HAA") is a
state law that restricts the City's ability to deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible
any housing development project that complies with objective general plan, zoning, and
subdivision standards and criteria (collectively, "Objective Standards"), in effect at the
time that the housing development's application is determined to be complete. The HAA
has been effect since 1982 and has undergone several amendments to further reinforce
the state legislature's intent to increase the supply of residential housing stock. The
most recent amendments went into effect on January 1, 2018.
In essence, the HAA precludes the Planning Commission from denying or imposing any
conditions upon any housing project (including residential units only or mixed-use
projects with at least two-thirds of square footage designated for residential use) that
meets all Objective Standards unless specific findings are made. As proposed, the
16 of 26
project does not comply with all Objective Standards, which include the Active
Commercial Design standards in SMMC Section 9.14.030 (A). The applicant has
submitted a Waiver request (18ENT-0227) for ground floor (floor to floor) height and a
Major Modification request (18ENT-0226) for the ground floor exceeding 18 inches from
the adjacent sidewalk grade. Therefore, the HAA does not apply. However, as
previously discussed, a fully code compliant project was also reviewed in the context of
the Major Modification and Waiver requests and staff believes such a project would also
meet all the findings for approval.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential environmental effects of the
1921 Ocean Front Walk Project and the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project. While the Projects
require two separate development review permit applications, both projects are
analyzed together in the EIR as required by CEQA. Under CEQA, an agency cannot
"piecemeal" the environmental review for a project. The EIR clearly provides an analysis
of each site independently while also evaluating the potential for combined effects. On
October 3, 2018, the Planning Commission certified the Final EIR with a 7-0 vote.
Appeal Summary
The appellants filed timely appeals on December 19, 2018. The appellants’ appeal
statements (Attachment G) raise many specific points as to why the appeal should be
granted and DRP, MM, and WVR denied by Council. In summary, the appeals raise
concerns regarding: (1) Residents were not offered a fair hearing and challenge the
accuracy of project description for the public notification posting at the site, (2)
Emergency access and public safety risk regarding traffic and CEQA, (3) Compliance
with the LUCE and Consistency with Coastal Act, (4) Proposition S Compliance and the
potential for corporate housing, and (5) Devalued property and SOAR’s request for a
20-foot setback and 36-foot height limit on Vicente Terrace.
Appeal Analysis
17 of 26
Staff has reviewed the issues raised by the appellant’s Statement of Appeal and
provides the following analysis and responses:
1. Residents were not offered a fair hearing and accuracy of project
description for the public notification posting at the site.
Two Planning Commissioners, one who made the motion to send the Project
back for revision, and the other who seconded the motion, were both absent
at the second Planning Commission hearing when the approval was granted.
Pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-014 (PCS) and in
accordance with Section 1004 of the City of Santa Monica Charter, four
members of the City’s Planning Commission constitute a quorum. Further,
action granting approval of any substantive matter must be taken by a
majority of four Commissioners voting in favor of the matter. Therefore, since
five Commissioners were present and voted 5-0 in favor of approval, the
hearing and vote were conducted in compliance with the Planning
Commission Resolution and the City’s Charter.
The publicized notice posted at the site listed a project for 1,000 square-feet
of restaurant / café area rather than the 2,000 square-feet considered by the
Planning Commission.
The posting at the site described the mixed-use project as a 47-foot-tall
apartment building with 83 apartments and approximately 1,000 square-feet
restaurant/café above a subterranean parking garage containing
approximately 277 parking spaces, including 127 replacement parking
spaces. The project plans depict an approximate 1,170 square-foot
commercial café tenant space, which will count towards the project’s floor
area. The project also includes 830 outdoor patio space for the commercial
café, which is not counted towards the project’s floor area. The site posting
has been updated for the Council hearing to depict a 2,000 restaurant/café in
order to reduce any confusion.
18 of 26
2. Emergency access and public safety risk regarding traffic and CEQA
Emergency access is already compromised on warm, beach days. The public
safety is at risk by not recognizing that this is an existing problem. Adding
more traffic is irresponsible.
The EIR prepared for the project included an analysis to determine the project’s
impacts on traffic. Based on the analysis, the project would generate 36 AM peak
hour trips, 42 PM peak hour trips, and 42 weekend midday trips. Using the City’s
significance thresholds for the 23 analyzed intersections surrounding the project
site, the project’s trips would not result in a significant traffic impact.
The project’s EIR fails to comply with CEQA.
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential
environmental effects of the 1921 Ocean Front Walk and the 1828 Ocean
Avenue Projects. While the Projects require two separate development review
permits, both projects are analyzed together in the EIR as required by CEQA.
Under CEQA, an agency cannot "piecemeal" the environmental review for a
project. The EIR clearly provides an analysis of each site independently while
also evaluating the potential for combined effects given the proximity of the
Project Sites. On October 3, 2018, the Planning Commission certified the Final
EIR with a 7-0 vote. The EIR was not appealed and remains certified.
3. Compliance with the LUCE and Consistency with Coastal Act
The project is not in conformance with the LUCE.
As stated above in this report, the proposed development is consistent with the
goals, objectives and policies in the LUCE in that the project is located in
19 of 26
Oceanfront District land use designation in the 2010 LUCE. The development
parameters in the LUCE are implemented in the Zoning Ordinance for Tier 2
projects. The proposed project complies with all of the development standards
outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed development is also consistent
with the goals, objectives, and policies in the LUCE. Specifically, Policy D18.2
seeks to respect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas
in the design and construction of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages
visitor serving uses consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of
Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
The proposed building complies with the building height volume for the district, is
consistent with the height and mass of surrounding buildings, and provides an
additional voluntary setback along Vicente Terrace in recognition of the transition
between zoning districts. Additionally, the proposed project complies with the
goals and policies in that it is a mixed-use building with a small (maximum 2,000
square-feet) ground floor café with residential as the proposed use on the upper
floors. The Oceanfront District designation is intended to maintain and enhance
the Oceanfront District as an important visitor serving destination with lodging,
restaurants, shopping and recreation, as well as to protect the existing residential
enclaves in the area. The unique character and scale of the area is maintained,
centering on the Landmark Santa Monica Pier. New residential and commercial
uses are consistent with the character of existing buildings.
The proposed project complies with these goals and policies in that the mixed-
use residential and commercial building is designed with an inviting and activated
ground floor (restaurants are a maximum 2,000 square-feet consistent with
Proposition S), includes a variety of housing unit types and affordability, and
formed in a manner that is sensitive to the context of the adjacent properties and
surrounding neighborhoods.
The project is inconsistent with the Coastal Act.
20 of 26
The City of Santa Monica has a certified Land Use Plan for the Coastal Zone.
However, the City does not have the authority to issue Coastal Development
Permits on behalf of the California Coastal Commission. Therefore, all projects
located in the California Coastal Zone are required to obtain approval from the
California Coastal Commission prior to the issuance of any building permits by
the City of Santa Monica. The applicant is responsible for obtaining any such
permits. Moreover, the proposed project is consistent with various policies in the
City’s Land Use Plan including the following:
Policy 58: New development shall be located within, contiguous with, or in close
proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it, or, where such
areas are not able to accommodate it, in other areas with adequate public
services and where it will not have significant adverse effects, either individually
or cumulatively, on coastal resources.
The project is located within an urban area contiguous with existing development
in the area. The property is accessible from three public streets with adequate
public services and the project will not have significant adverse effects on coastal
resources.
4. Proposition S compliance and the potential for corporate housing
A. Proposition S: The project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar /
Shutters hotel complex, and therefore contravenes the spirit and purpose
of the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay District standards.
The project description for the proposed project includes the following
language:
The 83 residential units are intended for use by persons as their
permanent place of residence and shall not be used as Corporate
Housing or Lodging for persons who intend their occupancy to be
21 of 26
temporary. Consistent with Proposition S, this project does not propose
or constitute an expansion of any hotel use. Other than continuation of
the use of the property by Hotel Casa Del Mar for parking for guests,
visitors and/or employees of that hotel, there shall be no hotel amenities
from the adjacent hotel -- e.g., housekeeping, valet (except as
referenced above), food/room service -- provided at the Project.
Additionally, the Planning Commission included Condition of Approval
No. 2 with the following language:
“The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as
defined in Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.51.020(A)(2),
or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined in SMMC Section
9.51.030(B)(15), or successor thereto.”
Therefore, the proposed description and condition of approval restrict the
use of the proposed project from becoming corporate housing or lodging.
Additionally, aside from the Major Modification and Waiver, the project
complies with all the development standards and land use restrictions in
the Oceanfront District including height, floor area, open space, and
setbacks.
B. Proposition S: The law prohibits the construction of new hotels
(Proposition S and SMMC 9.20.060.A). The space used for parking in
the proposed building is part of the Casa del Mar Hotel. The developer
could no more lawfully put a hotel room, the hotel lobby, the hotel pool,
or any other hotel facility on this site than it can put the hotel parking in
new construction on this site.
Proposition S prohibits new hotels, expansion of hotels, and
restaurants over 2,000 square feet. Proposition S does not regulate
parking, regardless of whether parking is being used by an existing
22 of 26
(legal, non-conforming) hotel. Moreover, neither Proposition S nor the
Zoning Ordinance prevents the existing 127 parking spaces from being
replaced in the project’s subterranean garage. The Zoning Ordinance
specifically allows for the replacement of existing surface parking that
is either code-required or permit-required (SMMC 9.28.040(A)(5)(c)):
“Replacement of Existing Parking”: If a site contains existing surface
parking that serves as Code or permit-required parking for an off-site
user, such as parking spaces may be replaced on-site as part of any
redevelopment of the site, and such replacement parking shall not be
considered parking that exceeds the quantities specified in Section
9.28.060 for purposes of subsection (A)(5)(b).
Therefore, since the existing parking spaces at the subject property are
permit-required for the alcohol CUP at Casa del Mar (CUP 97-003), the
parking spaces are allowed to be replaced. The spaces have no
relationship to Proposition S.
C. Proposition S: Legal, nonconforming use: If the hotel lot is currently a
legal, nonconforming use (SMMC 9.27.020.A and 9.27.050), then that
use may be maintained subject to [specified] provisions. Further, a
nonconforming use shall not be permitted to substantially change in
mode or character of operation (SMMC9.27.050.E). The change from
outdoor to indoor hotel parking in new construction is an impermissible
change in mode or character of operation.
The parking spaces do not substantially change the mode or character
of Casa del Mar per the Zoning Ordinance provisions that relate to
expansions of floor area, expansion of hours of operation, or an
increase of seating in the case of a restaurant. The existing restaurant
at Casa del Mar has not proposed any changes of mode or character.
The City has not received any permit applications for a change in
23 of 26
number of guest rooms, size of restaurant and bar floor areas, number
of restaurant and bar seats, conference/banquet/meeting rooms, or
hours of operation. The proposed development would simply be
incorporating the existing parking space used by Casa del Mar within
the proposed development.
D. Corporate Housing: The conditions of approval are insufficient.
Specifically, Condition of Approval No. 2, which seeks to assure the
project would only be residential, merely reiterates what is already in
the Municipal Code, and does not address a major loophole in the
Municipal Code. The appellant recommends adding conditions of
approval including that would a) prohibit converting the project to
corporate housing and b) require leases be a minimum term of one
year.
The project description specifically states that the residential units are
intended for use by persons as their permanent place of residence and
therefore corporate housing and lodging are not included in the proposed
project. Although typically not required for residential projects, the Planning
Commission has included a condition of approval to specifically prohibit
corporate housing or lodging. If the project operates as corporate housing,
lodging, or anything else not permitted in the Oceanfront District as defined by
the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC), the City would consider it an
illegal operation and a violation of the SMMC and Planning Entitlement.
Staff does not support adding the conditions recommended by the appellant.
Prohibition of converting the project into corporate housing is repetitive in
nature to Condition No. 2, which prevents corporate housing and lodging.
Additionally, requiring leases be a minimum of one year could restrict
residential uses within the Oceanfront District that are otherwise permitted
within multiple-unit dwelling development including Supportive Housing,
24 of 26
Transitional Housing, and Group Residential. Therefore, staff does not
recommend adding either of these recommended conditions.
5. Devalued property and SOAR’s request for a 20-foot setback and 36-foot
height limit on Vicente Terrace side.
The property value of Vicente Terrace owners will be devalued because of the
jarring imposition of this massive, high, out-of-character building that casts
their homes and terrace into shadow.
In the Planning Commission’s Statement of Official Action (STOA), all of the
required findings were made for approval of the project. Additionally, the
Planning Commission certified the Environmental Impact Report for the
project. While many issue areas were evaluated as part of project and
environmental review, the property value of adjacent properties is not one of
the factors identified in the required findings for project approval. Moreover, a
property values study has not been submitted so there is no evidence that
property would in fact be devalued.
The residents on Vicente Terrace have advocated from the beginning for a
20-foot setback, the same that would be required if someone were to build on
the north side of Vicente Terrace today. Additionally, the height on Vicente
Terrace side not exceeding 36 feet.
The subject property is located in the Oceanfront District, which has established
setback and height requirements pursuant to SMMC Section 9.14.030. In this
case, the SMMC requires a five-foot setback for street-facing parcel lines and a
height limitation of 47 feet for Tier 2 projects. The project complies with this
minimum setback requirement on Vicente Terrace and also provides additional
building setback ranging from of approximately 10 feet 4 inches to 17 feet for the
westerly building adjacent to Shutters Hotel and setback range of approximately
15 feet 4 inches to 22 feet setback for the northerly building for the portion of the
building up to 36 feet in height. The portion of the project above 36 feet on
25 of 26
Vicente Terrace is setback approximately 20 feet for the westerly building and
approximately 25 feet for the northerly building. Therefore, while not required to
be set back more than five feet, the project well exceeds the minimum
requirement for the Oceanfront District on Vicente Terrace. Sheet A27 of the
project plans shows a setback comparison of the existing dwellings north of
Vicente Terrace. Additionally, Sheet A10 provides exhibits with a rendering and a
section showing the building stepping back on the upper floor in order to
accommodate a transition to the lower-scaled residential buildings on the north
side of Vicente Terrace.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission approved the Development Review Permit, Major
Modification, and Waiver based on the findings set forth in the Planning Commission
STOA as well as the oral and written testimony presented prior to or during the public
hearings. Council reviews the project de novo. Staff recommends approval of these
three applications based on the findings set forth in the draft Statement of Official
Action.
Alternative Actions
As an alternative to the staff recommendation, Council may choose to approve the
appeal based on revised findings and deny the Development Review Permit, Major
Modification, and Waiver.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action required as a result of the
recommended action.
26 of 26
Prepared By: Russell Bunim, Associate Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. 1828 Ocean Ave DRP Appeal Plans
B. 1828 Ocean Avenue - SOAR Appeal Statement
C. 1828 Ocean Avenue - William Johnson Appeal Statement
D. 1828 Ocean Avenue - UNITE HERE Appeal Statement
E. 1828 Ocean Avenue - UNITE HERE Appeal Supplemental
F. 18ENT-0390 -0391 -0392 Appeal CC STOA (1828 Ocean Avenue)
G. Written Comments
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: April 23, 2019
Agenda Item: 6.A
1 of 26
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, City Planning
Subject: 1828 Ocean Avenue: Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to
approve Development Review Permit (15ENT-0300) to allow a new five-story
(47 feet) 81,630 square-foot mixed-use housing project consisting of 83
residential units, 2,000 square-feet of ground floor commercial space, and
273 automobile parking spaces within a three-level subterranean parking
garage.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeals and uphold the Planning
Commission’s approval by taking the following actions:
1. Deny Appeal 18ENT-0390;
2. Deny Appeal 18ENT-0391;
3. Deny Appeal 18ENT-0392;
4. Approve Development Review Permit 15ENT-0300;
5. Approve Major Modification 18ENT-0226;
6. Approve Waiver 18ENT-0227; and
7. Adopt the Statement of Official Action, pursuant to the draft findings and
conditions.
Executive Summary
A project has been proposed for the property at 1828 Ocean Avenue. On December 5,
2018, the Planning Commission approved Development Review Permit (DRP) 15ENT-
0300, Major Modification (MM) 18ENT-0226, and Waiver (WVR) 18ENT-0227 to allow a
new five-story (47 feet) 81,630 square-foot mixed-use housing project consisting of 83
residential units, 2,000 square-feet of ground floor commercial space, and 273
automobile parking spaces within a three-level subterranean parking garage. The
Planning Commission staff report, Statement of Official Action (STOA), and additional
attachments to this report are provided as attachments.
2 of 26
The Planning Commission’s approval of the DRP, MM, and WVR were appealed by
three parties, all on December 19, 2019: William Johnson (18ENT-0390), South of
Ocean Avenue (SOAR) (18ENT-0391), and UNITE HERE (18ENT-0392).
The appeal statements raise a variety of concerns regarding the following aspects of the
project: (1) Residents were not offered a fair hearing and challenged the accuracy of
project description for the public notification posting at the site, (2) Emergency access
and public safety risk regarding traffic and CEQA, (3) Compliance with the LUCE and
Consistency with Coastal Act, (4) Proposition S Compliance and the potential for
corporate housing, and (5) Devalued property and SOAR’s request for a 20-foot setback
and 36-foot height limit on Vicente Terrace.
Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.37.130, Council’s review of the DRP approval is de novo.
This report describes the proposed project scope, provides relevant background
information, and analyzes the issues of appeal raised by the appellant. The staff report
concludes by recommending that Council approve the DRP based upon the findings set
forth in the Draft Statement of Official Action (Draft STOA).
Background
Existing Conditions and Setting
The following table provides a brief summary of the project location, existing conditions
and setting.
3 of 26
Site Location Map
Zoning District OF – Oceanfront District and BCH –
Beach Overlay District
Land Use Element Designation Oceanfront District
Parcel Area (SF)/Dimensions 45,120 SF (209.43 x 215.90)
Existing On-Site Improvements Parking lot servicing Casa del Mar Hotel
Rent Control Status N/A
Adjacent Zoning Districts & Land Uses
North: R3 and BCH – Multiple Family
Housing
West: OF and BCH – Shutters Hotel
South: R4 and BCH – Multiple Family
Housing
East: CC and BCH – Viceroy Hotel
Historic Resources Inventory N/A
The subject site consists of a single parcel, approximately 45,120 square feet in size.
The property has three street-facing sides including Pico Boulevard, Ocean Avenue,
and Vicente Terrace. Surrounding uses include hotels, single-family housing, and multi-
family housing. The site is currently occupied by a surface parking lot serving Hotel
Casa del Mar.
Project Description
The proposed project is a five-story building with a maximum height of 47 feet from
Average Natural Grade that includes 2,000 square feet of ground floor commercial
space, 83 residential units (including the four affordable units from the 1921 Ocean
4 of 26
Front Walk project) totaling 80,460 square-feet of residential area, and a floor area ratio
of 1.81. Additionally, the project includes 18,480 square feet of open space consisting of
9,290 square feet of common open space and 9,190 square feet of private open space.
The project includes 237 vehicle parking spaces in a three-level subterranean parking
garage for the commercial uses, residential tenants, guests of the building, and
replacement parking for Casa del Mar Hotel. Bicycle parking spaces are proposed at
grade and within the subterranean garage totaling 147 spaces (17 short-term spaces,
130 long-term spaces).
The project’s market-rate residential component consists of residential rental units with
the following overall unit mix:
Unit Type Number of Units % of Market Rate
Units
Average Size
(square feet)
Studio -- -- --
1-Bedroom 44 65.7 740
2-Bedroom 13 19.4 1,090
3-Bedroom 10 14.9 1,400
Table 1: Project Unit Mix – Market-Rate
The project’s affordable housing residential component consists of residential rental
units with the following overall unit mix:
Unit Type Number of Units % of Affordable
Units
Average Size
(square feet)
1-Bedroom
(affordable) 6 50% 680
(Min Req’d: 600)
2-Bedroom
(affordable) 5 41.7% 900
(Min Req’d 850)
3-Bedroom
(affordable) 1 8.3% 1,175
(Min Req’d 1,080)
Table 2: Project Unit Mix – Affordable Housing
In addition to the 12 affordable housing units required for the 1828 Ocean Avenue
project, the four affordable housing units required for the 1921 Ocean Front Walk
project are proposed within the 1828 Ocean Avenue project and consist of the following:
Unit Type Number of Units Percentage of
Entire Project
Number of
bedrooms
1-BR 2 Off-site 2
5 of 26
2-BR 1 Off-site 2
3-BR 1 Off-site 3
TOTAL 4 Off-site 7
Average Number of Bedrooms 1.75
Table 3: Affordable Unit Mix
Figure 1: Project Rendering (Corner of Pico Boulevard and Ocean Avenue)
As shown in Figure 2 below, the ground floor is comprised of one commercial tenant
space at the building frontage totaling approximately 1,170 square-feet in size with a
830 square-foot plaza area adjacent to the corner of Pico Boulevard and Ocean
Avenue. The residential lobby is located along Ocean Avenue, which is accessible to an
elevator and stairs to the residential units on the above and below floor levels. The
upper floors consist entirely of residential units.
6 of 26
Figure 2: Ground Floor Plan
Architectural Review Board Concept Review
Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.40.040 (Development Review Permit - Procedures), a
DRP requires Architectural Review Board (ARB) review and recommendation on the
design of the proposal. The project was presented to the ARB at its July 31, 2017,
meeting. The project design was generally well-received with the ARB expressing
support of the project massing and acknowledging that the location of the new mixed-
use project is challenging due to the site configuration and topography. While the ARB
7 of 26
was positive regarding the overall direction of the project, there were some minor
concerns expressed regarding certain aspects of the design. Staff expressed similar
concerns with the overall project design and met with the applicant to convey these
concerns. While the applicant responded to many of the ARB and staff comments, there
were a few design comments provided by the Architectural Review Board that were not
addressed. The Planning Commission included a condition that the Board pay particular
attention to these issues as pointed out below in the Planning Commission Action
section of this report.
Planning Commission Action
On October 3, 2018 and December 5, 2018, public hearings were held by the Planning
Commission to consider the DRP, MM, and WVR. Public testimony was generally in
opposition to the project, citing design issues along Vicente Terrace, corporate housing,
expansion of hotels, and lack of sufficient affordable housing.
The Commission certified the Environmental Impact Report on October 3, 2018, by a
vote of 7-0. On December 5, 2018, the Planning Commission took formal action on the
DRP, MM, and WVR and voted 5-0 (with 2 absent) to approve the project, with
amendments to Condition #1 in the Planning Commission’s Statement of Official Action
(Attachment B). In approving the project, the Commission included the following
conditions:
• The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as defined in
SMMC Section 9.51.020(A)(2), or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined in
SMMC Section 9.51.030(B)(15), or successor thereto.
• Condition #1 required the ARB to pay particular attention to the following design
elements:
o The relationship of the building along Vicente Terrace and Pico Boulevard and
the connectivity to the public sidewalk.
o The ground floor commercial tenant space and the connectivity to the sidewalk
along Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
8 of 26
o The building design on Vicente Terrace and compatibility to the adjacent low
density neighborhood.
o The planting design details throughout the project.
o The landscaped and open space area on the corner of Ocean Avenue and
Vicente Terrace.
o The terraced landscaping on Vicente Terrace should not be dominated by
concrete planter boxes and should create a more natural, soft-planted area.
o The pedestrian experience on Pico Boulevard by establishing a visual sense of
arrival at the project site that can be anticipated from up the block.
o On the Pico Boulevard side of the project, consider providing an interactive
feature, work of public art, or other element that would be of interest to
pedestrians on route to the beach.
The City Council Draft Statement of Official Action (STOA) (Attachment A) includes this
recommendation as Condition #1.
Discussion
The proposed project is five-story (47 feet) in height and has a 1.81 floor area ratio
(FAR). The project exceeds the maximum Tier 1 limits (3 stories (36 feet) / 1.5 FAR) for
the OF zoning district for projects that include on-site affordable housing in compliance
with the minimum requirements of the Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP).
Aside from the Major Modification and Waiver requests as outlined below, the project
complies with all development standards applicable to the site and is within the
established maximums to qualify as a Tier 2 project (no limitation of stories and 47 feet
high / 2.0 FAR) with on-site affordable housing provided.
Development Review Permit
According to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.40.020, a DRP is
required for any project that proposes to exceed Tier 1 development standards. A DRP
is intended to allow the City to review certain projects for which the design, siting, and
9 of 26
location of uses within the project could result in an adverse impact on the surrounding
area. As such, the DRP allows for the discretionary review of:
A. the location, size, massing, and placement of proposed structures;
B. the location of proposed uses within the project;
C. the project’s compliance with fixed and established land use standards; and
D. whether the proposed siting and design should be permitted by weighing the
public need for the benefit to be derived from the proposed site plan use
against the impact which it may cause.
Pursuant to SMMC 9.40.050, in order to approve a DRP, Council on appeal must make
the following findings in an affirmative manner:
A. The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and
placement of proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses
within the project are consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible
and relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods;
B. The rights-of-way can accommodate autos, bicycles, pedestrians, and multi-modal
transportation methods, including adequate parking and access;
C. The health and safety services (police, fire etc.) and public infrastructure (e.g.,
utilities) are sufficient to accommodate the new development;
D. The project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code, General Plan, and any
applicable Specific Plan;
E. Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have
been reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures
incorporated in the project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been
adopted;
F. The project promotes the general welfare of the community;
G. The project has no unacceptable adverse effects on public health or safety; and
H. The project provides Community Benefits consistent with Chapter 9.23.
Major Modification + Waiver
10 of 26
The subject site is unique in that it has three street frontages along Ocean Avenue, Pico
Boulevard, and Vicente Terrace. The property is also unique in that it slopes 0.6 percent
(1 foot 4 inches over approximately 218 feet in length) downward from Vicente Terrace
to Pico Boulevard and it slopes seven percent (16 feet) from Ocean Avenue to the
westerly property line adjacent to Shutters Hotel. On a property such as the subject site,
complying with development standards that are envisioned for primarily flat parcels can
be difficult. The Zoning Ordinance provides additional allowance for sloped parcels with
a grade change of ten percent or more, however, the subject site does not meet that
criterion. Therefore, in order to address unique situations, the Zoning Ordinance allows
applicants to request Modifications and Waivers to provide some relief from the strict
application of development standards. Pursuant to SMMC 9.43.100, in order to approve
the Waiver and Major Modification, Council on appeal must make the following findings
in an affirmative manner:
A. The requested modification is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable
area or specific plan;
B. The project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the applicable zone
districts;
C. The approval or conditional approval of the requested modification will not be
detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working
on the site or result in a change in land use or density that would be inconsistent
with the requirements of this Ordinance;
D. The approval of the requested modification is justified by environmental features,
site conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees;
E. The proposed design meets the Design Objectives of the Santa Monica Design
Guidelines; and
F. The proposed project will not significantly affect the properties in the immediate
neighborhood as a result of approval or conditional approval of the major
modification or be incompatible with the neighborhood character.
Major Modification Request
11 of 26
The applicant has also submitted a Major Modification application seeking relief from
the Active Commercial Design Standards (ACD) standard which requires the ground
floor (floor to floor) height to be within 11 feet to 16 feet. Due to the slope of the parcel,
the applicant is requesting a deviation from the ACD standard to allow for a 19-foot floor
to floor height from the café. In this case, in an effort to align the ground floor of the café
at sidewalk grade on Ocean Avenue and align the residential units above the café with
the residential levels, the floor height exceeds the maximum 16 feet. The applicant has
proposed a design in which the floor to ceiling height would be 15 feet and is therefore
trying to comply with the intent of ACD standard. From the interior and exterior of the
building, the project will have the appearance of code compliance. As depicted on Sheet
A50 of the project plans, the ceiling will have a 4-foot ceiling thickness.
Waiver Request
The applicant has submitted a Waiver application seeking relief from the Active
Commercial Design (ACD) Standard which requires the ground floor level along
commercial boulevards not to exceed 18 inches lower or higher from the adjacent
sidewalk. The applicant has created an exhibit on Sheet A49 of the project plans
depicting the proposed project on the subject site. In this case, the proposed ground
floor commercial space is level with the sidewalk on Ocean Avenue. However, since the
sidewalk slopes seven percent (36 inches) along the front of the café on Pico
Boulevard, the applicant is seeking relief from the ACD standard as it will exceed the
18-inch maximum allowed for this development standard.
As part of staff’s review of the Major Modification and Waiver requests, the applicant
provided plans showing a project without the Major Modification and Waiver requests.
This information was also provided to Planning Commission at its December 5, 2018
hearing. Based on staff’s review of this information, both versions of the project design
would meet the DRP findings for approval. However, the proposed project, with
incorporation of the requests to modify the two active commercial design standards
outlined above, provides for a superior project design and enhanced pedestrian
orientation:
12 of 26
• Superior design – the floor levels are all on the same plane in elevation which is
aesthetically preferred and the floor plans minimize the need for additional stairs
and lifts to access the corner units at Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
• Pedestrian orientation – the ground floor of the corner café and outdoor patio
would be level with the sidewalk on Ocean Avenue. In the Code Compliant
project, the ground floor would be 18” lower than the adjacent sidewalk grade.
Tier 2 Community Benefits
According to Chapter 9.23 of the Zoning Ordinance, projects that exceed the maximum
height or FAR allowed for Tier 1 projects are required to provide the community benefits
outlined in subsection 9.23.030 of the Chapter. The purpose of the community benefits
is to ensure that projects are allowed to exceed the base height and FAR of a
respective zoning district, and in return provide community benefits that enhance the
City’s community character.
The project provides the required community benefits identified in Chapter 9.23
(Community Benefits) of the Zoning Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. This includes at least
50% more affordable housing units than would be required by Section 9.64.050
(Affordable Housing Production Program) of the Zoning Ordinance, and a unit mix of at
least 15% 3-BR units, at least 20% 2-BR units, and no more than 15% Studio units.
Also, the average number of bedrooms for all of the affordable housing units in a Tier 2
project shall be equal to or greater than the average number of bedrooms for all of the
market rate units in the project. Further, the project provides the augmented fees and
TDM requirements established in Chapter 9.23 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Building Massing & Modulation
The project is in compliance with the maximum height limitation of 47 feet (no limitation
of stories) in the OF District based on the measurement of height using ANG. As a
result of the sloped property, using ANG as the basis for height measurement, and
identifying Pico Boulevard as the front parcel line, the building massing is three stories
at Ocean Avenue and five stories at the westerly property line adjacent to Shutters. The
13 of 26
building does not step down with the natural slope of the property. However, the project
is compatible with the neighborhood context by striking balance between two large
hotels (Shutters to the west and Viceroy across Ocean Avenue) and stepping down to
the lower-scale residential district across Vicente Terrace by providing large setbacks
on the ground floor for patios and upper-floor step backs with balconies.
Open Space
The proposed project contains 83 units, which requires a minimum of 8,300 square-feet
of overall open space for the project. As described previously, the project includes
18,140 square-feet of open space consisting of a 9,240 square-feet of common open
space and 8,900 square-feet of private open space. The 8,900 square-feet of private
open space proposed would be provided as balconies and distributed amongst the 83
units for an average of 107 square-feet of private open space per unit. Further, all
individual balconies would be a minimum of 60 square-feet which complies with the
minimum private open space requirements identified above.
Pedestrian Orientation/Active Commercial Design
The ground floor commercial tenant space has a depth of 44’-10” for the ground floor
frontage along Pico Boulevard. Since the subject property does not have alley access;
vehicle ingress and egress, loading, and the trash room is located on Pico Boulevard.
However, the applicant has designed this southern side of the project with landscaping,
outdoor dining, and a residential patio in an effort to create pedestrian orientation to the
sidewalk along Pico Boulevard. As outlined below, due to the 7% slope of the property
along Pico Boulevard, it is not possible to comply with all of the Active Commercial
Design standards required by SMMC Section 9.14.030(A) and Table 9.14.030.
Specifically, the finished ground floor level along a commercial boulevard shall not
exceed 18 inches lower or higher than the adjacent finished grade of the adjacent
sidewalk. In addition, ground floor height for nonresidential uses are required to have a
minimum of 11 feet and maximum of 16 feet. As previously discussed, the applicant
has submitted two requests to deviate from the Active Commercial Design standards:
14 of 26
• Waiver to exceed the maximum 18 inches higher or lower than the finished grade
of the adjacent sidewalk; and
• Major Modification to exceed the 16-foot maximum ground floor (floor to floor)
height.
The project includes a commercial tenant space with a ground floor level 36 inches
higher than the adjacent sidewalk grade on Pico Boulevard and a 19-foot-tall ground
floor (floor to floor) height. The deviation from the code requirements are unique to this
property with three street fronts and a significant slope.
Parking & Access
A three-level subterranean garage with driveway access from Pico Boulevard is
proposed and includes a total of 273 parking spaces to accommodate residents, guests,
and commercial visitors. Code requirements specify a minimum of 130 long-term and 17
short-term bicycle parking spaces be provided in combination. The project meets this
requirement by providing 147 total spaces.
General Plan Consistency
The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies in the
LUCE in that the project is located in Oceanfront District land use designation in the
2010 LUCE. The development parameters in the LUCE are implemented in the Zoning
Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. The proposed project complies with all of the
development standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed development is
also consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies in the LUCE. Specifically, Policy
D18.2 seeks to respect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas
in the design and construction of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages visitor
serving uses consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue
between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
15 of 26
The proposed building complies with the 47-foot building height requirements in the
LUCE and Oceanfront District. Additionally, the proposed project complies with these
goals and policies in that it is a mixed-use building with one small (maximum 2,000
square-feet) ground floor café facing Ocean Avenue with residential as the proposed
use on the upper floors. The Oceanfront District designation is intended to maintain and
enhance the Oceanfront District as an important visitor serving destination with lodging,
restaurants, shopping and recreation, as well as to protect the existing residential
enclaves in the area. The unique character and scale of the area is maintained,
centering on the landmark Santa Monica Pier. New residential and commercial uses are
consistent with the character of existing buildings.
The proposed project complies with these goals and policies in that the mixed-use
residential and commercial building is designed with an inviting and activated ground
floor (the restaurant is a maximum 2,000 square-feet consistent with Proposition S),
includes a variety of housing unit types and affordability, and formed in a manner that is
sensitive to the context of the adjacent properties and surrounding neighborhoods.
Housing Accountability Act (HAA)
The Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 65589.5) ("the HAA") is a
state law that restricts the City's ability to deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible
any housing development project that complies with objective general plan, zoning, and
subdivision standards and criteria (collectively, "Objective Standards"), in effect at the
time that the housing development's application is determined to be complete. The HAA
has been effect since 1982 and has undergone several amendments to further reinforce
the state legislature's intent to increase the supply of residential housing stock. The
most recent amendments went into effect on January 1, 2018.
In essence, the HAA precludes the Planning Commission from denying or imposing any
conditions upon any housing project (including residential units only or mixed-use
projects with at least two-thirds of square footage designated for residential use) that
meets all Objective Standards unless specific findings are made. As proposed, the
16 of 26
project does not comply with all Objective Standards, which include the Active
Commercial Design standards in SMMC Section 9.14.030 (A). The applicant has
submitted a Waiver request (18ENT-0227) for ground floor (floor to floor) height and a
Major Modification request (18ENT-0226) for the ground floor exceeding 18 inches from
the adjacent sidewalk grade. Therefore, the HAA does not apply. However, as
previously discussed, a fully code compliant project was also reviewed in the context of
the Major Modification and Waiver requests and staff believes such a project would also
meet all the findings for approval.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential environmental effects of the
1921 Ocean Front Walk Project and the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project. While the Projects
require two separate development review permit applications, both projects are
analyzed together in the EIR as required by CEQA. Under CEQA, an agency cannot
"piecemeal" the environmental review for a project. The EIR clearly provides an analysis
of each site independently while also evaluating the potential for combined effects. On
October 3, 2018, the Planning Commission certified the Final EIR with a 7-0 vote.
Appeal Summary
The appellants filed timely appeals on December 19, 2018. The appellants’ appeal
statements (Attachment G) raise many specific points as to why the appeal should be
granted and DRP, MM, and WVR denied by Council. In summary, the appeals raise
concerns regarding: (1) Residents were not offered a fair hearing and challenge the
accuracy of project description for the public notification posting at the site, (2)
Emergency access and public safety risk regarding traffic and CEQA, (3) Compliance
with the LUCE and Consistency with Coastal Act, (4) Proposition S Compliance and the
potential for corporate housing, and (5) Devalued property and SOAR’s request for a
20-foot setback and 36-foot height limit on Vicente Terrace.
Appeal Analysis
17 of 26
Staff has reviewed the issues raised by the appellant’s Statement of Appeal and
provides the following analysis and responses:
1. Residents were not offered a fair hearing and accuracy of project
description for the public notification posting at the site.
Two Planning Commissioners, one who made the motion to send the Project
back for revision, and the other who seconded the motion, were both absent
at the second Planning Commission hearing when the approval was granted.
Pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-014 (PCS) and in
accordance with Section 1004 of the City of Santa Monica Charter, four
members of the City’s Planning Commission constitute a quorum. Further,
action granting approval of any substantive matter must be taken by a
majority of four Commissioners voting in favor of the matter. Therefore, since
five Commissioners were present and voted 5-0 in favor of approval, the
hearing and vote were conducted in compliance with the Planning
Commission Resolution and the City’s Charter.
The publicized notice posted at the site listed a project for 1,000 square-feet
of restaurant / café area rather than the 2,000 square-feet considered by the
Planning Commission.
The posting at the site described the mixed-use project as a 47-foot-tall
apartment building with 83 apartments and approximately 1,000 square-feet
restaurant/café above a subterranean parking garage containing
approximately 277 parking spaces, including 127 replacement parking
spaces. The project plans depict an approximate 1,170 square-foot
commercial café tenant space, which will count towards the project’s floor
area. The project also includes 830 outdoor patio space for the commercial
café, which is not counted towards the project’s floor area. The site posting
has been updated for the Council hearing to depict a 2,000 restaurant/café in
order to reduce any confusion.
18 of 26
2. Emergency access and public safety risk regarding traffic and CEQA
Emergency access is already compromised on warm, beach days. The public
safety is at risk by not recognizing that this is an existing problem. Adding
more traffic is irresponsible.
The EIR prepared for the project included an analysis to determine the project’s
impacts on traffic. Based on the analysis, the project would generate 36 AM peak
hour trips, 42 PM peak hour trips, and 42 weekend midday trips. Using the City’s
significance thresholds for the 23 analyzed intersections surrounding the project
site, the project’s trips would not result in a significant traffic impact.
The project’s EIR fails to comply with CEQA.
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential
environmental effects of the 1921 Ocean Front Walk and the 1828 Ocean
Avenue Projects. While the Projects require two separate development review
permits, both projects are analyzed together in the EIR as required by CEQA.
Under CEQA, an agency cannot "piecemeal" the environmental review for a
project. The EIR clearly provides an analysis of each site independently while
also evaluating the potential for combined effects given the proximity of the
Project Sites. On October 3, 2018, the Planning Commission certified the Final
EIR with a 7-0 vote. The EIR was not appealed and remains certified.
3. Compliance with the LUCE and Consistency with Coastal Act
The project is not in conformance with the LUCE.
As stated above in this report, the proposed development is consistent with the
goals, objectives and policies in the LUCE in that the project is located in
19 of 26
Oceanfront District land use designation in the 2010 LUCE. The development
parameters in the LUCE are implemented in the Zoning Ordinance for Tier 2
projects. The proposed project complies with all of the development standards
outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed development is also consistent
with the goals, objectives, and policies in the LUCE. Specifically, Policy D18.2
seeks to respect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas
in the design and construction of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages
visitor serving uses consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of
Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
The proposed building complies with the building height volume for the district, is
consistent with the height and mass of surrounding buildings, and provides an
additional voluntary setback along Vicente Terrace in recognition of the transition
between zoning districts. Additionally, the proposed project complies with the
goals and policies in that it is a mixed-use building with a small (maximum 2,000
square-feet) ground floor café with residential as the proposed use on the upper
floors. The Oceanfront District designation is intended to maintain and enhance
the Oceanfront District as an important visitor serving destination with lodging,
restaurants, shopping and recreation, as well as to protect the existing residential
enclaves in the area. The unique character and scale of the area is maintained,
centering on the Landmark Santa Monica Pier. New residential and commercial
uses are consistent with the character of existing buildings.
The proposed project complies with these goals and policies in that the mixed-
use residential and commercial building is designed with an inviting and activated
ground floor (restaurants are a maximum 2,000 square-feet consistent with
Proposition S), includes a variety of housing unit types and affordability, and
formed in a manner that is sensitive to the context of the adjacent properties and
surrounding neighborhoods.
The project is inconsistent with the Coastal Act.
20 of 26
The City of Santa Monica has a certified Land Use Plan for the Coastal Zone.
However, the City does not have the authority to issue Coastal Development
Permits on behalf of the California Coastal Commission. Therefore, all projects
located in the California Coastal Zone are required to obtain approval from the
California Coastal Commission prior to the issuance of any building permits by
the City of Santa Monica. The applicant is responsible for obtaining any such
permits. Moreover, the proposed project is consistent with various policies in the
City’s Land Use Plan including the following:
Policy 58: New development shall be located within, contiguous with, or in close
proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it, or, where such
areas are not able to accommodate it, in other areas with adequate public
services and where it will not have significant adverse effects, either individually
or cumulatively, on coastal resources.
The project is located within an urban area contiguous with existing development
in the area. The property is accessible from three public streets with adequate
public services and the project will not have significant adverse effects on coastal
resources.
4. Proposition S compliance and the potential for corporate housing
A. Proposition S: The project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar /
Shutters hotel complex, and therefore contravenes the spirit and purpose
of the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay District standards.
The project description for the proposed project includes the following
language:
The 83 residential units are intended for use by persons as their
permanent place of residence and shall not be used as Corporate
Housing or Lodging for persons who intend their occupancy to be
21 of 26
temporary. Consistent with Proposition S, this project does not propose
or constitute an expansion of any hotel use. Other than continuation of
the use of the property by Hotel Casa Del Mar for parking for guests,
visitors and/or employees of that hotel, there shall be no hotel amenities
from the adjacent hotel -- e.g., housekeeping, valet (except as
referenced above), food/room service -- provided at the Project.
Additionally, the Planning Commission included Condition of Approval
No. 2 with the following language:
“The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as
defined in Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.51.020(A)(2),
or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined in SMMC Section
9.51.030(B)(15), or successor thereto.”
Therefore, the proposed description and condition of approval restrict the
use of the proposed project from becoming corporate housing or lodging.
Additionally, aside from the Major Modification and Waiver, the project
complies with all the development standards and land use restrictions in
the Oceanfront District including height, floor area, open space, and
setbacks.
B. Proposition S: The law prohibits the construction of new hotels
(Proposition S and SMMC 9.20.060.A). The space used for parking in
the proposed building is part of the Casa del Mar Hotel. The developer
could no more lawfully put a hotel room, the hotel lobby, the hotel pool,
or any other hotel facility on this site than it can put the hotel parking in
new construction on this site.
Proposition S prohibits new hotels, expansion of hotels, and
restaurants over 2,000 square feet. Proposition S does not regulate
parking, regardless of whether parking is being used by an existing
22 of 26
(legal, non-conforming) hotel. Moreover, neither Proposition S nor the
Zoning Ordinance prevents the existing 127 parking spaces from being
replaced in the project’s subterranean garage. The Zoning Ordinance
specifically allows for the replacement of existing surface parking that
is either code-required or permit-required (SMMC 9.28.040(A)(5)(c)):
“Replacement of Existing Parking”: If a site contains existing surface
parking that serves as Code or permit-required parking for an off-site
user, such as parking spaces may be replaced on-site as part of any
redevelopment of the site, and such replacement parking shall not be
considered parking that exceeds the quantities specified in Section
9.28.060 for purposes of subsection (A)(5)(b).
Therefore, since the existing parking spaces at the subject property are
permit-required for the alcohol CUP at Casa del Mar (CUP 97-003), the
parking spaces are allowed to be replaced. The spaces have no
relationship to Proposition S.
C. Proposition S: Legal, nonconforming use: If the hotel lot is currently a
legal, nonconforming use (SMMC 9.27.020.A and 9.27.050), then that
use may be maintained subject to [specified] provisions. Further, a
nonconforming use shall not be permitted to substantially change in
mode or character of operation (SMMC9.27.050.E). The change from
outdoor to indoor hotel parking in new construction is an impermissible
change in mode or character of operation.
The parking spaces do not substantially change the mode or character
of Casa del Mar per the Zoning Ordinance provisions that relate to
expansions of floor area, expansion of hours of operation, or an
increase of seating in the case of a restaurant. The existing restaurant
at Casa del Mar has not proposed any changes of mode or character.
The City has not received any permit applications for a change in
23 of 26
number of guest rooms, size of restaurant and bar floor areas, number
of restaurant and bar seats, conference/banquet/meeting rooms, or
hours of operation. The proposed development would simply be
incorporating the existing parking space used by Casa del Mar within
the proposed development.
D. Corporate Housing: The conditions of approval are insufficient.
Specifically, Condition of Approval No. 2, which seeks to assure the
project would only be residential, merely reiterates what is already in
the Municipal Code, and does not address a major loophole in the
Municipal Code. The appellant recommends adding conditions of
approval including that would a) prohibit converting the project to
corporate housing and b) require leases be a minimum term of one
year.
The project description specifically states that the residential units are
intended for use by persons as their permanent place of residence and
therefore corporate housing and lodging are not included in the proposed
project. Although typically not required for residential projects, the Planning
Commission has included a condition of approval to specifically prohibit
corporate housing or lodging. If the project operates as corporate housing,
lodging, or anything else not permitted in the Oceanfront District as defined by
the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC), the City would consider it an
illegal operation and a violation of the SMMC and Planning Entitlement.
Staff does not support adding the conditions recommended by the appellant.
Prohibition of converting the project into corporate housing is repetitive in
nature to Condition No. 2, which prevents corporate housing and lodging.
Additionally, requiring leases be a minimum of one year could restrict
residential uses within the Oceanfront District that are otherwise permitted
within multiple-unit dwelling development including Supportive Housing,
24 of 26
Transitional Housing, and Group Residential. Therefore, staff does not
recommend adding either of these recommended conditions.
5. Devalued property and SOAR’s request for a 20-foot setback and 36-foot
height limit on Vicente Terrace side.
The property value of Vicente Terrace owners will be devalued because of the
jarring imposition of this massive, high, out-of-character building that casts
their homes and terrace into shadow.
In the Planning Commission’s Statement of Official Action (STOA), all of the
required findings were made for approval of the project. Additionally, the
Planning Commission certified the Environmental Impact Report for the
project. While many issue areas were evaluated as part of project and
environmental review, the property value of adjacent properties is not one of
the factors identified in the required findings for project approval. Moreover, a
property values study has not been submitted so there is no evidence that
property would in fact be devalued.
The residents on Vicente Terrace have advocated from the beginning for a
20-foot setback, the same that would be required if someone were to build on
the north side of Vicente Terrace today. Additionally, the height on Vicente
Terrace side not exceeding 36 feet.
The subject property is located in the Oceanfront District, which has established
setback and height requirements pursuant to SMMC Section 9.14.030. In this
case, the SMMC requires a five-foot setback for street-facing parcel lines and a
height limitation of 47 feet for Tier 2 projects. The project complies with this
minimum setback requirement on Vicente Terrace and also provides additional
building setback ranging from of approximately 10 feet 4 inches to 17 feet for the
westerly building adjacent to Shutters Hotel and setback range of approximately
15 feet 4 inches to 22 feet setback for the northerly building for the portion of the
building up to 36 feet in height. The portion of the project above 36 feet on
25 of 26
Vicente Terrace is setback approximately 20 feet for the westerly building and
approximately 25 feet for the northerly building. Therefore, while not required to
be set back more than five feet, the project well exceeds the minimum
requirement for the Oceanfront District on Vicente Terrace. Sheet A27 of the
project plans shows a setback comparison of the existing dwellings north of
Vicente Terrace. Additionally, Sheet A10 provides exhibits with a rendering and a
section showing the building stepping back on the upper floor in order to
accommodate a transition to the lower-scaled residential buildings on the north
side of Vicente Terrace.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission approved the Development Review Permit, Major
Modification, and Waiver based on the findings set forth in the Planning Commission
STOA as well as the oral and written testimony presented prior to or during the public
hearings. Council reviews the project de novo. Staff recommends approval of these
three applications based on the findings set forth in the draft Statement of Official
Action.
Alternative Actions
As an alternative to the staff recommendation, Council may choose to approve the
appeal based on revised findings and deny the Development Review Permit, Major
Modification, and Waiver.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action required as a result of the
recommended action.
26 of 26
Prepared By: Russell Bunim, Associate Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. 1828 Ocean Ave DRP Appeal Plans
B. 1828 Ocean Avenue - SOAR Appeal Statement
C. 1828 Ocean Avenue - William Johnson Appeal Statement
D. 1828 Ocean Avenue - UNITE HERE Appeal Statement
E. 1828 Ocean Avenue - UNITE HERE Appeal Supplemental
F. 18ENT-0390 -0391 -0392 Appeal CC STOA (1828 Ocean Avenue)
G. Written Comments
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
APPLICATION: 15ENT - 0300
MARCH 8TH 2019
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated by these
drawings are the property and copyright of the Architect and shall
neither be used on any other work nor be disclosed to any other
person for any use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals and employees
waives any and all liability or responsibility for problems that may
occur when these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional’s guidance with ambiguities,
or conflicts which are alleged.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
A2
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
KoningEiz
1454 25th St,
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 f
All designs, ideas, a
by these drawings a
the Architect and sha
work nor be disclose
use whatsoever with
Koning Eizenberg Ar
and employees waiv
responsibility for pro
these plans, drawing
are followed without
ambiguities, or confl
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEA
1512
SANTA MONICA
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DE
SD PRICING SE
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
PROJECT INFORMATION KoningEizen
1454 25th St, San
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrang
by these drawings are the
the Architect and shall ne
work nor be disclosed to
use whatsoever without w
Koning Eizenberg Archite
and employees waives a
responsibility for problem
these plans, drawings, sp
are followed without the p
ambiguities, or conflicts w
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN
1512
SANTA MONICA, C
A
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCR
SD PRICING SET
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONS KoningEizen
1454 25th St, San
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrang
by these drawings are the
the Architect and shall ne
work nor be disclosed to
use whatsoever without w
Koning Eizenberg Archite
and employees waives a
responsibility for problem
these plans, drawings, sp
are followed without the p
ambiguities, or conflicts w
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN
1512
SANTA MONICA, C
A
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCR
SD PRICING SET
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
BICYCLE PARKING
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
TIER II COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
BICYCLE PARKING
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
SETBACKS:
AVERAGE NATUR
GRADE (A.N.G.):
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
E.V.
0
0
5
5
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
LOADING:
HC
9
0
0
9
PARKING REQ'SREQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
0.5
0
0.75
4.5
1
5
1
1 14
0
0.75
1.5
1
1
1
1
COVERAGE:
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
PROJECT CONTACTS
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
BICYCLE PARKING
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1REQUEST FOR WAIVER
PROJECT INFORMATION
OWNER:
NXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
ARCHITECT:
KONING EIZENBERG ARCHITECTURE
1454 25TH STREET
SANTA MONICA, CA 90404
CONTACT:
HANK KONING, TROY FOSLER
T: 310.828.6131
E: hkoning@kearch.com
tfosler@kearch.com
HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT
CHATTEL, INC.
13417 VENTURA BLVD
SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91423
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
SD PRICING SET
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
SHEET INDEX
ARCHITECTURE:
A1 COVER
A2 PROJECT INFORMATION
A3 OCEAN AVENUE RENDERING
A4 OCEAN AVENUE LOBBY RENDERING
A5 PICO BLVD/ OCEAN AVE CORNER RENDERING
A6 PICO BLVD RENDERING
A7 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A8 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A9 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A10 VICENTE TERRACE SECTION RENDERING
A11 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A12 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A13 COURTYARD RENDERING
A14 COURTYARD RENDERING
A15 SITE AERIAL & ZONING MAP
A16 SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
A17 PICO BLVD CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
A18 OCEAN AVENUE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
A19 VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
A20 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
A21 AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE CALCULATION
A22 SITE / PLOT PLAN
A23 P2 FLOOR PLAN
A24 P1 FLOOR PLAN
A25 GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A26 R1 FLOOR PLAN
A27 VICENTE TERRACE YARDS
A28 PICO BLVD ENLARGED PLAN
A29 R2 FLOOR PLAN
A30 R3 FLOOR PLAN
A31 R4 FLOOR PLAN
A32 ROOF PLAN
A33 SITE ACCESS DIAGRAM
A34 ENLARGED RAMP PLANS / SECTIONS
A35 ENLARGED RAMP PLANS / SECTIONS
A36 F.A.R. CALCULATIONS
A37 OUTDOOR LIVING AREA &
PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
A38 UPPER STORY STEP-BACK CALCULATIONS
A39 MATERIAL & PROJECT PRECEDENTS
A40 OCEAN AVE CONTEXT ELEVATION
A41 OCEAN AVE ELEVATION
A42 PICO BLVD CONTEXT ELEVATION
A43 PICO BLVD ELEVATION
A44 VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATION
A45 VICENTE TERRACE ELEVATION
A46 COURTYARD ELEVATION
A47 WEST ELEVATION - CONCEALED
A48 BUILDING SECTION 1
A49 WAIVER REQUEST
A50 MAJOR MODIFICATION REQUEST
LANDSCAPE:
L1 SITE PLAN
L2 STREETSCAPE - PLANTING PALETTE
L3 ELEVATION - OCEAN AVENUE
L4 ELEVATION - PICO BOULEVARD
L5 SECTIONS - PICO BOULEVARD
L6 ELEVATION - VICENTE TERRACE
L7 SECTIONS - VICENTE TERRACE
L8 SITE PLAN - COURTYARD PLANTING
L9 SITE PLAN - ROOF DECK
L10 PLAN - ROOF DECK
A55-59 ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MOD.
A51-54 WAIVER / MAJOR MODIFICATION EXHIBITS
A3
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 OCEAN AVENUE RENDERING
A4
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 OCEAN AVENUE LOBBY
A5
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
A6
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 PICO BOULEVARD RENDERING
A7
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A8
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A9
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A10
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE SECTION RENDERING
3 5 '-0 " F R O M A .N .G .
PL
A
N
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
4 5 .0 0 °
5'-0"
SETBACK SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
ENLARGED BUILDING
SECTION
A4.10
DESCRIPTION DATE
UPPER STORY DAYLIGHT PLANE
A11
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A12
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A13
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 COURTYARD RENDERING
A14
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 COURTYARD RENDERING
A15
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
SITE
AERIAL
ZONING MAP
ZONING LEGEND
AERIAL VIEW
P I C O B O U L E V A R D
SITE AERIAL AND ZONING
MAP
DA0.30
SITE AERIAL & ZONING MAP
A16
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PICO BOULEVARD
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(E) VICEROY
HOTEL
(E) MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT
(E) CAPO
RESTAURANT
(E) COMMERCIAL
1828
OCEAN AVENUE
(E)
PARKING
LOT
(E) MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT
(E) HOTEL CASA
DEL MAR (E)
RESTAURANT
A P P I A N
W A Y
(E) RESIDENTIAL(E) MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT
TRAFFIC ISLAND TRAFFIC ISLAND
1
2
345
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1. APPROACH FROM OCEAN AVE.2. THE VICEROY HOTEL 3. VICENTE TERRACE 4. COMMERCIAL / RESIDENTIAL ALONG VICENTE TERRACE 5. EXISTING APARTMENT ALONG VICENTE TERRACE
6. PARKING LOT DIAGONALLY ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE 7. CORNER OF PICO BLVD. AND OCEAN AVE.8. ACCESS TO EXISTING SITE ALONG PICO BLVD.9. CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT ACROSS PICO BLVD. 10. MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS ALONG PICO BLVD.
11. PICO BLVD.12. WALKWAY ADJACENT TO SHUTTERS HOTEL 13. ADJACENT FACADE OF SHUTTERS HOTEL
14. BRIDGE ACROSS APPIAN WAY TO SHUTTERS HOTEL 15. VIEW DIAGONALLY ACROSS FROM OCEAN AVE. AND PICO BLVD.16. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ALONG OCEAN AVE.
SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
DA0.31
SITE CONTEXT PHOTO MAP
SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
A17
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
SITE
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTELOCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
SITE AND C
ELEVATION
D
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
0 10'5'20'PICO BOULEVARD CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
NEIGHBORING ST
ELEVATIONS
DA0
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
A18
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'OCEAN AVENUE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS OCEAN AVENUE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
NEIGHBORING STREET
ELEVATIONS
DA0.32
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS OCEAN AVENUE
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE
LOOKING WEST
A19
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS OCEAN AVENUE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
NEIGHBORING STREET
ELEVATIONS
DA0.32
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
A20
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
A21
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE CALCULATION
PI
C
O
B
O
U
L
E
V
A
R
D
VI
C
E
N
T
E
T
E
R
R
A
C
E
OCEAN AVENUE
HEIGHT = 47' MAX ABV. A.N.G.
P .L .
2 1 6 .2 2 '
P.
L
.
2
1
5
.
5
8
'
P.L. 217.73'
P.L. 201.13'
**NO SIDE YARD REQUIRED**
(NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL)
**
N
O
R
E
A
R
Y
A
R
D
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
*
*
(A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
T
O
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
T
R
E
E
T
)
46.63'45.31'
29.31'30.81'
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
SETBACK
5'-0"STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'-0" STREETFRONTAGE
S E T B A C K
5'
-
0
"
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
44.70'
A.N.G. CALCULATION
PT 1 = 31.45 +
PT 2 = 46.06
PT 3 = 30.12
PT 4 = 44.70
152.33 ÷ 4
A.N.G. = 38.08'
PA
R
C
E
L
F
R
O
N
T
2 1 6 '-2 "
21
5
'
-
7
"
217'-8"
PT 4
30.12'
PT 3
31.45'
PT 1
46.06'
PT 2
NOTE: A.N.G. ELEVATIONS AT THE SETBACK
BOUNDRY ARE INTERPOLATED FROM
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY ON SHEET A20
NOTES:
FOR CALCULATING CBC GRADE PLANE -
GRADE PLANE REFERENCE POINTS REPRESENT THE AVERAGE
FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION ADJOINING THE BUILDING AT
EXTERIOR WALLS. GRADE PLANE SPOT ELEVATIONS 1 - 4
AVERAGE TO 37.29' ABOVE PROJECT SEA LEVEL
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
SETBACK
5'-0" ST FRONTAGE
P.L.
P.L.
32.71
46.09'
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
OCEAN AVE.
(E)
SHUTTERS
HOTEL
APPROX. (E) GRADE
47'-0" ABOVE AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE
SM ZO A.N.G
38.00'
AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE = 38.0'
GROUND FLOOR IS FIRST
STORY OF PROJECT PER
9.52.020.0230
6'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A.N.G. SECTION
A.N.G. PLAN
A22
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PICO BLVD
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(E) VICEROY
HOTEL
CC DISTRICT
PER ZO
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) CAFE
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) COMMERCIAL
P.L. 216.22'
P.L. 215.58'
P.
L
.
2
1
7
.
7
3
'
P.
L
.
2
0
1
.
1
3
'
ONE WAY
(E) MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R3 DISTRICT PER ZO
UPPER
COURTYARD
ONE WAY
POOL
ELEV
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
LOWER
COURTYARD
S E T B A C K
5'
-
0
"
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
S E T B A C K
5 '-0 " S T R E E T F R O N T A G E
SETBACK
5'-0" FRONT YARD
EDGE OF (E) SIDEWALK
(E) PALM TREE
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONI
A ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E)
TREES
TXF
6'-0" TALL GATE & FENCE
44'-0"
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
30.82'
46.63'
45.31'
29.31'
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
TRELLIS, TYP
PV PANELS
CL
(E) CURB CUT TO
BE REDUCED
R.
D
.
R.D.CONDENSER UNITS TYP
85'-0"
85'-0"
38.56'
45.96'
STAIR
85'-0"
EGRESS
20'-0"
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
STAIR
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
85'-0"
STAIR
R.
D
.
R.D.R.D.
R.D.
PV PANELS
PV PANELS
ELEV
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
CONDENSER UNITS
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
STREET PARKING:
OCEAN AVE. 7 EXISTING; 7 PROPOSED
PICO BLVD. 8 EXISTING; 8 PROPOSED
TREE PROTECTION ZONE
NEW TREES PROPOSED
ALONG VICENTE
TERRACE, TYP OF 5
INGRESS
15'-0"
LOUVER
43
'
-
7
"
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SITE /
1" = 20'-0"1SITE PLAN 0 10'5'20'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
SITE / PLOT PLAN
PICO BLVD
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(E) VICEROY
HOTEL
CC DISTRICT
PER ZO
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO (E) COMMERCIAL
P.L. 216.22'
P.L. 215.58'
P.
L
.
2
1
7
.
7
3
'
P.
L
.
2
0
1
.
1
3
'
ONE WAY
UPPER
COURTYARD
ONE WAY
POOL
ELEV
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
LOWER
COURTYARD
S E T B A C K
5'
-
0
"
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
S E T B A C K
5 '-0 " S T R E E T F R O N T A G E
EDGE OF (E) SIDEWALK
(E) PALM TREE
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONI
A ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E)
TREES
TXF
6'-0" TALL GATE & FENCE
44'-0"
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
30.82'
46.63'
45.31'
29.31'
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
TRELLIS, TYP
PV PANELS
(E) CURB CUT TO
BE REDUCED
R.
D
.
R.D.CONDENSER UNITS TYP
85'-0"
85'-0"
38.56'
45.96'
STAIR
85'-0"
EGRESS
20'-0"
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
STAIR
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
85'-0"
STAIR
R.
D
.
R.D.R.D.
R.D.
PV PANELS
PV PANELS
ELEV
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
CONDENSER UNITS
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
STREET PARKING:
OCEAN AVE. 7 EXISTING; 7 PROPOSED
PICO BLVD. 8 EXISTING; 8 PROPOSED
TREE PROTECTION ZONE
NEW TREES PROPOSED
ALONG VICENTE
TERRACE, TYP OF 5
INGRESS
15'-0"
LOUVER
43
'
-
7
"
1" = 20'-0"1SITE PLAN 0 10'5'20'
A23
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
L: 4' - 2"
W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
1 10
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
3 4
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
6.1
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
LEG
TYPICAL PARKING STALL
COMPACT PARKING STALL
HC PARKING STALL
7'-6"
15
'
-
0
"
9'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
8'-6"
18
'
-
0
"
1'-6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
HC VAN
8'-0"
HC
5'-0"
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
P2 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
GROU
COMP
COMP
HC
HC - V
HC - V
STAND
TANDE
P1
COMP
COMP
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
P2
COMP
COMP
STAND
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
Grand
0 8'4'16'
SD P
* COMPA
(8'-6" MIN
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
P2 FLOOR PLAN
L: 4' - 2"W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
ARKING STALL
PARKING STALL
NG STALL
-6"
15
'
-
0
"
"
18
'
-
0
"
6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.00
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
B
C
E
F
G
H
A
J
D
I
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.00
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
L: 4' - 2"
W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
1 10
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
3 4
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
6.1
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
TYPICAL PARKING STALL
COMPACT PARKING STALL
HC PARKING STALL
7'-6"
15
'
-
0
"
9'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
8'-6"
18
'
-
0
"
1'-6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
HC VAN
8'-0"
HC
5'-0"
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN 0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
A48
A46
A24
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
L: 4' - 2"W: 4' - 2"CSA: 17.36SF
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
S
t
a
c
k
s
(
x
7
)
1
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
Br
e
a
k
e
r
2'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
Pa
n
e
l
(
x
3
)
1'
- 8
"
1'
- 0
"
Fir
e
A
l
a
r
m
4'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
House Service2' - 6"2' - 0"
Cafe2' - 0"2' - 0"
Inverter5' - 0"2' - 0"
Main Switch Board
14' - 0"
4' - 0"
S
t
a
c
k
s
(
x
7
)
1
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
Br
e
a
k
e
r
2'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
Pa
n
e
l
(
x
3
)
1'
- 8
"
1'
- 0
"
Fir
e
A
l
a
r
m
4'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
House Service2' - 6"2' - 0"
Cafe2' - 0"2' - 0"
Inverter5' - 0"2' - 0"
Main Switch Board
14' - 0"
4' - 0"
S
t
a
c
k
s
(
x
1
0
)
1
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
B
r
e
a
k
e
r
2
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
P
a
n
e
l
(
x
3
)
1
'
-
8
"
1
'
-
0
"
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
A
J
1 10
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
DN TO P2
ONE WAY
ONE WAY
FROM GF
ELEC
UP TO PICO
ONE WAY
CURB
3 4
O.H. GATE BELOW
12'-0"
20'-9"
117 STALLS
VALET AISLE PARKING
LOCATED SO ONLY
ONE VEHICLE NEEDS
TO BE MOVED TO
ACCESS BLOCKED
VEHICLES.
D
13'-9"
22
'
-
0
"
I
MECH
6.1
MECH
ELEV CTRL
STORAGE
60 SF
ELEV CTRL
STORAGE
STORAGE
ELEC
22'-0"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
13'-2"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
12
'
-
0
"
EXHAUST CHASE
13'-5"
ON
E
W
A
Y
RAMP 2
RAMP 3
RAMP 4
1'-6"1'-9"
1'-6"
1'-9"
3'-0"
1'-9"
VALET STND
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VALET STND
VALET STND
VALET STND
VALET STND
VALET CMP VALET CMP
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VALET STND VALET STND VALET STND
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VALET STND
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
1-
1
9
VALET STND VALET STND
20
-
4
5
46
-
5
3
54
-
7
7
10
0
-
1
1
7
78
-
9
9
STOP
ST
O
P
VALET
ONLY
EXIT
RESI
ONLY6"H
3'-6"H
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
P1 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1P1 FLOOR PLAN
GROU
COMP
COMP
HC
HC - V
HC - V
STAND
TANDE
P1
COMP
COMP
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
P2
COMP
COMP
STAND
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
Grand
0 8'4'16'
SD P
* COMPA
(8'-6" MIN
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
P1 FLOOR PLAN
L: 4' - 2"W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
ARKING STALL
PARKING STALL
NG STALL
-6"
15
'
-
0
"
"
18
'
-
0
"
6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.00
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
B
C
E
F
G
H
A
J
VALET AISLE PARKING
LOCATED SO ONLY
ONE VEHICLE NEEDS
TO BE MOVED TO
ACCESS BLOCKED
VEHICLES.
D
I
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P1 FLOOR PLAN
A2.01
1/16" = 1'-0"1P1 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
A48
A46
A25
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
704 SF
1 BED
G103
PICO BOULEVARD
A
J
1 10
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
INGRESS DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
EXIT
HVO
HVO
LOWER
COURTYARD
30.82'
29.31'
844 SF
1 BED
G104
ONE WAY
25
'
-
0
"
DOWN TO P1
O.H. GATE
126 BIKE
CAPACITY
RAMP UP FROM
PARKING
HVO
HVO
EGRESS
20'-0"
O.H. GATE
DN
693 SF
1 BED
G106
1128 SF
3 BED - A
G107
3 4
OFFSET COLUMN
GRID FOR CLEARANCE
7'
-
6
"
23
'
-
6
"
TXF
VAULT
12" MIN CLR
FROM PAD ABV
12'-0"
48
'
-
2
"
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
440 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
?
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
13 XL BIKES
D
I
MECH
25'-0"
EXIT
6.1
RESIDENTIAL / GUEST /
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
MECH
25'-0"
SHWR
1175 SF
3 BED - A
G102
886 SF
2 BED
G101
864 SF
2 BED - A
G105
ME
C
H
PET SALON
SURF BD. LOCKER
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
ONE WAY
ELEV CTRL
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.11
A6.11
A6.11
L.T. COMM. BIKE
PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
5'
-
0
"
6' GATE & FENCE
6' H GATE
12
'
-
0
"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
(E) STREET TREES
4'-0" MIN
8'
-
0
"
18'-0"18'-0"15'-0"18'-0"4'-0"
22'-6"
22'-6"
RAMP 1
RAMP 2
RAMP 4 8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
MECH
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
18
'
-
4
"
24'-5"
18'-8"20
'
-
8
"
8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
ONE WAY
17
'
-
3
"
3'
-
0
"
80 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
500 SF
MAINTENANCE
VALET CMP 2 VALET CMP 3
HVO
PERF. SLIDING
GATES &
FENCE - 6' H
15'-0"
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
4
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
6
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
7
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
8
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
9
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
0
RESI HC 3
RESI HC 2 GUEST STND 12
GUEST HC VAN 13
VALET HC 9
VALET CMP 10
COMM HC VAN 7
VALET HC VAN 8
VALET HC 7
VALET HC 6
VALET HC 1
VALET CMP 4
VALET CMP 5
RESI HC VAN EV 1
GUEST STND 4 COMM CMP 4
GUEST STND 5 COMM CMP 5
GUEST STND 6 COMM CMP 6
GUEST STND 7
GUEST CMP 8
GUEST CMP 9
GUEST STND 1
GUEST STND 2
GUEST STND 3
COMM STND 1
COMM STND 2
COMM STND 3
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
1
DN ONE WAY
3'
-
7
"
17
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5 '-0
"
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
GROU
1/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLAN
GROU
COMP
COMP
HC
HC - V
HC - V
STAND
TANDE
P1
COMP
COMP
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
P2
COMP
COMP
STAND
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
Grand
RE
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THIS FLOOR HAS APPROX. 10 VALET STALLS FOR
CDM REPLACEMENT PARKING, 20 RESIDENTIAL GUEST
& COMMERCIAL STALLS, AND 9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
SD P
* COMPA
(8'-6" MIN
PLANTER
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
B
C
E
F
G
H
704 SF
1 BED
G103
PICO BOULEVARD
A
J
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
INGRESS DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
EXIT
HVO
HVO
LOWER
COURTYARD
30.82'
29.31'
844 SF
1 BED
G104
ONE WAY
25
'
-
0
"
DOWN TO P1
O.H. GATE
126 BIKE
CAPACITY
RAMP UP FROM
PARKING
HVO
HVO
EGRESS
20'-0"
O.H. GATE
DN
693 SF
1 BED
G106
1128 SF
3 BED - A
G107
OFFSET COLUMN
GRID FOR CLEARANCE
7'
-
6
"
23
'
-
6
"
TXF
VAULT
12" MIN CLR
FROM PAD ABV
12'-0"
48
'
-
2
"
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
440 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
?
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
13 XL BIKES
D
I
MECH
25'-0"
EXIT
RESIDENTIAL / GUEST /
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
MECH
25'-0"
SHWR
1175 SF
3 BED - A
G102
886 SF
2 BED
G101
864 SF
2 BED - A
G105
ME
C
H
PET SALON
SURF BD. LOCKER
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
ONE WAY
ELEV CTRL
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.11
A6.11
A6.11
L.T. COMM. BIKE
PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
5'
-
0
"
6' GATE & FENCE
6' H GATE
12
'
-
0
"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
(E) STREET TREES
4'-0" MIN
8'
-
0
"
18'-0"18'-0"15'-0"18'-0"4'-0"
22'-6"
22'-6"
RAMP 1
RAMP 2
RAMP 4 8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
MECH
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
18
'
-
4
"
24'-5"
18'-8"20
'
-
8
"
8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
ONE WAY
17
'
-
3
"
3'
-
0
"
80 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
500 SF
MAINTENANCE
VALET CMP 2 VALET CMP 3
HVO
PERF. SLIDING
GATES &
FENCE - 6' H
15'-0"
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
4
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
6
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
7
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
8
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
9
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
0
RESI HC 3
RESI HC 2 GUEST STND 12
GUEST HC VAN 13
VALET HC 9
VALET CMP 10
COMM HC VAN 7
VALET HC VAN 8
VALET HC 7
VALET HC 6
VALET HC 1
VALET CMP 4
VALET CMP 5
RESI HC VAN EV 1
GUEST STND 4 COMM CMP 4
GUEST STND 5 COMM CMP 5
GUEST STND 6 COMM CMP 6
GUEST STND 7
GUEST CMP 8
GUEST CMP 9
GUEST STND 1
GUEST STND 2
GUEST STND 3
COMM STND 1
COMM STND 2
COMM STND 3
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
1
DN ONE WAY
3'
-
7
"
17
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5 '-0
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A2.02
1/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - GF
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 3
2 BED 1
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
7
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THIS FLOOR HAS APPROX. 10 VALET STALLS FOR
CDM REPLACEMENT PARKING, 20 RESIDENTIAL GUEST
& COMMERCIAL STALLS, AND 9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
PLANTER
B
C
E
F
G
H
A
J
12" MIN CLR
FROM PAD ABV
D
I
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
5 '-0
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A2.02
1/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - GF
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 3
2 BED 1
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
7
TOTAL
9
138
147
RM COM.
0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THIS FLOOR HAS APPROX. 10 VALET STALLS FOR
CDM REPLACEMENT PARKING, 20 RESIDENTIAL GUEST
& COMMERCIAL STALLS, AND 9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
AT THIS LEVEL:
20 COMMERCIAL / RESI GUEST STALLS
9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS
10 VALET STALLS FOR CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
Δ #
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
HREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
WO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
HIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
HE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
RIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
HIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
00 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
0 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
ROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
EET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
ABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A26
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
ONE WAY
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN(E) STREET
LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1 BED
R103
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1 BED
R102
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
46.63'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF
1 BED
R105
748 SF
1 BED
R101
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
1 BED
R104
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
1033 SF
2 BED
R109
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
(N) TRANSFORMER
A6.14
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
139'-9"17'-9"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
35'-6"22'-6"
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
5 '-0 "
17'-9"
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
3 '-7 "
9 '-0 "
7 '-1 "
3 '-7 "
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
3 1 '-1 "
1 8 '-1 0 "
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R1 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R1 FLOOR PLAN
R
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R1 FLOOR PLAN
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
ONE WAY
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN(E) STREET
LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1 BED
R103
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1 BED
R102
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
46.63'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF
1 BED
R105
748 SF
1 BED
R101
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
1 BED
R104
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
1033 SF
2 BED
R109
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
(N) TRANSFORMER
A6.14
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
139'-9"17'-9"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
35'-6"22'-6"
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
5 '-0 "
17'-9"
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
3 '-7 "
9 '-0 "
7 '-1 "
3 '-7 "
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
3 1 '-1 "
1 8 '-1 0 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R1 FLOOR PLAN
A2.03
1/16" = 1'-0"1R1 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R1
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 10
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 1
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED 2
16
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
Δ #
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
HREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
WO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
HIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
HE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
RIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
HIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
00 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
0 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
ROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
EET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
ABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
ENLARGED PLAN
SEE SHEET A27
A48
A46
ENLARGED PLAN
SEE SHEET A28
A27
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
+/
-
1
2
'
-
1
"
+/
-
1
4
'
-
0
"
+/
-
1
2
'
-
4
"
+/
-
1
0
'
-
9
"
+/
-
7
'
-
2
"
+/
-
1
4
'
-
3
"
LEVEL CHANGE
VICENTE TERRACE
17
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5'
-
0
"
9'
-
0
"
3'
-
7
"
17'-7"
22'-5"
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
ELECTRICAL
TRANSFORMER PAD
(E) CAFE
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R3 DISTRICT PER ZO
3'
-
7
"
5'
-
0
"
T Y P
1 8 '-8 "
5 '-0 "
TYPICAL FENCE LINE
6' H FENCE AND GATE
OUTLINE OF BUILDING ABV
RESIDENT PATIO
TYP OF 5
LOWER CTYD
SHORT-TERM BIKE PARKING
7 '-1 "
T Y P
2 2 '-0 "
3 '-7 "
5 '-0 "
T O B A L C .
1 5 '-4 " T Y P
+/- 5 9 '-0 "
5 '-0 "
T O B A L C .
1 0 '-0 "
(N) TREE ON SITE
VICENTE TERRACE YARDS
A28
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
LEVEL CHANGE
PICO BLVD
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
CAFE
OUTDOOR SEATING
RESIDENT PATIO
(E) MEDIAN
SHORT-TERM
BIKE PARKING
OUTLINE OF BUILDING ABV
SHORT-TERM BIKE PARKING
6' H FENCE & GATE
EGRESS DRIVEWAY
20'-0"
INGRESS DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
COURTYARD
LOADING
RESIDENT
ENTRY
RESIDENT
ENTRY
6' H FENCE & GATE
LOBBY
ELEV
S E T B A C K
5 '-0
"
TRASH
B U I L D -T
O -L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR CAFE
EXCEEDS 10' PER 9.14.030.C1
Koning
1454 25t
310.828.6
310.828.0
All designs, i
by these draw
the Architect
work nor be d
use whatsoe
Koning Eizen
and employe
responsibility
these plans,
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
ENLAR
PICO BOULEVARD - ENLARGED PLAN
A29
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
OPEN TO
BELOW
LOBBY FOR
RESIDENTS
BELOW
CAFE
BELOW
1033 SF
2 BED
R209
RESIDENT SPA
1373 SF
3 BED
R217
646 SF
1 BED
R216
1310 SF
3 BED
R214
656 SF
1 BED - A
R219
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED - A
R208
680 SF
1 BED
R206 653 SF
1 BED
R207
ME
C
H
735 SF
1 BED
R203
733 SF
1 BED
R202
732 SF
1 BED
R205
837 SF
1 BED
R201
734 SF
1 BED
R204
634 SF
1 BED - A
R212
634 SF
1 BED
R211
874 SF
2 BED - A
R210
1196 SF
2 BED
R213
788 SF
1 BED
R218
100 SF
STORAGE
60 SF
RR
ELEC
653 SF
1 BED
R215
A6.14
A6.14
A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
160 SF
RES. STORAGE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
14
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"
66
'
-
1
"
14
'
-
7
"
50
'
-
1
1
"
12'-2"
134'-3"
27'-5"
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
RESIDENT MEETING
1 3 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
3 4 '-7 "
1 5 '-4 "
2 2 '-7 "
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R2 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R2 FLOOR PLAN
R
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R2 FLOOR PLAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
OPEN TO
BELOW
LOBBY FOR
RESIDENTS
BELOW
CAFE
BELOW
1033 SF
2 BED
R209
RESIDENT SPA
1373 SF
3 BED
R217
646 SF
1 BED
R216
1310 SF
3 BED
R214
656 SF
1 BED - A
R219
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED - A
R208
680 SF
1 BED
R206 653 SF
1 BED
R207
ME
C
H
735 SF
1 BED
R203
733 SF
1 BED
R202
732 SF
1 BED
R205
837 SF
1 BED
R201
734 SF
1 BED
R204
634 SF
1 BED - A
R212
634 SF
1 BED
R211
874 SF
2 BED - A
R210
1196 SF
2 BED
R213
788 SF
1 BED
R218
100 SF
STORAGE
60 SF
RR
ELEC
653 SF
1 BED
R215
A6.14
A6.14
A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
160 SF
RES. STORAGE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
14
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"
66
'
-
1
"
14
'
-
7
"
50
'
-
1
1
"
12'-2"
134'-3"
27'-5"
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
RESIDENT MEETING
1 3 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
3 4 '-7 "
1 5 '-4 "
2 2 '-7 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.04
1/16" = 1'-0"1R2 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R2
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 11
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 3
2 BED 2
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED 2
19
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A30
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
ME
C
H
734 SF
1 BED
R303
733 SF
1 BED
R302
734 SF
1 BED
R305
837 SF
1 BED
R301
734 SF
1 BED
R304
634 SF
1 BED - A
R312
634 SF
1 BED
R311
874 SF
2 BED - A
R310
1196 SF
2 BED
R313
1033 SF
2 BED
R309
1173 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
1 5 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
3 4 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
1 5 '-4 "
1 7 '-8 "
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R3 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R3 FLOOR PLAN
R
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R3 FLOOR PLAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
ME
C
H
734 SF
1 BED
R303
733 SF
1 BED
R302
734 SF
1 BED
R305
837 SF
1 BED
R301
734 SF
1 BED
R304
634 SF
1 BED - A
R312
634 SF
1 BED
R311
874 SF
2 BED - A
R310
1196 SF
2 BED
R313
1033 SF
2 BED
R309
1173 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
1 5 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
3 4 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
1 5 '-4 "
1 7 '-8 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R3 FLOOR PLAN
A2.05
1/16" = 1'-0"1R3 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R3
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 12
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 3
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
3 BED 3
22
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A31
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
POOL ABV
1340 SF
3 BED
R419
1173 SF
2 BED
R417
960 SF
2 BED
R418
1373 SF
3 BED
R414
646 SF
1 BED - A
R413
1310 SF
3 BED
R411
653 SF
1 BED
R412
788 SF
1 BED
R415
656 SF
1 BED
R416
40 SF
RR
809 SF
2 BED
R405
70 SF
W.C.
ME
C
H
634 SF
1 BED
R409
634 SF
1 BED
R408
874 SF
2 BED - A
R407
1196 SF
2 BED
R410
837 SF
1 BED
R406
708 SF
1 BED
R402
745 SF
1 BED
R403
1062 SF
2 BED
R401
887 SF
2 BED
R404
60 SF
RR
ELEC
POTTED PLANTS
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
A6.17 A6.17 A6.17
A6.17
TRELLIS
ABOVE
TRELLIS
ABOVE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
24
'
-
1
0
"
35'-6"38'-0"114'-1"27'-11"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
139'-2"
25
'
-
1
"
12
'
-
7
"
19
'
-
1
1
"
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
17
'
-
8
"
24
'
-
1
0
"
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R4 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R4 FLOOR PLAN
RE
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R4 FLOOR PLAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
POOL ABV
1340 SF
3 BED
R419
1173 SF
2 BED
R417
960 SF
2 BED
R418
1373 SF
3 BED
R414
646 SF
1 BED - A
R413
1310 SF
3 BED
R411
653 SF
1 BED
R412
788 SF
1 BED
R415
656 SF
1 BED
R416
40 SF
RR
809 SF
2 BED
R405
70 SF
W.C.
ME
C
H
634 SF
1 BED
R409
634 SF
1 BED
R408
874 SF
2 BED - A
R407
1196 SF
2 BED
R410
837 SF
1 BED
R406
708 SF
1 BED
R402
745 SF
1 BED
R403
1062 SF
2 BED
R401
887 SF
2 BED
R404
60 SF
RR
ELEC
POTTED PLANTS
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
A6.17 A6.17 A6.17
A6.17
TRELLIS
ABOVE
TRELLIS
ABOVE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
24
'
-
1
0
"
35'-6"38'-0"114'-1"27'-11"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
139'-2"
25
'
-
1
"
12
'
-
7
"
19
'
-
1
1
"
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
17
'
-
8
"
24
'
-
1
0
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R4 FLOOR PLAN
A2.06
1/16" = 1'-0"1R4 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R4
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 8
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
2 BED 6
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED 3
19
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A32
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS
CONDENSER UNITS
BBQ
POOL
ELEV
MECH
ENCLOSURE
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
CONDENSER
UNITS, TYP
GARAGE EXHAUST
LOUVER TO FACE
AWAY FROM VICENTE
TERRACE
ME
C
H
SOLAR HOT WATER PANELS
MAX 7' ABOVE ROOF
PV ARRAY
POOL
EQUIPMENT
MECH
ENCLOSURE
CANOPY ABOVE
TRELLIS
BELOW
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS.
STACKED TWO HIGHHOT WATER
EQUIPMENT
ME
C
H
CONDENSER UNITS
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
EL
E
V
ROOF DECK
MECH
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
REQUIRED PV SYSTEM PER 8.106.080
2W/ SF OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT REQUIRED, MIN.
PARCEL COVERAGE = 28,045 SF * 2W = 56,100 W
139'-2"
TO
R
O
O
F
24
'
-
1
0
"
T O T R E L L I S
2 2 '-7 "
TRELLIS
ABV
M I N
1 5 '-0 "
T O E X H A U S T L O U V E R
+/- 6 0 '
LOUVER
5 '-0 "
3 0 '-7 "
7 '-1 "
TRELLIS
BELOW
11'-9"
T O R O O F D E C K
2 7 '-1 0 "
T O R O O F
1 9 '-1 0 "
2 4 '-1 0 "
1 7 '-8 "
M I N
1 0 '-0 "
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
ROOF
1/16" = 1'-0"1ROOF PLAN 0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
ROOF PLAN
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS
CONDENSER UNITS
BBQ
POOL
ELEV
MECH
ENCLOSURE
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
CONDENSER
UNITS, TYP
GARAGE EXHAUST
LOUVER TO FACE
AWAY FROM VICENTE
TERRACE
ME
C
H
SOLAR HOT WATER PANELS
MAX 7' ABOVE ROOF
PV ARRAY
POOL
EQUIPMENT
MECH
ENCLOSURE
CANOPY ABOVE
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS.
STACKED TWO HIGHHOT WATER
EQUIPMENT
ME
C
H
CONDENSER UNITS
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
EL
E
V
ROOF DECK
MECH33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
REQUIRED PV SYSTEM PER 8.106.080
2W/ SF OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT REQUIRED, MIN.
PARCEL COVERAGE = 28,045 SF * 2W = 56,100 W
139'-2"
TO
R
O
O
F
24
'
-
1
0
"
T O T R E L L I S
2 2 '-7 "M I N
1 5 '-0 "
T O E X H A U S T L O U V E R
+/- 6 0 '
LOUVER
5 '-0 "
3 0 '-7 "
7 '-1 "
T O R O O F D E C K
2 7 '-1 0 "
T O R O O F
1 9 '-1 0 "
2 4 '-1 0 "
1 7 '-8 "
M I N
1 0 '-0 "
S
P
P
∆
1
1
S
R
1/16" = 1'-0"1ROOF PLAN 0 8'4'16'
A48
A46
A33
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
CAFE ON R1 LEVELPARKING
EXIT
PARKING
ENTRANCE
VALET FROM CDM
VALET TO CDM
RESIDENTIAL
LOADING
12' X 30'
PARKING
LOADING
TRASH
& STAGING
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
RESIDENTIAL
R & R
NOTE: MAINTENANCE STAFF WILL BE
RESPONSIBLE TO COLLECT ALL
TRASH & RECYCLING WITH THEIR
CONTAINERS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL
TRASH AREA AND TAKE MATERIAL TO
THE LARGER CONTAINERS PROVIDED
BY THE CITY
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
LOAD
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
CAFE ON R1 LEVELPARKING
EXIT
PARKING
ENTRANCE
VALET FROM CDM
VALET TO CDM
RESIDENTIAL
LOADING
12' X 30'
PARKING
LOADING
TRASH
& STAGING
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
RESIDENTIAL
R & R
NOTE: MAINTENANCE STAFF WILL BE
RESPONSIBLE TO COLLECT ALL
TRASH & RECYCLING WITH THEIR
CONTAINERS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL
TRASH AREA AND TAKE MATERIAL TO
THE LARGER CONTAINERS PROVIDED
BY THE CITY
SITE ACCESS DIAGRAM
A34
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
H
J
I
DN
ONE WAY
PICO BLVD
SIDEWALK APPROX.
6.5% SLOPE
38.83'
39.11'
38.83'
2 0
A P P R O A C H
8 '-6
"
F L A T
5 '-0
"
A P R O N & S I D E W A L K
+/- 1 0 '-2 "
R A M P 1 0 %
5 '-0
"
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
HVO
HVO
RAMP 1
38.92'
38.56'37.75'
38.67'
38.67'
SIDEWALK
3 6 '-0 "
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
3 6 '-8 "
18
'
-
9
"
12'-0"
24'-5"
27
'
-
6
"
2
2
9
.
4
10
7
.
7
4.
2
BIN UNLOADING
NO PARKING OR DELIVERIES
IN HATCHED ZONE
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
J
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
PICO BLVD
10% MAX
5'-0"
10% MAX
5'-0"8'-6"P.L.
11
'
-
6
"
CL
R
8'
-
2
"
M
I
N
2%
5'-0"
20% MAX
26'-7"
654 6.1
RAMP DOWN TO P1
20 %10 %
12
'
-
0
"
4
A6.20
5'-0"5'-0"
10 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
654 6.1
2 0 %
1 0 %
1 0 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
10
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
5'-0"5'-0"
SHEET NO.
PROJECT T
PROJECT N
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
ENLAR
RAMP
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 1 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 1 SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 2 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 2 SECTION
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
ENLARGED RAMP PLANS
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
C ED
4
A6.21
2
F
G
H
J
1 3 4
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
32.50'
32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVOHVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
F G H I
KoningEizenbergAr
1454 25th St, Santa Monic
310.828.6131 info@
310.828.0719 fax www
All designs, ideas, arrangements and
by these drawings are the property an
the Architect and shall neither be used
work nor be disclosed to any other pe
use whatsoever without written permi
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or
and employees waives any and all lia
responsibility for problems that may o
these plans, drawings, specifications,
are followed without the professional's
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alle
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN04'2'8'0 4'2'8'
RAMP 2 SECTIONRAMP 1 SECTION
87
H
J
I
6.1
O.H. GATE
DN
ONE WAY
PICO BLVD
SIDEWALK APPROX.
6.5% SLOPE
38.83'
39.11'
38.83'
2 0
1 0
A P P R O A C H
8 '-6
"
F L A T
5 '-0
"
A P R O N & S I D E W A L K
+/- 1 0 '-2 "
R A M P 1 0 %
5 '-0
"
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
HVO
HVO
RAMP 1
38.92'
38.56'37.75'
38.67'
38.67'
32.50'32.50'
SIDEWALK
3 6 '-0 "
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
3 6 '-8 "
18
'
-
9
"
12'-0"
24'-5"
27
'
-
6
"
2
2
9
.
4
10
7
.
7
4.
2
BIN UNLOADING
NO PARKING OR DELIVERIES
IN HATCHED ZONE
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
J
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
PICO BLVD
10% MAX
5'-0"
10% MAX
5'-0"8'-6"P.L.
11
'
-
6
"
CL
R
8'
-
2
"
M
I
N
2%
5'-0"
20% MAX
26'-7"
654 6.1
RAMP DOWN TO P1
20 %10 %
12
'
-
0
"
4
A6.20
5'-0"5'-0"
10 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
654 6.1
2 0 %
1 0 %
1 0 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
10
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
5'-0"5'-0"
Konin
1454 2
310.828
310.828
All designs
by these d
the Archite
work nor b
use whatso
Koning Eiz
and emplo
responsibi
these plan
are followe
ambiguities
SHEET NO.
PROJECT T
PROJECT N
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
ENLAR
RAMP
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 1 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 1 SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 2 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 2 SECTION
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
RAMP 2 PLANRAMP 1 PLAN
A35
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
C ED
4
A6.21
2
F
G
H
J
1 3 4
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
32.50'
32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVOHVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
F G H I
KoningEizenbergAr
1454 25th St, Santa Monic
310.828.6131 info@
310.828.0719 fax www
All designs, ideas, arrangements and
by these drawings are the property an
the Architect and shall neither be used
work nor be disclosed to any other pe
use whatsoever without written permi
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or
and employees waives any and all lia
responsibility for problems that may o
these plans, drawings, specifications,
are followed without the professional's
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alle
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN04'2'8'0 4'2'8'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
C ED
8'-0"41'-7"7'-11"
O.H. GATE
1 0 %
8'
-
2
"
12.00'12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
C
L
R
7
'
-
6
"
M
I
N
2 0 %
9 .7 %
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
F G H I
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
30.00'
PICO BLVD
P.L.
5'-0"5'-0"5'-0"42'-5"
1 0
1 0 5
1 9 .8
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
ENLARGED PARKING
RAMP
A6.21
DESCRIPTION DATE
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 3 SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 4 SECTION
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
G
H
J
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
F G H I
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
30.00'
PICO BLVD
P.L.
5'-0"5'-0"5'-0"42'-5"
1 0
1 0 5
1 9 .8
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
ENLARGED PARKING
RAMP
A6.21
DESCRIPTION DATE
"1
"2
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 4 SECTION
0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'
ENLARGED RAMP PLANS
RAMP 4 SECTION
RAMP 3 SECTION
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
C ED
8'-0"41'-7"7'-11"
O.H. GATE
1 0 %
8'
-
2
"
12.00'12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
C
L
R
7
'
-
6
"
M
I
N
2 0 %
9 .7 %
4
A6.21
2
F
G
H
J
1 3 4
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
32.50'
32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
F G H I
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
30.00'
PICO BLVD
P.L.
5'-0"5'-0"5'-0"42'-5"
1 0
1 0 5
1 9 .8
K
14
31
31
All
by
the
wo
us
Ko
an
res
the
are
am
SHE
PRO
PRO
∆ #
18
15
SAN
EN
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN04'2'8'0 4'2'8'
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
C ED
8'-0"41'-7"7'-11"
O.H. GATE
1 0 %
8'
-
2
"
12.00'12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
C
L
R
7
'
-
6
"
M
I
N
2 0 %
9 .7 %
4
A6.21
21 3
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
HVO
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
31.35'31.58'
3
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
F G
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
5'-0"5 42'-5"
1 0
1 0
1 9 .8
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 3 SECTION
0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'
RAMP 4 PLANRAMP 3 PLAN
A36
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
713 SF
1 BED
1181 SF
3 BED-A
870 SF
2 BED-A
755 SF
1 BED
699 SF
1 BED
1130 SF
3 BED-A
CTYD
PARKING BELOW ONE
STREET LEVEL EXCLUDED
FROM FAR PER 9.04.080.B.8.A
881 SF
2 BED
147 SF
SURF BD.
LOCKERS
453 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
MECH ROOM IN
GARAGE EXCLUDED
FROM FAR
BIKE PARKING BELOW
GRADE IN GARAGE
EXCLUDED FROM FAR
184 SF
PET SALON
529 SF
MAINTENANCE
155 SF
MECHANICAL
90 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
881 SF
2 BED-A
652 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1279 SF
FITNESS
1431 SF
3 BED
41 SF
PARCEL
PENDING
1170 SF
CAFE
154 SF
MAIL
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
541 SF
LOBBY
RECEPTION706 SF
1 BED-A
COURTYARD
737 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
752 SF
1 BED
546 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
737 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED
744 SF
1 BED
809 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3020 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
67 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
124 SF
STORAGE
31 SF
ELEC
161 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
182 SF
RESIDENT SPA
74 SF
W.C.
79 SF
STORAGE
487 SF
RESIDENT SPA880 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
818 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
56 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3444 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED-A
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
125 SF
STORAGE
170 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
210 SF
RESIDENT
MEETING
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
836 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
758 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
1192 SF
2 BED
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED-A
1194 SF
2 BED
3590 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
120 SF
STORAGE
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
POOL
ABV
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED
1442 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
841 SF
1 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
1081 SF
2 BED
721 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED
774 SF
1 BED
933 SF
2 BED
1060 SF
2 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
72 SF
W.C.
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED
1194 SF
2 BED
3728 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
F.A.R. AREA
CALCULATIONS
A0.41
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
AREA SCHEDULE (F.A.R.)
AREA NAME QTY AREA
GROUND FLOOR
1 BED 3 2,167 SF
2 BED 1 881 SF
2 BED-A 1 870 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
MAINTENANCE 1 529 SF
MECHANICAL 1 155 SF
PET SALON 1 184 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 543 SF
SURF BD. LOCKERS 1 147 SF
7,788 SF
R1
1 BED 10 7,387 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,347 SF
2 BED 1 1,027 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
CAFE 1 1,170 SF
ELEC 2 53 SF
FITNESS 1 1,279 SF
LOBBY RECEPTION 1 541 SF
MAIL 1 154 SF
PARCEL PENDING 1 41 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 3 665 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 182 SF
STORAGE 4 391 SF
W.C.1 74 SF
18,010 SF
R2
1 BED 11 8,325 SF
1 BED-A 3 2,023 SF
2 BED 2 2,220 SF
2 BED-A 1 880 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 118 SF
RESIDENT MEETING 1 210 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 487 SF
STORAGE 3 322 SF
17,424 SF
R3
1 BED 12 9,024 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,346 SF
2 BED 3 3,414 SF
2 BED-A 2 1,860 SF
3 BED 3 4,177 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 2 148 SF
20,106 SF
R4
1 BED 8 5,853 SF
1 BED-A 1 706 SF
2 BED 6 6,440 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 3 4,187 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 1 27 SF
W.C.1 72 SF
18,303 SF
Grand total 81,630 SF
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
AVG. UNIT SIZE
740 SF
680 SF
1,080 SF
900 SF
1,400 SF
1,160 SF
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA
UNIT TYPE QTY TOTAL AREA
1 BED 44 32,757 SF
1 BED-A 8 5,423 SF
2 BED 13 13,983 SF
2 BED-A 6 5,372 SF
3 BED 10 13,996 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
83 73,843 SF
F.A.R. CALCULATION
FLOOR AREAS PER 9.04.080
MIN. UNIT SIZE
-
600 SF
-
850 SF
-
1,080 SF
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
713 SF
1 BED
1181 SF
3 BED-A
870 SF
2 BED-A
755 SF
1 BED
699 SF
1 BED
1130 SF
3 BED-A
CTYD
PARKING BELOW ONE
STREET LEVEL EXCLUDED
FROM FAR PER 9.04.080.B.8.A
881 SF
2 BED
147 SF
SURF BD.
LOCKERS
453 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
MECH ROOM IN
GARAGE EXCLUDED
FROM FAR
BIKE PARKING BELOW
GRADE IN GARAGE
EXCLUDED FROM FAR
184 SF
PET SALON
529 SF
MAINTENANCE
155 SF
MECHANICAL
90 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
881 SF
2 BED-A
652 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1279 SF
FITNESS
1431 SF
3 BED
41 SF
PARCEL
PENDING
1170 SF
CAFE
154 SF
MAIL
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
541 SF
LOBBY
RECEPTION706 SF
1 BED-A
COURTYARD
737 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
752 SF
1 BED
546 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
737 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED
744 SF
1 BED
809 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3020 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
67 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
124 SF
STORAGE
31 SF
ELEC
161 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
182 SF
RESIDENT SPA
74 SF
W.C.
79 SF
STORAGE
487 SF
RESIDENT SPA880 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
818 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
56 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3444 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED-A
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
125 SF
STORAGE
170 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
210 SF
RESIDENT
MEETING
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
836 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
758 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
1192 SF
2 BED
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED-A
1194 SF
2 BED
3590 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
120 SF
STORAGE
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
POOL
ABV
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED
1442 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
841 SF
1 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
1081 SF
2 BED
721 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED
774 SF
1 BED
933 SF
2 BED
1060 SF
2 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
72 SF
W.C.
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED
1194 SF
2 BED
3728 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
F.A.R. AREA
CALCULATIONS
A0.41
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
AREA SCHEDULE (F.A.R.)
AREA NAME QTY AREA
GROUND FLOOR
1 BED 3 2,167 SF
2 BED 1 881 SF
2 BED-A 1 870 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
MAINTENANCE 1 529 SF
MECHANICAL 1 155 SF
PET SALON 1 184 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 543 SF
SURF BD. LOCKERS 1 147 SF
7,788 SF
R1
1 BED 10 7,387 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,347 SF
2 BED 1 1,027 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
CAFE 1 1,170 SF
ELEC 2 53 SF
FITNESS 1 1,279 SF
LOBBY RECEPTION 1 541 SF
MAIL 1 154 SF
PARCEL PENDING 1 41 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 3 665 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 182 SF
STORAGE 4 391 SF
W.C.1 74 SF
18,010 SF
R2
1 BED 11 8,325 SF
1 BED-A 3 2,023 SF
2 BED 2 2,220 SF
2 BED-A 1 880 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 118 SF
RESIDENT MEETING 1 210 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 487 SF
STORAGE 3 322 SF
17,424 SF
R3
1 BED 12 9,024 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,346 SF
2 BED 3 3,414 SF
2 BED-A 2 1,860 SF
3 BED 3 4,177 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 2 148 SF
20,106 SF
R4
1 BED 8 5,853 SF
1 BED-A 1 706 SF
2 BED 6 6,440 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 3 4,187 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 1 27 SF
W.C.1 72 SF
18,303 SF
Grand total 81,630 SF
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
AVG. UNIT SIZE
740 SF
680 SF
1,080 SF
900 SF
1,400 SF
1,160 SF
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA
UNIT TYPE QTY TOTAL AREA
1 BED 44 32,757 SF
1 BED-A 8 5,423 SF
2 BED 13 13,983 SF
2 BED-A 6 5,372 SF
3 BED 10 13,996 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
83 73,843 SF
F.A.R. CALCULATION
FLOOR AREAS PER 9.04.080
MIN. UNIT SIZE
-
600 SF
-
850 SF
-
1,080 SF
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
ZONING DISTRICT
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATUR
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
REQD UNIT MIX %MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
0
0
1
0
0
44
1.5
66
13.4
13
2
26
10.1
10
2
20
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
LOADING:
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORD
& 100% RESIDENT
STORIES:
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
F.A.R. CALCULATIONS
713 SF
1 BED
1181 SF
3 BED-A
870 SF
2 BED-A
755 SF
1 BED
699 SF
1 BED
1130 SF
3 BED-A
CTYD
PARKING BELOW ONE
STREET LEVEL EXCLUDED
FROM FAR PER 9.04.080.B.8.A
881 SF
2 BED
147 SF
SURF BD.
LOCKERS
453 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
MECH ROOM IN
GARAGE EXCLUDED
FROM FAR
BIKE PARKING BELOW
GRADE IN GARAGE
EXCLUDED FROM FAR
184 SF
PET SALON
529 SF
MAINTENANCE
155 SF
MECHANICAL
90 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
881 SF
2 BED-A
652 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1279 SF
FITNESS
1431 SF
3 BED
41 SF
PARCEL
PENDING
1170 SF
CAFE
154 SF
MAIL
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
541 SF
LOBBY
RECEPTION706 SF
1 BED-A
COURTYARD
737 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
752 SF
1 BED
546 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
737 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED
744 SF
1 BED
809 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3020 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
67 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
124 SF
STORAGE
31 SF
ELEC
161 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
182 SF
RESIDENT SPA
74 SF
W.C.
79 SF
STORAGE
487 SF
RESIDENT SPA880 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
818 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
56 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3444 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED-A
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
125 SF
STORAGE
170 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
210 SF
RESIDENT
MEETING
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
836 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
758 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
1192 SF
2 BED
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED-A
1194 SF
2 BED
3590 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
120 SF
STORAGE
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
POOL
ABV
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED
1442 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
841 SF
1 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
1081 SF
2 BED
721 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED
774 SF
1 BED
933 SF
2 BED
1060 SF
2 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
72 SF
W.C.
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED
1194 SF
2 BED
3728 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
F.A.R. AREA
CALCULATIONS
A0.41
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
AREA SCHEDULE (F.A.R.)
AREA NAME QTY AREA
GROUND FLOOR
1 BED 3 2,167 SF
2 BED 1 881 SF
2 BED-A 1 870 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
MAINTENANCE 1 529 SF
MECHANICAL 1 155 SF
PET SALON 1 184 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 543 SF
SURF BD. LOCKERS 1 147 SF
7,788 SF
R1
1 BED 10 7,387 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,347 SF
2 BED 1 1,027 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
CAFE 1 1,170 SF
ELEC 2 53 SF
FITNESS 1 1,279 SF
LOBBY RECEPTION 1 541 SF
MAIL 1 154 SF
PARCEL PENDING 1 41 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 3 665 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 182 SF
STORAGE 4 391 SF
W.C.1 74 SF
18,010 SF
R2
1 BED 11 8,325 SF
1 BED-A 3 2,023 SF
2 BED 2 2,220 SF
2 BED-A 1 880 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 118 SF
RESIDENT MEETING 1 210 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 487 SF
STORAGE 3 322 SF
17,424 SF
R3
1 BED 12 9,024 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,346 SF
2 BED 3 3,414 SF
2 BED-A 2 1,860 SF
3 BED 3 4,177 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 2 148 SF
20,106 SF
R4
1 BED 8 5,853 SF
1 BED-A 1 706 SF
2 BED 6 6,440 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 3 4,187 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 1 27 SF
W.C.1 72 SF
18,303 SF
Grand total 81,630 SF
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
AVG. UNIT SIZE
740 SF
680 SF
1,080 SF
900 SF
1,400 SF
1,160 SF
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA
UNIT TYPE QTY TOTAL AREA
1 BED 44 32,757 SF
1 BED-A 8 5,423 SF
2 BED 13 13,983 SF
2 BED-A 6 5,372 SF
3 BED 10 13,996 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
83 73,843 SF
F.A.R. CALCULATION
FLOOR AREAS PER 9.04.080
MIN. UNIT SIZE
-
600 SF
-
850 SF
-
1,080 SF
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
A37
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
COMMON
NOT USED
PRIVATE
LEGEND
440 SF
DECK
77 SF
DECK
101 SF
DECK
235 SF
DECK
248 SF
DECK
3231 SF
COURTYARD
113 SF
DECK
117 SF
DECK
10
'
-
7
"
5'-3"11
'
-
0
"
5'-7"
11
'
-
8
"
5'-1"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5'-4"
22'-6"
11
'
-
7
"
27'-10"
16
'
-
1
1
"
11
'
-
2
"
21'-8"
22'-6"
COMMON:3,230 SF
PRIVATE:1,330 SF
22'-6"
2039 SF
COURTYARD
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
129 SF
DECK
98 SF
DECK
140 SF
DECK 170 SF
DECK 127 SF
DECK66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
297 SF
DECK 266 SF
DECK
115 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
331 SF
DECK
12'-0"12'-0"
10'-0"12'-0"12'-0"
11
'
-
2
"
13
'
-
5
"
8'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
5
"
10
'
-
3
"
18'-10"
18
'
-
5
"
5'-3"
T Y P
1 2 '-0 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
6 '-8 "
14'-0"
14'-1"
6 '-1 "
COMMON:2,040 SF
PRIVATE:2,340 SF
2 0 '-1 0 "14'-11"
20'-4"
9 '-8 "
1 1 '-4 "
18'-11"
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
13'-1"
6 '-8 "
6 '-1 "
14'-1"
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"13'-1"6 '-8 "
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,570 SF
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK 143 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
5 '-3 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-8 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-7 "
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,930 SF
231 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
73 SF
DECK
143 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
328 SF
DECK
69 SF
DECK
2 0 '-2 "
14'-8"
8 '-4 "
11'-6"
5'-6"
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
1 3 '-2 "
5'-6"
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
13'-4"16'-0"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:2,020 SF
8 '-5 "
13'-10"
14'-6"
2 2 '-1 0 "
28138 SF
PARCEL
COVERAGE
4022 SF
COMMON ROOF
DECK
5 4 '-8 "
53'-2"
COMMON:4,020 SF
PRIVATE:0 SF
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OPEN SPACE
CALCULATIONS &
PARCEL COVERAGE
A0.42
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
ROOF
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
PARCEL COVERAGE
COMMON
NOT USED
PRIVATE
LEGEND
440 SF
DECK
77 SF
DECK
101 SF
DECK
235 SF
DECK
248 SF
DECK
3231 SF
COURTYARD
113 SF
DECK
117 SF
DECK
10
'
-
7
"
5'-3"11
'
-
0
"
5'-7"
11
'
-
8
"
5'-1"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5'-4"
22'-6"
11
'
-
7
"
27'-10"
16
'
-
1
1
"
11
'
-
2
"
21'-8"
22'-6"
COMMON:3,230 SF
PRIVATE:1,330 SF
22'-6"
2039 SF
COURTYARD
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
129 SF
DECK
98 SF
DECK
140 SF
DECK 170 SF
DECK 127 SF
DECK66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
297 SF
DECK 266 SF
DECK
115 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
331 SF
DECK
12'-0"12'-0"
10'-0"12'-0"12'-0"
11
'
-
2
"
13
'
-
5
"
8'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
5
"
10
'
-
3
"
18'-10"
18
'
-
5
"
5'-3"
T Y P
1 2 '-0 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
6 '-8 "
14'-0"
14'-1"
6 '-1 "
COMMON:2,040 SF
PRIVATE:2,340 SF
2 0 '-1 0 "14'-11"
20'-4"
9 '-8 "
1 1 '-4 "
18'-11"
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
13'-1"
6 '-8 "
6 '-1 "
14'-1"
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"13'-1"6 '-8 "
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,570 SF
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK 143 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
5 '-3 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-8 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-7 "
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,930 SF
231 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
73 SF
DECK
143 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
328 SF
DECK
69 SF
DECK
2 0 '-2 "
14'-8"
8 '-4 "
11'-6"
5'-6"
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
1 3 '-2 "
5'-6"
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
13'-4"16'-0"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:2,020 SF
8 '-5 "
13'-10"
14'-6"
2 2 '-1 0 "
28138 SF
PARCEL
COVERAGE
4022 SF
COMMON ROOF
DECK
5 4 '-8 "
53'-2"
COMMON:4,020 SF
PRIVATE:0 SF
310.828.6131 inf
310.828.0719 fax ww
All designs, ideas, arrangements a
by these drawings are the property
the Architect and shall neither be u
work nor be disclosed to any other
use whatsoever without written per
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and
and employees waives any and all
responsibility for problems that ma
these plans, drawings, specificatio
are followed without the profession
ambiguities, or conflicts which are
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 9040
OPEN SPACE
CALCULATIONS
PARCEL COVERA
A0
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
ROOF
DESCRIPTION
SD PRICING SET
PARCEL COVERAGE
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA &
PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
A38
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 UPPER STORY STEP-BACK CALCULATIONS
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
THIS LEVEL AT GROUND FLOOR OR BELOW.
NO UPPER STORY STEP BACK REQ'D
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
THIS LEVEL AT GROUND FLOOR OR BELOW.
NO UPPER STORY STEP BACK REQ'D
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=3117SF / 203' = 15.4'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1930SF / 207' = 9.3'
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK
- VICENTE TERRACE
=3710SF / 210' = 17.6'
3117SF
1930 SF
3710 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=2971SF / 203' = 14.6'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1760SF / 207' = 8.5'
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK
- VICENTE TERRACE
=3710SF / 210' = 17.6'
2971 SF
1760 SF
3710 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=2942SF / 203' = 14.5'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=2190 SF / 207' = 10.5'
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK
- VICENTE TERRACE
=5,030SF / 210' = 23.9'
2942 SF
2190 SF
5,030 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
21
7
'
-
8
"
215'-6"
216'-2"
5'-0"
13
0
'
-
7
"
327 SF SETBACK
AREA REQUIRED
- OCEAN AVENUE
5'
-
0
"
323 SF SETBACK
AREA REQUIRED
- VICENTE TERRACE
64'-8"
324 SF SETBACK
AREA REQUIRED
- PICO BLVD
5 '-0
"
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
SETBACK DIAGRAM
A0.43
DESCRIPTION DATE
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
PER TABLE 9.14.030
AT LEAST THIRTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING
ELEVATION ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR
HEIGHT SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIVE-FOOT
AVERAGE SETBACK FROM THE MINIMUM
REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK.
CODE SETBACK DIAGRAM
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
THIS LEVEL AT GROUND FLOOR OR BELOW.
NO UPPER STORY STEP BACK REQ'D
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=3117SF / 203' = 15.4'
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1930SF / 207' = 9.3'
3117SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1760SF / 207' = 8.5'
STORY STEPBACK
RRACE
0' = 17.6'
1760 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'-0"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
RY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
14.5'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=2190 SF / 207' = 10.5'
STORY STEPBACK
RRACE
0' = 23.9'
2190 SF
5'-0"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK5'-0"
F SETBACK
REQUIRED
BLVD
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
A0.43
DESCRIPTION DATE
R1
R2
R4
PER TABLE 9.14.030
AT LEAST THIRTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING
ELEVATION ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR
HEIGHT SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIVE-FOOT
AVERAGE SETBACK FROM THE MINIMUM
REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK.
CODE SETBACK DIAGRAM
MINIMUM UPPER STORY SETBACKS
A39
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 MATERIAL & PROJECT PRECEDENTS
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
MATERIAL PRECEDENTS
A0.20
DESCRIPTION DATE
PRELIMINARY PROJECT MATERIALS ARE INSPIRED BY A VERNACULAR
COASTAL LANDSCAPE INCLUDING FREE-FORM ROCKS, WEATHERED
VERTICAL WOOD PLANK RAIN-SCREEN, & VERTICAL TIMBER SCREENS.
SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER CONTRASTS THE TEXTURED WOOD RAIN-
SCREEN TO ESTABLISH A RHYTHM OF DISTINCT DWELLING VOLUMES.
PROJECTING SLATTED AND SEMI-TRANSPARENT SCREENS CASUALLY
LAYER VIEWS TO AND FROM THE PUBLIC REALM.
ALONG VICENTE TERRACE, AT THE UPPER MOST FLOOR, ADDITIONAL
SETBACKS AND A DISTINCT GLASS VOLUME LOWER THE PERCEPTION
OF BUILDING HEIGHT. THE SIMPLE GLASS VOLUME IS FURTHER
WRAPPED WITH A THIN ARBOR THAT PROVIDES SHADE TO OUTDOOR
LIVING AREAS AND FURTHER LAYERS THE BUILDING FACADE.
A40
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
OCEAN AVENUE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
A41
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
BCEFGH A
P.L.P.L.
VICENTE
TERRACE
PICO BLVD.
OCEAN AVE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
A.N.G. 38.08'
(E) PALM
TREES TYP.
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
DI
STAIR PENTHOUSE
EXTENT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE
TRELLIS
MATERIAL
WD-1 VER
GL-1 TH
AL-1 FIX
AL-2 SO
GL-4 CU
CP-1 AC
GL-3 CA
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PAI
AL-4 PER
CP-2 AC
AL-3 SO
GL-2 TH
WD-2 TIM
WD-3 FIX
WD-4 TIM
SS-1 STA
TABLE 9.21.
ABOVE THE
ROOFTO
ELEVATO
STAIR PE
MECHAN
MECHAN
9.21.150 - SO
PHOTOV
SOLAR T
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
BUILDI
EAST
1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION - EAST 0 4'2'8'
SD PRIC
OCEAN AVENUE ELEVATION
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A42
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTELOCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOT OCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PICO BOULEVARD CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
P.L.P.L.
SITE
VICEROY HOTELOCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
SITE AND CONTE
ELEVATIONS
DA0
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
SITE
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
0 10'5'20'
A43
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10
P.L.P.L.
PARKING EGRESS
PARKING INGRESS
OCEAN AVE
PICO BLVD.
A.N.G. 38.08'
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
B
O
V
E
A
.
N
.
G
.
47
'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
M
A
X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 4 6.1
(E) PALM
TREES TYP.
MECH.
ENCLOSURE
MECH.
ENCLOSURE
MECHANICAL
UNITS
SOLAR THERMAL
PANELS (E) STREET
TREES TYP. OF 4
EXTENT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE
LOADING
1'
-
8
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
0
"
6"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
0
"
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO
GRADE AT CORNER OF
OCEAN AVE & PICO BLVD3'
-
0
"
MATERIAL L
WD-1 VER
GL-1 THE
AL-1 FIXE
AL-2 SOL
GL-4 CUS
CP-1 ACR
GL-3 CAN
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PAI
AL-4 PER
CP-2 ACR
AL-3 SOL
GL-2 THE
WD-2 TIM
WD-3 FIX
WD-4 TIM
SS-1 STA
TABLE 9.21.
ABOVE THE
ROOFTOP
ELEVATO
STAIR PE
MECHAN
MECHAN
9.21.150 - SO
PHOTOVO
SOLAR TH
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
BUILDI
SOUTH
1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION - SOUTH 0 4'2'8'
SD PRIC
PICO BOULEVARD ELEVATIONR2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A44
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
A45
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9 8 7 6 5 2 110
P.L.P.L.
OCEAN AVE.
VICENTE TERRACE
A.N.G. 38.08'
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
6
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
B
O
V
E
A
.
N
.
G
.
47
'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
M
A
X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
COURTYARD GATE
PATIO GATE FOR
UNIT, TYP OF 5
346.1
ELEVATOR OVERRUN
STAIR PENTHOUSE
TRELLIS
EXTENT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE
1'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
5'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
2'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
2'
-
8
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
1'
-
9
"
MATERIAL L
WD-1 VER
GL-1 THE
AL-1 FIX
AL-2 SOL
GL-4 CU
CP-1 ACR
GL-3 CAN
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PAI
AL-4 PER
CP-2 ACR
AL-3 SOL
GL-2 THE
WD-2 TIM
WD-3 FIX
WD-4 TIM
SS-1 STA
TABLE 9.21.
ABOVE THE
ROOFTO
ELEVATO
STAIR PE
MECHAN
MECHAN
9.21.150 - SO
PHOTOV
SOLAR T
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
BUILDI
NORTH
1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION - NORTH 0 4'2'8'
SD PRIC
VICENTE TERRACE ELEVATION
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A46
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
MATERIAL
WD-1 VE
GL-1 TH
AL-1 FIX
AL-2 SO
GL-4 CU
CP-1 AC
GL-3 CA
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PA
AL-4 PE
CP-2 AC
AL-3 SO
GL-2 TH
WD-2 TI
WD-3 FI
WD-4 TI
SS-1 ST
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10346.1
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
F
R
O
M
A
.
N
.
G
.
47
'
-
0
"
A.N.G. 38.08'
3'
-
6
"
M
A
X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
ELEV PENTHOUSE
MECH. ENCLOSURE
(E)
SHUTTERS
HOTEL
STAIR PENTHOUSE
P.L.P.L.
RESIDENTIAL / GUEST
/ CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL
PARKING
PUMP RM
STAIR PENTHOUSE
MECHANICAL UNITS
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY TRELLIS
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
OCEAN AVE
TABLE 9.21
ABOVE TH
ROOFTO
ELEVAT
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 - S
PHOTOV
SOLAR
All designs
by these dr
the Archite
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eiz
and employ
responsibil
these plans
are followe
ambiguities
SHEET NO.
PROJECT T
PROJECT N
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
BUILD
-COUR
0 4'2'8' 1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING SECTION -COURTYARD2
SD PR
COURTYARD ELEVATION
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A47
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
MATERIA
WD-1 V
GL-1 T
AL-1 F
AL-2 S
GL-4 C
CP-1 A
GL-3 C
RW-1 R
ST-1 P
AL-4 P
CP-2 A
AL-3 S
GL-2 T
WD-2 T
WD-3 F
WD-4 T
SS-1 S
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
B C E F G HAD I
P.L.P.L.
STAIR PENTHOUSE
THIS ELEVATION IS CONCEALED
BY SHUTTERS HOTEL
EXTENT OF GARAGE BELOW
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
A.N.G. 38.08'
3 '-6 " M A X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
TABLE 9.
ABOVE T
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR
MECH
MECH
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor
use whats
Koning Ei
and empl
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828
1512
SANTA M
BUILD
WEST
0 4'2'8' 1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION- WEST
SD P
WEST ELEVATION - CONCEALEDR2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
PICO BLVDVICENTE TERRACE
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A48
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
AB
V
A
.
N
.
G
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
B
L
D
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
CAFE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
LOADING
RAMP TO P1
P.L.P.L.
ROOF
PV PANELS
CONDENSER UNITS TYP
MECH. ENCLOSURE TYP
ROOF
PV PANELS
OCEAN
AVENUE
3 4 6.1
MAINTENANCE
L.T. RESI BIKE
PARKING
14
'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
0
"
18
'
-
8
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
ROOF
PV PANELS
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
3'
-
6
"
14
'
C
L
R
M
I
N
17
'
-
4
"
RAMP TO GF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
TRELLIS
10
'
-
8
"
TABLE 9.2
ABOVE TH
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SD PRI
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
BUILDING SECTION 1R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
A49
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
98 10
18
'
-
8
"
15
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
9'
-
3
"
CAFE
2 BED
2 BED
1 BED
1 BED
1 BED - A
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
REFUSE & RECYCLE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
P.L.
OCEAN
AVENUE
SIDEWALK
10
'
-
0
"
2'
-
1
1
"
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M WAIVER REQUEST
WAIVER REQUEST FOR ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN:
PER 9.14.030.A.2.a.i THE FINISHED GROUND FLOOR LEVEL ALONG THE COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD SHALL NOT EXCEED 18”
LOWER OR HIGHER THAN THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE ADJACENT SIDEWALK.
EXCEPTION 9.14.030.A.2.a.ii FOR PARCELS WITH A GRADE CHANGE OF 10% OR MORE ALLOW UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 36” ABOVE
THE ADJACENT SIDEWALK LEVEL. HOWEVER PICO BOULEVARD HAS AN APPROXIMATE SLOPE OF 7% AT THIS LOCATION.
DUE TO THE SLOPE OF PICO BOULEVARD THE MOST WEST PORTION OF THE CAFE FLOOR LEVEL IS 36” ABOVE THE PICO
SIDEWALK LEVEL, HENCE A WAIVER PER 9.43.040.B.2 IS REQUIRED.
36”
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO THE SIDEWALK
LEVEL AT THE CORNER OF OCEAN AVENUE
AND PICO BOULEVARD
SIDEWALK SLOPE ALONG PICO BOULEVARD
APPROXIMATELY 7%
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO
THE SIDEWALK LEVEL
AT THE CORNER OF
OCEAN AVENUE AND
PICO BOULEVARD
36”
A50
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 MAJOR MODIFICATION REQUEST
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
98 10
18
'
-
8
"
15
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
9'
-
3
"
CAFE
2 BED
2 BED
1 BED
1 BED
1 BED - A
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
REFUSE & RECYCLE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
P.L.
OCEAN
AVENUE
SIDEWALK
10
'
-
0
"
2'
-
1
1
"
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
MAJOR MODIFICATION REQUEST FOR ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN:
PER TABLE 9.14.030 THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IS 16’-0”.
DUE TO THE SLOPE OF THE PARCEL AND THE ALIGNMENT OF THE CAFE FLOOR TO THE CORNER OF OCEAN AVENUE AND
PICO BOULEVARD THE PROJECT PROPOSES A FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT OF 19’-0”. THIS ALLOWS FOR THE ALIGNMENT
OF RESIDENTIAL FLOOR LEVELS PROVIDING AN ACCESSIBLE ACCESS AND EGRESS FOR EACH DWELLING. THE PROJECT
MASSING IS DESIGNED TO APPEAR AT 15’ IN HEIGHT COMPLYING WITH THE INTENT OF THE PROVISION. A 30” PLENUM
LOWERS THE CEILING TO THIS HEIGHT CONCEALING RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING AND BUILDING SERVICES.
A MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030.B.5.b ALLOWS UP TO 4 FEET OF THE REQUIRED MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO
FLOOR) HEIGHT. THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING 3 FEET.
15
’
-
0
”
19
’
-
0
”
9’
-
0
”
RESIDENTIAL FLOOR LEVELS ALIGN TO
PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE ACCESS & EGRESS
FOR EACH DWELLING.
GR
E
A
T
E
R
T
H
A
N
16
’
-
0
”
PE
R
C
E
P
T
I
O
N
O
F
GR
O
U
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
HE
I
G
H
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
E
S
19
’
-
0
”
GR
E
A
T
E
R
T
H
A
N
16
’
-
0
”
15
’
-
0
”
CO
M
P
L
I
E
S
W
I
T
H
IN
T
E
N
T
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO THE CORNER OF
OCEAN AVENUE AND PICO BOULEVARD FOR
ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN
AWNING/ TRELLIS
AWNING/ TRELLIS
SIGNAGE LOCATED IN ‘GROUND FLOOR’ ZONE
A51
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 OCEAN AVENUE RENDERING
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
A52
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
A53
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF 748 SF
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
R1 FLOOR PLAN
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSIONPICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
734 SF 733 SF4 SF 837 SF734 SF
1173 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
1 7 '-8 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
A2.05
1 BED 12
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 3
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
3 BED 3
22
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
R3 FLOOR PLAN
A54
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
AB
V
A
.
N
.
G
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
B
L
D
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
CAFE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
LOADING
RAMP TO P1
P.L.P.L.
ROOF
PV PANELS
CONDENSER UNITS TYP
MECH. ENCLOSURE TYP
ROOF
PV PANELS
OCEAN
AVENUE
3 4 6.1
MAINTENANCE
L.T. RESI BIKE
PARKING
14
'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
0
"
18
'
-
8
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
ROOF
PV PANELS
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
3'
-
6
"
14
'
C
L
R
M
I
N
17
'
-
4
"
RAMP TO GF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
TRELLIS
10
'
-
8
"
TABLE 9.2
ABOVE TH
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SD PRI
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
BUILDING SECTION 1
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
A55
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A56
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A57
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
GUARDRAIL
HANDRAILS
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A58
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
UP
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
FDC
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
W.C.
D.
F
.RES. FITNESS
ME
C
H
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
STORAGE
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
CANOPY ABOVE
290 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
360 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
48
'
-
7
"
105'-6"12'-2"
14
'
-
5
"
11
'
-
1
"
6' GATE & FENCE
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
2 9 '-1 0 "
1 2 '-4 "
35'-2"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
6'-5"
PORCH LIFT
STEPS
STEPS
RAMP
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF 748 SF
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
1174 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
48
'
-
7
"
7 '-1 1 "
105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
17
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
38'-0"
33'-6"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
A2.05
1 BED 12
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 3
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
3 BED 3
22
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
PORCH LIFT
STEPS
2ND DOOR
R1 FLOOR PLANR3 FLOOR PLAN
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A59
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
AB
V
A
.
N
.
G
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
B
L
D
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
CAFE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
LOADING
RAMP TO P1
P.L.P.L.
ROOF
PV PANELS
CONDENSER UNITS TYP
MECH. ENCLOSURE TYP
ROOF
PV PANELS
OCEAN
AVENUE
3 4 6.1
MAINTENANCE
L.T. RESI BIKE
PARKING
9'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
ROOF
PV PANELS
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
3'
-
6
"
14
'
C
L
R
M
I
N
17
'
-
4
"
RAMP TO GF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
TRELLIS
10
'
-
8
"
R3A
59.5'
R1A
43.8'
9'
-
1
0
"
13
'
-
2
"
14
'
-
4
"
TABLE 9.2
ABOVE TH
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatsoe
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SD PRI
PORCH LIFT
2ND DOOR
STEPS
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
APPLICATION: 15ENT - 0300
MARCH 8TH 2019
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated by these
drawings are the property and copyright of the Architect and shall
neither be used on any other work nor be disclosed to any other
person for any use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals and employees
waives any and all liability or responsibility for problems that may
occur when these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional’s guidance with ambiguities,
or conflicts which are alleged.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
A2
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
KoningEiz
1454 25th St,
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 f
All designs, ideas, a
by these drawings a
the Architect and sha
work nor be disclose
use whatsoever with
Koning Eizenberg Ar
and employees waiv
responsibility for pro
these plans, drawing
are followed without
ambiguities, or confl
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEA
1512
SANTA MONICA
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DE
SD PRICING SE
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
PROJECT INFORMATION KoningEizen
1454 25th St, San
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrang
by these drawings are the
the Architect and shall ne
work nor be disclosed to
use whatsoever without w
Koning Eizenberg Archite
and employees waives a
responsibility for problem
these plans, drawings, sp
are followed without the p
ambiguities, or conflicts w
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN
1512
SANTA MONICA, C
A
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCR
SD PRICING SET
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONS KoningEizen
1454 25th St, San
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrang
by these drawings are the
the Architect and shall ne
work nor be disclosed to
use whatsoever without w
Koning Eizenberg Archite
and employees waives a
responsibility for problem
these plans, drawings, sp
are followed without the p
ambiguities, or conflicts w
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN
1512
SANTA MONICA, C
A
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCR
SD PRICING SET
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
BICYCLE PARKING
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
TIER II COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
BICYCLE PARKING
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
SETBACKS:
AVERAGE NATUR
GRADE (A.N.G.):
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
E.V.
0
0
5
5
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
LOADING:
HC
9
0
0
9
PARKING REQ'SREQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
0.5
0
0.75
4.5
1
5
1
1 14
0
0.75
1.5
1
1
1
1
COVERAGE:
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
PROJECT CONTACTS
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
BICYCLE PARKING
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1REQUEST FOR WAIVER
PROJECT INFORMATION
OWNER:
NXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
ARCHITECT:
KONING EIZENBERG ARCHITECTURE
1454 25TH STREET
SANTA MONICA, CA 90404
CONTACT:
HANK KONING, TROY FOSLER
T: 310.828.6131
E: hkoning@kearch.com
tfosler@kearch.com
HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT
CHATTEL, INC.
13417 VENTURA BLVD
SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91423
KoningEizenber
1454 25th St, Santa M
310.828.6131
310.828.0719 fax
All designs, ideas, arrangemen
by these drawings are the prop
the Architect and shall neither b
work nor be disclosed to any ot
use whatsoever without written
Koning Eizenberg Architecture
and employees waives any and
responsibility for problems that
these plans, drawings, specifica
are followed without the profess
ambiguities, or conflicts which a
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
SD PRICING SET
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
SHEET INDEX
ARCHITECTURE:
A1 COVER
A2 PROJECT INFORMATION
A3 OCEAN AVENUE RENDERING
A4 OCEAN AVENUE LOBBY RENDERING
A5 PICO BLVD/ OCEAN AVE CORNER RENDERING
A6 PICO BLVD RENDERING
A7 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A8 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A9 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A10 VICENTE TERRACE SECTION RENDERING
A11 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A12 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A13 COURTYARD RENDERING
A14 COURTYARD RENDERING
A15 SITE AERIAL & ZONING MAP
A16 SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
A17 PICO BLVD CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
A18 OCEAN AVENUE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
A19 VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
A20 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
A21 AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE CALCULATION
A22 SITE / PLOT PLAN
A23 P2 FLOOR PLAN
A24 P1 FLOOR PLAN
A25 GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A26 R1 FLOOR PLAN
A27 VICENTE TERRACE YARDS
A28 PICO BLVD ENLARGED PLAN
A29 R2 FLOOR PLAN
A30 R3 FLOOR PLAN
A31 R4 FLOOR PLAN
A32 ROOF PLAN
A33 SITE ACCESS DIAGRAM
A34 ENLARGED RAMP PLANS / SECTIONS
A35 ENLARGED RAMP PLANS / SECTIONS
A36 F.A.R. CALCULATIONS
A37 OUTDOOR LIVING AREA &
PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
A38 UPPER STORY STEP-BACK CALCULATIONS
A39 MATERIAL & PROJECT PRECEDENTS
A40 OCEAN AVE CONTEXT ELEVATION
A41 OCEAN AVE ELEVATION
A42 PICO BLVD CONTEXT ELEVATION
A43 PICO BLVD ELEVATION
A44 VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATION
A45 VICENTE TERRACE ELEVATION
A46 COURTYARD ELEVATION
A47 WEST ELEVATION - CONCEALED
A48 BUILDING SECTION 1
A49 WAIVER REQUEST
A50 MAJOR MODIFICATION REQUEST
LANDSCAPE:
L1 SITE PLAN
L2 STREETSCAPE - PLANTING PALETTE
L3 ELEVATION - OCEAN AVENUE
L4 ELEVATION - PICO BOULEVARD
L5 SECTIONS - PICO BOULEVARD
L6 ELEVATION - VICENTE TERRACE
L7 SECTIONS - VICENTE TERRACE
L8 SITE PLAN - COURTYARD PLANTING
L9 SITE PLAN - ROOF DECK
L10 PLAN - ROOF DECK
A55-59 ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MOD.
A51-54 WAIVER / MAJOR MODIFICATION EXHIBITS
A3
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 OCEAN AVENUE RENDERING
A4
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 OCEAN AVENUE LOBBY
A5
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
A6
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 PICO BOULEVARD RENDERING
A7
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A8
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A9
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A10
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE SECTION RENDERING
3 5 '-0 " F R O M A .N .G .
PL
A
N
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
4 5 .0 0 °
5'-0"
SETBACK SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
ENLARGED BUILDING
SECTION
A4.10
DESCRIPTION DATE
UPPER STORY DAYLIGHT PLANE
A11
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A12
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 VICENTE TERRACE RENDERING
A13
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 COURTYARD RENDERING
A14
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 COURTYARD RENDERING
A15
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
SITE
AERIAL
ZONING MAP
ZONING LEGEND
AERIAL VIEW
P I C O B O U L E V A R D
SITE AERIAL AND ZONING
MAP
DA0.30
SITE AERIAL & ZONING MAP
A16
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PICO BOULEVARD
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(E) VICEROY
HOTEL
(E) MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT
(E) CAPO
RESTAURANT
(E) COMMERCIAL
1828
OCEAN AVENUE
(E)
PARKING
LOT
(E) MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT
(E) HOTEL CASA
DEL MAR (E)
RESTAURANT
A P P I A N
W A Y
(E) RESIDENTIAL(E) MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT
TRAFFIC ISLAND TRAFFIC ISLAND
1
2
345
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1. APPROACH FROM OCEAN AVE.2. THE VICEROY HOTEL 3. VICENTE TERRACE 4. COMMERCIAL / RESIDENTIAL ALONG VICENTE TERRACE 5. EXISTING APARTMENT ALONG VICENTE TERRACE
6. PARKING LOT DIAGONALLY ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE 7. CORNER OF PICO BLVD. AND OCEAN AVE.8. ACCESS TO EXISTING SITE ALONG PICO BLVD.9. CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT ACROSS PICO BLVD. 10. MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS ALONG PICO BLVD.
11. PICO BLVD.12. WALKWAY ADJACENT TO SHUTTERS HOTEL 13. ADJACENT FACADE OF SHUTTERS HOTEL
14. BRIDGE ACROSS APPIAN WAY TO SHUTTERS HOTEL 15. VIEW DIAGONALLY ACROSS FROM OCEAN AVE. AND PICO BLVD.16. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ALONG OCEAN AVE.
SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
DA0.31
SITE CONTEXT PHOTO MAP
SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
A17
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
SITE
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTELOCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
SITE AND C
ELEVATION
D
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
0 10'5'20'PICO BOULEVARD CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
NEIGHBORING ST
ELEVATIONS
DA0
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
A18
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'OCEAN AVENUE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS OCEAN AVENUE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
NEIGHBORING STREET
ELEVATIONS
DA0.32
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS OCEAN AVENUE
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE
LOOKING WEST
A19
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS OCEAN AVENUE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS PICO BLVD.
NEIGHBORING STREET
ELEVATIONS
DA0.32
NEIGHBORING STREET ELEVATION ACROSS VICENTE TERRACE
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
A20
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
A21
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE CALCULATION
PI
C
O
B
O
U
L
E
V
A
R
D
VI
C
E
N
T
E
T
E
R
R
A
C
E
OCEAN AVENUE
HEIGHT = 47' MAX ABV. A.N.G.
P .L .
2 1 6 .2 2 '
P.
L
.
2
1
5
.
5
8
'
P.L. 217.73'
P.L. 201.13'
**NO SIDE YARD REQUIRED**
(NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL)
**
N
O
R
E
A
R
Y
A
R
D
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
*
*
(A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
T
O
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
T
R
E
E
T
)
46.63'45.31'
29.31'30.81'
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
SETBACK
5'-0"STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'-0" STREETFRONTAGE
S E T B A C K
5'
-
0
"
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
44.70'
A.N.G. CALCULATION
PT 1 = 31.45 +
PT 2 = 46.06
PT 3 = 30.12
PT 4 = 44.70
152.33 ÷ 4
A.N.G. = 38.08'
PA
R
C
E
L
F
R
O
N
T
2 1 6 '-2 "
21
5
'
-
7
"
217'-8"
PT 4
30.12'
PT 3
31.45'
PT 1
46.06'
PT 2
NOTE: A.N.G. ELEVATIONS AT THE SETBACK
BOUNDRY ARE INTERPOLATED FROM
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY ON SHEET A20
NOTES:
FOR CALCULATING CBC GRADE PLANE -
GRADE PLANE REFERENCE POINTS REPRESENT THE AVERAGE
FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION ADJOINING THE BUILDING AT
EXTERIOR WALLS. GRADE PLANE SPOT ELEVATIONS 1 - 4
AVERAGE TO 37.29' ABOVE PROJECT SEA LEVEL
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
SETBACK
5'-0" ST FRONTAGE
P.L.
P.L.
32.71
46.09'
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
OCEAN AVE.
(E)
SHUTTERS
HOTEL
APPROX. (E) GRADE
47'-0" ABOVE AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE
SM ZO A.N.G
38.00'
AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE = 38.0'
GROUND FLOOR IS FIRST
STORY OF PROJECT PER
9.52.020.0230
6'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A.N.G. SECTION
A.N.G. PLAN
A22
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PICO BLVD
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(E) VICEROY
HOTEL
CC DISTRICT
PER ZO
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) CAFE
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) COMMERCIAL
P.L. 216.22'
P.L. 215.58'
P.
L
.
2
1
7
.
7
3
'
P.
L
.
2
0
1
.
1
3
'
ONE WAY
(E) MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R3 DISTRICT PER ZO
UPPER
COURTYARD
ONE WAY
POOL
ELEV
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
LOWER
COURTYARD
S E T B A C K
5'
-
0
"
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
S E T B A C K
5 '-0 " S T R E E T F R O N T A G E
SETBACK
5'-0" FRONT YARD
EDGE OF (E) SIDEWALK
(E) PALM TREE
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONI
A ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E)
TREES
TXF
6'-0" TALL GATE & FENCE
44'-0"
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
30.82'
46.63'
45.31'
29.31'
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
TRELLIS, TYP
PV PANELS
CL
(E) CURB CUT TO
BE REDUCED
R.
D
.
R.D.CONDENSER UNITS TYP
85'-0"
85'-0"
38.56'
45.96'
STAIR
85'-0"
EGRESS
20'-0"
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
STAIR
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
85'-0"
STAIR
R.
D
.
R.D.R.D.
R.D.
PV PANELS
PV PANELS
ELEV
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
CONDENSER UNITS
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
STREET PARKING:
OCEAN AVE. 7 EXISTING; 7 PROPOSED
PICO BLVD. 8 EXISTING; 8 PROPOSED
TREE PROTECTION ZONE
NEW TREES PROPOSED
ALONG VICENTE
TERRACE, TYP OF 5
INGRESS
15'-0"
LOUVER
43
'
-
7
"
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SITE /
1" = 20'-0"1SITE PLAN 0 10'5'20'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
SITE / PLOT PLAN
PICO BLVD
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(E) VICEROY
HOTEL
CC DISTRICT
PER ZO
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO (E) COMMERCIAL
P.L. 216.22'
P.L. 215.58'
P.
L
.
2
1
7
.
7
3
'
P.
L
.
2
0
1
.
1
3
'
ONE WAY
UPPER
COURTYARD
ONE WAY
POOL
ELEV
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
(E) HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R4 DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
(E) SYCAMORE
TREE, PLATANUS
RACEMOSA
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
EDGE OF
(E) SIDEWALK
LOWER
COURTYARD
S E T B A C K
5'
-
0
"
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
S E T B A C K
5 '-0 " S T R E E T F R O N T A G E
EDGE OF (E) SIDEWALK
(E) PALM TREE
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONI
A ROBUSTA
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
(E)
TREES
TXF
6'-0" TALL GATE & FENCE
44'-0"
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
30.82'
46.63'
45.31'
29.31'
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
CONDENSER
UNITS TYP
TRELLIS, TYP
PV PANELS
(E) CURB CUT TO
BE REDUCED
R.
D
.
R.D.CONDENSER UNITS TYP
85'-0"
85'-0"
38.56'
45.96'
STAIR
85'-0"
EGRESS
20'-0"
(E) PALM TREE,
WASHINGTONIA
ROBUSTA
STAIR
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
85'-0"
STAIR
R.
D
.
R.D.R.D.
R.D.
PV PANELS
PV PANELS
ELEV
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
R.
D
.
CONDENSER UNITS
6'-0" TALL GATE
& FENCE
STREET PARKING:
OCEAN AVE. 7 EXISTING; 7 PROPOSED
PICO BLVD. 8 EXISTING; 8 PROPOSED
TREE PROTECTION ZONE
NEW TREES PROPOSED
ALONG VICENTE
TERRACE, TYP OF 5
INGRESS
15'-0"
LOUVER
43
'
-
7
"
1" = 20'-0"1SITE PLAN 0 10'5'20'
A23
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
L: 4' - 2"
W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
1 10
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
3 4
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
6.1
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
LEG
TYPICAL PARKING STALL
COMPACT PARKING STALL
HC PARKING STALL
7'-6"
15
'
-
0
"
9'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
8'-6"
18
'
-
0
"
1'-6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
HC VAN
8'-0"
HC
5'-0"
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
P2 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
GROU
COMP
COMP
HC
HC - V
HC - V
STAND
TANDE
P1
COMP
COMP
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
P2
COMP
COMP
STAND
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
Grand
0 8'4'16'
SD P
* COMPA
(8'-6" MIN
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
P2 FLOOR PLAN
L: 4' - 2"W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
ARKING STALL
PARKING STALL
NG STALL
-6"
15
'
-
0
"
"
18
'
-
0
"
6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.00
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
B
C
E
F
G
H
A
J
D
I
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.00
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
L: 4' - 2"
W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
1 10
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
3 4
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
6.1
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
TYPICAL PARKING STALL
COMPACT PARKING STALL
HC PARKING STALL
7'-6"
15
'
-
0
"
9'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
8'-6"
18
'
-
0
"
1'-6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
HC VAN
8'-0"
HC
5'-0"
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN 0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
A48
A46
A24
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
L: 4' - 2"W: 4' - 2"CSA: 17.36SF
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
S
t
a
c
k
s
(
x
7
)
1
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
Br
e
a
k
e
r
2'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
Pa
n
e
l
(
x
3
)
1'
- 8
"
1'
- 0
"
Fir
e
A
l
a
r
m
4'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
House Service2' - 6"2' - 0"
Cafe2' - 0"2' - 0"
Inverter5' - 0"2' - 0"
Main Switch Board
14' - 0"
4' - 0"
S
t
a
c
k
s
(
x
7
)
1
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
Br
e
a
k
e
r
2'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
Pa
n
e
l
(
x
3
)
1'
- 8
"
1'
- 0
"
Fir
e
A
l
a
r
m
4'
- 0
"
1'
- 0
"
House Service2' - 6"2' - 0"
Cafe2' - 0"2' - 0"
Inverter5' - 0"2' - 0"
Main Switch Board
14' - 0"
4' - 0"
S
t
a
c
k
s
(
x
1
0
)
1
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
B
r
e
a
k
e
r
2
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
P
a
n
e
l
(
x
3
)
1
'
-
8
"
1
'
-
0
"
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
A
J
1 10
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
DN TO P2
ONE WAY
ONE WAY
FROM GF
ELEC
UP TO PICO
ONE WAY
CURB
3 4
O.H. GATE BELOW
12'-0"
20'-9"
117 STALLS
VALET AISLE PARKING
LOCATED SO ONLY
ONE VEHICLE NEEDS
TO BE MOVED TO
ACCESS BLOCKED
VEHICLES.
D
13'-9"
22
'
-
0
"
I
MECH
6.1
MECH
ELEV CTRL
STORAGE
60 SF
ELEV CTRL
STORAGE
STORAGE
ELEC
22'-0"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
13'-2"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
12
'
-
0
"
EXHAUST CHASE
13'-5"
ON
E
W
A
Y
RAMP 2
RAMP 3
RAMP 4
1'-6"1'-9"
1'-6"
1'-9"
3'-0"
1'-9"
VALET STND
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VALET STND
VALET STND
VALET STND
VALET STND
VALET CMP VALET CMP
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VALET STND VALET STND VALET STND
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VALET STND
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
C
M
P
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
VA
L
E
T
S
T
N
D
1-
1
9
VALET STND VALET STND
20
-
4
5
46
-
5
3
54
-
7
7
10
0
-
1
1
7
78
-
9
9
STOP
ST
O
P
VALET
ONLY
EXIT
RESI
ONLY6"H
3'-6"H
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
P1 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1P1 FLOOR PLAN
GROU
COMP
COMP
HC
HC - V
HC - V
STAND
TANDE
P1
COMP
COMP
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
P2
COMP
COMP
STAND
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
Grand
0 8'4'16'
SD P
* COMPA
(8'-6" MIN
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
P1 FLOOR PLAN
L: 4' - 2"W: 4' - 2"
CSA: 17.36SF
B
C
E
F
G
H
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
A
J
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
SEWAGE
EJECTOR BELOW
SLAB
SUMP BELOW
SLAB
PUMP RM
UP TO P1
20'-9"
O.H. GATE
117 STALLS
D
I
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
20'-3"
MECH
CISTERN
PUMPS/RISERS
MECH
STORAGE
20'-3"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
22
'
-
0
"
ELEV
EL
E
V
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
7'
-
7
"
7'
-
6
"
5 '-0
"
AT END STALL
3'-0" MIN
EXHAUST CHASE
STORM WATER
STORAGE TANK
RAMP 3
1'-6"
1'-6"
1'-6"
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
1-
2
0
21
-
3
8
39
-
5
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
E
V
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
C
M
P
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
56
-
8
5
86
-
9
7
98
-
1
1
7
3'-0"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
ARKING STALL
PARKING STALL
NG STALL
-6"
15
'
-
0
"
"
18
'
-
0
"
6"
4'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
6"
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.00
1/16" = 1'-0"1P2 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THERE ARE APPROX. 100 INDEPENDENTLY
ACCESSIBLE STALLS FOR 83 UNITS, SO EACH UNIT HAS
ACCESS TO AN INDEPENDENT STALL.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
B
C
E
F
G
H
A
J
VALET AISLE PARKING
LOCATED SO ONLY
ONE VEHICLE NEEDS
TO BE MOVED TO
ACCESS BLOCKED
VEHICLES.
D
I
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
P1 FLOOR PLAN
A2.01
1/16" = 1'-0"1P1 FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
A48
A46
A25
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
987652
B
C
E
F
G
H
704 SF
1 BED
G103
PICO BOULEVARD
A
J
1 10
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
INGRESS DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
EXIT
HVO
HVO
LOWER
COURTYARD
30.82'
29.31'
844 SF
1 BED
G104
ONE WAY
25
'
-
0
"
DOWN TO P1
O.H. GATE
126 BIKE
CAPACITY
RAMP UP FROM
PARKING
HVO
HVO
EGRESS
20'-0"
O.H. GATE
DN
693 SF
1 BED
G106
1128 SF
3 BED - A
G107
3 4
OFFSET COLUMN
GRID FOR CLEARANCE
7'
-
6
"
23
'
-
6
"
TXF
VAULT
12" MIN CLR
FROM PAD ABV
12'-0"
48
'
-
2
"
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
440 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
?
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
13 XL BIKES
D
I
MECH
25'-0"
EXIT
6.1
RESIDENTIAL / GUEST /
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
MECH
25'-0"
SHWR
1175 SF
3 BED - A
G102
886 SF
2 BED
G101
864 SF
2 BED - A
G105
ME
C
H
PET SALON
SURF BD. LOCKER
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
ONE WAY
ELEV CTRL
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.11
A6.11
A6.11
L.T. COMM. BIKE
PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
5'
-
0
"
6' GATE & FENCE
6' H GATE
12
'
-
0
"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
(E) STREET TREES
4'-0" MIN
8'
-
0
"
18'-0"18'-0"15'-0"18'-0"4'-0"
22'-6"
22'-6"
RAMP 1
RAMP 2
RAMP 4 8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
MECH
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
18
'
-
4
"
24'-5"
18'-8"20
'
-
8
"
8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
ONE WAY
17
'
-
3
"
3'
-
0
"
80 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
500 SF
MAINTENANCE
VALET CMP 2 VALET CMP 3
HVO
PERF. SLIDING
GATES &
FENCE - 6' H
15'-0"
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
4
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
6
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
7
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
8
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
9
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
0
RESI HC 3
RESI HC 2 GUEST STND 12
GUEST HC VAN 13
VALET HC 9
VALET CMP 10
COMM HC VAN 7
VALET HC VAN 8
VALET HC 7
VALET HC 6
VALET HC 1
VALET CMP 4
VALET CMP 5
RESI HC VAN EV 1
GUEST STND 4 COMM CMP 4
GUEST STND 5 COMM CMP 5
GUEST STND 6 COMM CMP 6
GUEST STND 7
GUEST CMP 8
GUEST CMP 9
GUEST STND 1
GUEST STND 2
GUEST STND 3
COMM STND 1
COMM STND 2
COMM STND 3
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
1
DN ONE WAY
3'
-
7
"
17
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5 '-0
"
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
GROU
1/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLAN
GROU
COMP
COMP
HC
HC - V
HC - V
STAND
TANDE
P1
COMP
COMP
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
P2
COMP
COMP
STAND
STAND
TANDE
TANDE
TANDE
Grand
RE
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THIS FLOOR HAS APPROX. 10 VALET STALLS FOR
CDM REPLACEMENT PARKING, 20 RESIDENTIAL GUEST
& COMMERCIAL STALLS, AND 9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
SD P
* COMPA
(8'-6" MIN
PLANTER
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
L:
7
'
- 6
"
W:
4
'
- 8
"
CS
A
:
3
5
.
0
0
S
F
B
C
E
F
G
H
704 SF
1 BED
G103
PICO BOULEVARD
A
J
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
INGRESS DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
(E) MEDIAN
(E) MEDIAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
EXIT
HVO
HVO
LOWER
COURTYARD
30.82'
29.31'
844 SF
1 BED
G104
ONE WAY
25
'
-
0
"
DOWN TO P1
O.H. GATE
126 BIKE
CAPACITY
RAMP UP FROM
PARKING
HVO
HVO
EGRESS
20'-0"
O.H. GATE
DN
693 SF
1 BED
G106
1128 SF
3 BED - A
G107
OFFSET COLUMN
GRID FOR CLEARANCE
7'
-
6
"
23
'
-
6
"
TXF
VAULT
12" MIN CLR
FROM PAD ABV
12'-0"
48
'
-
2
"
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
440 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
?
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
13 XL BIKES
D
I
MECH
25'-0"
EXIT
RESIDENTIAL / GUEST /
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
MECH
25'-0"
SHWR
1175 SF
3 BED - A
G102
886 SF
2 BED
G101
864 SF
2 BED - A
G105
ME
C
H
PET SALON
SURF BD. LOCKER
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
8'-2" OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
ONE WAY
ELEV CTRL
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.10
A6.11
A6.11
A6.11
L.T. COMM. BIKE
PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
(4) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
17'-3"22'-3"19'-8"19'-7"28'-0"30'-0"27'-6"29'-0"22'-3"
5'
-
0
"
6' GATE & FENCE
6' H GATE
12
'
-
0
"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
(E) STREET TREES
4'-0" MIN
8'
-
0
"
18'-0"18'-0"15'-0"18'-0"4'-0"
22'-6"
22'-6"
RAMP 1
RAMP 2
RAMP 4 8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
MECH
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
18
'
-
4
"
24'-5"
18'-8"20
'
-
8
"
8'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
ONE WAY
17
'
-
3
"
3'
-
0
"
80 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
500 SF
MAINTENANCE
VALET CMP 2 VALET CMP 3
HVO
PERF. SLIDING
GATES &
FENCE - 6' H
15'-0"
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
4
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
5
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
6
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
7
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
8
RE
S
I
S
T
N
D
9
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
0
RESI HC 3
RESI HC 2 GUEST STND 12
GUEST HC VAN 13
VALET HC 9
VALET CMP 10
COMM HC VAN 7
VALET HC VAN 8
VALET HC 7
VALET HC 6
VALET HC 1
VALET CMP 4
VALET CMP 5
RESI HC VAN EV 1
GUEST STND 4 COMM CMP 4
GUEST STND 5 COMM CMP 5
GUEST STND 6 COMM CMP 6
GUEST STND 7
GUEST CMP 8
GUEST CMP 9
GUEST STND 1
GUEST STND 2
GUEST STND 3
COMM STND 1
COMM STND 2
COMM STND 3
GU
E
S
T
S
T
N
D
1
1
DN ONE WAY
3'
-
7
"
17
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5 '-0
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A2.02
1/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - GF
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 3
2 BED 1
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
7
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THIS FLOOR HAS APPROX. 10 VALET STALLS FOR
CDM REPLACEMENT PARKING, 20 RESIDENTIAL GUEST
& COMMERCIAL STALLS, AND 9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
PLANTER
B
C
E
F
G
H
A
J
12" MIN CLR
FROM PAD ABV
D
I
16
'
-
9
"
28
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
6
"
30
'
-
6
"
27
'
-
6
"
16
'
-
9
"
5 '-0
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A2.02
1/16" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLAN
PARKING SCHEDULE
PARKING TYPE QTY
GROUND FLOOR
COMPACT 6
COMPACT WIDE 3
HC 6
HC - VAN 3
HC - VAN EV 1
STANDARD 19
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
39
P1
COMPACT 8
COMPACT WIDE 31
STANDARD 51
TANDEM - COMPACT 6
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 19
117
P2
COMPACT 4
COMPACT WIDE 38
STANDARD 53
STANDARD - EV 5
TANDEM - COMPACT 1
TANDEM - COMPACT WIDE 2
TANDEM - STANDARD 14
117
Grand total 273
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - GF
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 3
2 BED 1
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
7
TOTAL
9
138
147
RM COM.
0 8'4'16'
9.28.040.A.5.C - REPLACEMENT OF CODE REQ'D
PARKING FOR OFF-SITE USER
IF A SITE CONTAINS EXISTING SURFACE PARKING THAT
SERVES AS CODE OR PERMIT-REQUIRED PARKING FOR
AN OFF-SITE USER, SUCH PARKING SPACES MAY BE
REPLACED ON-SITE AS PART OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE SITE, AND SUCH REPLACEMENT PARKING
SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PARKING THAT EXCEEDS
THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.28.060 FOR
PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 9.28.040(A)(5)(B).
NOTES:
1.PARKING STALLS ARE QUANTIFIED BY LEVEL IN THE
ASSOCIATED SCHEDULE
2. 127 VALET STALLS FOR CASA DEL MAR ARE
REQUIRED.
3. THIS FLOOR HAS APPROX. 10 VALET STALLS FOR
CDM REPLACEMENT PARKING, 20 RESIDENTIAL GUEST
& COMMERCIAL STALLS, AND 9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS.
COMPACT STALLS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
40% OF TOTAL PARKING PER S.M.Z.C.
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
* COMPACT WIDE IS STANDARD SIZE WIDTH
(8'-6" MIN) WITH REDUCED LENGTH (15' MIN)
AT THIS LEVEL:
20 COMMERCIAL / RESI GUEST STALLS
9 RESIDENTIAL STALLS
10 VALET STALLS FOR CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
Δ #
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
HREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
WO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
HIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
HE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
RIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
HIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
00 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
0 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
ROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
EET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
ABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A26
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
ONE WAY
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN(E) STREET
LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1 BED
R103
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1 BED
R102
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
46.63'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF
1 BED
R105
748 SF
1 BED
R101
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
1 BED
R104
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
1033 SF
2 BED
R109
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
(N) TRANSFORMER
A6.14
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
139'-9"17'-9"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
35'-6"22'-6"
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
5 '-0 "
17'-9"
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
3 '-7 "
9 '-0 "
7 '-1 "
3 '-7 "
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
3 1 '-1 "
1 8 '-1 0 "
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R1 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R1 FLOOR PLAN
R
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R1 FLOOR PLAN
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
ONE WAY
(E) STREET SIGN
(E) STREET SIGN(E) STREET
LIGHT TYP.
(E) PARKING
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1 BED
R103
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1 BED
R102
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
46.63'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF
1 BED
R105
748 SF
1 BED
R101
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
1 BED
R104
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
1033 SF
2 BED
R109
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13 A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
(N) TRANSFORMER
A6.14
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
139'-9"17'-9"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
35'-6"22'-6"
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
5 '-0 "
17'-9"
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
3 '-7 "
9 '-0 "
7 '-1 "
3 '-7 "
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
3 1 '-1 "
1 8 '-1 0 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R1 FLOOR PLAN
A2.03
1/16" = 1'-0"1R1 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R1
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 10
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 1
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED 2
16
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
Δ #
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
ADDRESS:
ZONING DISTRICT:
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATURAL
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
REQD UNIT MIX %
MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
ST
0
0
0
0
0
15% MAX
0
0
1
0
1B
8
12
11
10
3
N/A
0
44
1.5
66
2B
6
3
2
1
1
20% MIN
13.4
13
2
26
3B
3
3
2
2
0
15% MIN
10.1
10
2
20
TOTAL
17
18
15
13
4
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
79 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH 15% VERY-LOW
INCOME AFFORDABLE UNITS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 4 AFFORDABLE
UNITS (TO SATISFY 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK AKA 1920 OCEAN
WAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS) AND 1,170 SF
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT STREET LEVEL.
1828 OCEAN AVENUE, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT
47' - NO LIMIT TO STORIES. SEE SHEET A21
STREET FRONTAGE = 5',
NO REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS
BECAUSE NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT PROVIDES NON-REQUIRED SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS
45,120 SF. SEE SHEET A20
SEE SHEET A21
SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH 127 PARKING STALLS FOR CASA DEL
MAR HOTEL TO BE REPLACED ON SITE
2.0 ALLOWABLE; 1.81 PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A36
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
UNIT TYPE
MARKET-RATE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:ADDITIONAL 5' SETBACK FOR 30% OF FRONT STREET FACING
FACADE ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
SEE SHEET A38
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
TOTAL:100 SF / UNIT PER CHAPTER 9.21.090
PRIVATE: 60 SF MIN / UNIT
SEE SHEET A37
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
GREATER THAN 40 UNITS PER TABLE 9.21.130.A
MUST BE REVIEWED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
LOADING:GREATER THAN 50 UNITS - ONE STANDARD LOADING SPACE REQ'D
MIN 30'L x 12'W x 14'H PER 9.28.080
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
70% ALLOWABLE; 62% PROPOSED
SEE SHEET A37
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
REQUIRED UNIT MIX FOR REFERENCE
A) MARKET RATE UNITS:
HREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 15% MIN
WO-BEDROOM UNITS: 20% MIN
ONE BEDROOM UNITS: UNREGULATED
STUDIO UNITS: NONE
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
HIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
HE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
RIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
HIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
00 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
0 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
PROJECT INFORMATIONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARKING TABULATIONSTIER 2 COMMUNITY BENEFITS PER 9.23
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
ROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES - TIER 2 WITH PROVISIONS WITH COMMUNITY BENEFITS
& 100% RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR
STORIES:NO LIMIT. THE NAMES OF THE FLOORS/LEVELS ARE FOR IDENTIFICATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT REFLECT THE ZONING ORDINANCE
DEFINITIONS OF “BASEMENT,” “STORY” OR “GROUND FLOOR”
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
EET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
ABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
ENLARGED PLAN
SEE SHEET A27
A48
A46
ENLARGED PLAN
SEE SHEET A28
A27
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
+/
-
1
2
'
-
1
"
+/
-
1
4
'
-
0
"
+/
-
1
2
'
-
4
"
+/
-
1
0
'
-
9
"
+/
-
7
'
-
2
"
+/
-
1
4
'
-
3
"
LEVEL CHANGE
VICENTE TERRACE
17
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5'
-
0
"
9'
-
0
"
3'
-
7
"
17'-7"
22'-5"
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
ELECTRICAL
TRANSFORMER PAD
(E) CAFE
OCEANFRONT DISTRICT PER ZO
(E) MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
R3 DISTRICT PER ZO
3'
-
7
"
5'
-
0
"
T Y P
1 8 '-8 "
5 '-0 "
TYPICAL FENCE LINE
6' H FENCE AND GATE
OUTLINE OF BUILDING ABV
RESIDENT PATIO
TYP OF 5
LOWER CTYD
SHORT-TERM BIKE PARKING
7 '-1 "
T Y P
2 2 '-0 "
3 '-7 "
5 '-0 "
T O B A L C .
1 5 '-4 " T Y P
+/- 5 9 '-0 "
5 '-0 "
T O B A L C .
1 0 '-0 "
(N) TREE ON SITE
VICENTE TERRACE YARDS
A28
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
LEVEL CHANGE
PICO BLVD
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
CAFE
OUTDOOR SEATING
RESIDENT PATIO
(E) MEDIAN
SHORT-TERM
BIKE PARKING
OUTLINE OF BUILDING ABV
SHORT-TERM BIKE PARKING
6' H FENCE & GATE
EGRESS DRIVEWAY
20'-0"
INGRESS DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
COURTYARD
LOADING
RESIDENT
ENTRY
RESIDENT
ENTRY
6' H FENCE & GATE
LOBBY
ELEV
S E T B A C K
5 '-0
"
TRASH
B U I L D -T
O -L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR CAFE
EXCEEDS 10' PER 9.14.030.C1
Koning
1454 25t
310.828.6
310.828.0
All designs, i
by these draw
the Architect
work nor be d
use whatsoe
Koning Eizen
and employe
responsibility
these plans,
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
ENLAR
PICO BOULEVARD - ENLARGED PLAN
A29
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
OPEN TO
BELOW
LOBBY FOR
RESIDENTS
BELOW
CAFE
BELOW
1033 SF
2 BED
R209
RESIDENT SPA
1373 SF
3 BED
R217
646 SF
1 BED
R216
1310 SF
3 BED
R214
656 SF
1 BED - A
R219
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED - A
R208
680 SF
1 BED
R206 653 SF
1 BED
R207
ME
C
H
735 SF
1 BED
R203
733 SF
1 BED
R202
732 SF
1 BED
R205
837 SF
1 BED
R201
734 SF
1 BED
R204
634 SF
1 BED - A
R212
634 SF
1 BED
R211
874 SF
2 BED - A
R210
1196 SF
2 BED
R213
788 SF
1 BED
R218
100 SF
STORAGE
60 SF
RR
ELEC
653 SF
1 BED
R215
A6.14
A6.14
A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
160 SF
RES. STORAGE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
14
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"
66
'
-
1
"
14
'
-
7
"
50
'
-
1
1
"
12'-2"
134'-3"
27'-5"
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
RESIDENT MEETING
1 3 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
3 4 '-7 "
1 5 '-4 "
2 2 '-7 "
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R2 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R2 FLOOR PLAN
R
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R2 FLOOR PLAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
OPEN TO
BELOW
LOBBY FOR
RESIDENTS
BELOW
CAFE
BELOW
1033 SF
2 BED
R209
RESIDENT SPA
1373 SF
3 BED
R217
646 SF
1 BED
R216
1310 SF
3 BED
R214
656 SF
1 BED - A
R219
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED - A
R208
680 SF
1 BED
R206 653 SF
1 BED
R207
ME
C
H
735 SF
1 BED
R203
733 SF
1 BED
R202
732 SF
1 BED
R205
837 SF
1 BED
R201
734 SF
1 BED
R204
634 SF
1 BED - A
R212
634 SF
1 BED
R211
874 SF
2 BED - A
R210
1196 SF
2 BED
R213
788 SF
1 BED
R218
100 SF
STORAGE
60 SF
RR
ELEC
653 SF
1 BED
R215
A6.14
A6.14
A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
160 SF
RES. STORAGE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
14
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"
66
'
-
1
"
14
'
-
7
"
50
'
-
1
1
"
12'-2"
134'-3"
27'-5"
1 0 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
RESIDENT MEETING
1 3 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
3 4 '-7 "
1 5 '-4 "
2 2 '-7 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R2 FLOOR PLAN
A2.04
1/16" = 1'-0"1R2 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R2
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 11
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 3
2 BED 2
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED 2
19
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A30
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
ME
C
H
734 SF
1 BED
R303
733 SF
1 BED
R302
734 SF
1 BED
R305
837 SF
1 BED
R301
734 SF
1 BED
R304
634 SF
1 BED - A
R312
634 SF
1 BED
R311
874 SF
2 BED - A
R310
1196 SF
2 BED
R313
1033 SF
2 BED
R309
1173 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
1 5 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
3 4 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
1 5 '-4 "
1 7 '-8 "
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R3 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R3 FLOOR PLAN
R
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R3 FLOOR PLAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
ME
C
H
734 SF
1 BED
R303
733 SF
1 BED
R302
734 SF
1 BED
R305
837 SF
1 BED
R301
734 SF
1 BED
R304
634 SF
1 BED - A
R312
634 SF
1 BED
R311
874 SF
2 BED - A
R310
1196 SF
2 BED
R313
1033 SF
2 BED
R309
1173 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15 A6.15
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
1 5 ' M I N
1 5 '-4 "
3 4 '-7 "
11'-9"
1 0 ' M I N
1 0 '-4 "
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
1 5 '-4 "
1 7 '-8 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R3 FLOOR PLAN
A2.05
1/16" = 1'-0"1R3 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R3
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 12
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 3
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
3 BED 3
22
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A31
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
POOL ABV
1340 SF
3 BED
R419
1173 SF
2 BED
R417
960 SF
2 BED
R418
1373 SF
3 BED
R414
646 SF
1 BED - A
R413
1310 SF
3 BED
R411
653 SF
1 BED
R412
788 SF
1 BED
R415
656 SF
1 BED
R416
40 SF
RR
809 SF
2 BED
R405
70 SF
W.C.
ME
C
H
634 SF
1 BED
R409
634 SF
1 BED
R408
874 SF
2 BED - A
R407
1196 SF
2 BED
R410
837 SF
1 BED
R406
708 SF
1 BED
R402
745 SF
1 BED
R403
1062 SF
2 BED
R401
887 SF
2 BED
R404
60 SF
RR
ELEC
POTTED PLANTS
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
A6.17 A6.17 A6.17
A6.17
TRELLIS
ABOVE
TRELLIS
ABOVE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
24
'
-
1
0
"
35'-6"38'-0"114'-1"27'-11"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
139'-2"
25
'
-
1
"
12
'
-
7
"
19
'
-
1
1
"
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
17
'
-
8
"
24
'
-
1
0
"
LEG
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
R4 FL
1/16" = 1'-0"1R4 FLOOR PLAN
RE
1 BED
1 BED
2 BED
2 BED
3 BED
0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
R4 FLOOR PLAN
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
POOL ABV
1340 SF
3 BED
R419
1173 SF
2 BED
R417
960 SF
2 BED
R418
1373 SF
3 BED
R414
646 SF
1 BED - A
R413
1310 SF
3 BED
R411
653 SF
1 BED
R412
788 SF
1 BED
R415
656 SF
1 BED
R416
40 SF
RR
809 SF
2 BED
R405
70 SF
W.C.
ME
C
H
634 SF
1 BED
R409
634 SF
1 BED
R408
874 SF
2 BED - A
R407
1196 SF
2 BED
R410
837 SF
1 BED
R406
708 SF
1 BED
R402
745 SF
1 BED
R403
1062 SF
2 BED
R401
887 SF
2 BED
R404
60 SF
RR
ELEC
POTTED PLANTS
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.15
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.15
A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
A6.17 A6.17 A6.17
A6.17
TRELLIS
ABOVE
TRELLIS
ABOVE
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
24
'
-
1
0
"
35'-6"38'-0"114'-1"27'-11"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
139'-2"
25
'
-
1
"
12
'
-
7
"
19
'
-
1
1
"
6 '-6
"
8 '-0
"
17
'
-
8
"
24
'
-
1
0
"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
R4 FLOOR PLAN
A2.06
1/16" = 1'-0"1R4 FLOOR PLAN
RESIDENTIAL UNITS - R4
Unit Type QTY
1 BED 8
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
2 BED 6
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 1
3 BED 3
19
0 8'4'16'
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ‘X BED - A’
A48
A46
A32
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS
CONDENSER UNITS
BBQ
POOL
ELEV
MECH
ENCLOSURE
PICO BLVD.
VICENTE TERRACE
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
CONDENSER
UNITS, TYP
GARAGE EXHAUST
LOUVER TO FACE
AWAY FROM VICENTE
TERRACE
ME
C
H
SOLAR HOT WATER PANELS
MAX 7' ABOVE ROOF
PV ARRAY
POOL
EQUIPMENT
MECH
ENCLOSURE
CANOPY ABOVE
TRELLIS
BELOW
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS.
STACKED TWO HIGHHOT WATER
EQUIPMENT
ME
C
H
CONDENSER UNITS
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
EL
E
V
ROOF DECK
MECH
35'-6"22'-6"145'-9"
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
REQUIRED PV SYSTEM PER 8.106.080
2W/ SF OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT REQUIRED, MIN.
PARCEL COVERAGE = 28,045 SF * 2W = 56,100 W
139'-2"
TO
R
O
O
F
24
'
-
1
0
"
T O T R E L L I S
2 2 '-7 "
TRELLIS
ABV
M I N
1 5 '-0 "
T O E X H A U S T L O U V E R
+/- 6 0 '
LOUVER
5 '-0 "
3 0 '-7 "
7 '-1 "
TRELLIS
BELOW
11'-9"
T O R O O F D E C K
2 7 '-1 0 "
T O R O O F
1 9 '-1 0 "
2 4 '-1 0 "
1 7 '-8 "
M I N
1 0 '-0 "
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
ROOF
1/16" = 1'-0"1ROOF PLAN 0 8'4'16'
SD P
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
ROOF PLAN
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS
CONDENSER UNITS
BBQ
POOL
ELEV
MECH
ENCLOSURE
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
CONDENSER
UNITS, TYP
GARAGE EXHAUST
LOUVER TO FACE
AWAY FROM VICENTE
TERRACE
ME
C
H
SOLAR HOT WATER PANELS
MAX 7' ABOVE ROOF
PV ARRAY
POOL
EQUIPMENT
MECH
ENCLOSURE
CANOPY ABOVE
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY
CONDENSER UNITS.
STACKED TWO HIGHHOT WATER
EQUIPMENT
ME
C
H
CONDENSER UNITS
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
TRASH VENT
ENCLOSURE
EL
E
V
ROOF DECK
MECH33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
35'-6"22'-6"105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
REQUIRED PV SYSTEM PER 8.106.080
2W/ SF OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT REQUIRED, MIN.
PARCEL COVERAGE = 28,045 SF * 2W = 56,100 W
139'-2"
TO
R
O
O
F
24
'
-
1
0
"
T O T R E L L I S
2 2 '-7 "M I N
1 5 '-0 "
T O E X H A U S T L O U V E R
+/- 6 0 '
LOUVER
5 '-0 "
3 0 '-7 "
7 '-1 "
T O R O O F D E C K
2 7 '-1 0 "
T O R O O F
1 9 '-1 0 "
2 4 '-1 0 "
1 7 '-8 "
M I N
1 0 '-0 "
S
P
P
∆
1
1
S
R
1/16" = 1'-0"1ROOF PLAN 0 8'4'16'
A48
A46
A33
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
CAFE ON R1 LEVELPARKING
EXIT
PARKING
ENTRANCE
VALET FROM CDM
VALET TO CDM
RESIDENTIAL
LOADING
12' X 30'
PARKING
LOADING
TRASH
& STAGING
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
RESIDENTIAL
R & R
NOTE: MAINTENANCE STAFF WILL BE
RESPONSIBLE TO COLLECT ALL
TRASH & RECYCLING WITH THEIR
CONTAINERS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL
TRASH AREA AND TAKE MATERIAL TO
THE LARGER CONTAINERS PROVIDED
BY THE CITY
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor b
use whats
Koning Ei
and emplo
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
LOAD
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
CAFE ON R1 LEVELPARKING
EXIT
PARKING
ENTRANCE
VALET FROM CDM
VALET TO CDM
RESIDENTIAL
LOADING
12' X 30'
PARKING
LOADING
TRASH
& STAGING
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
RESIDENTIAL
R & R
NOTE: MAINTENANCE STAFF WILL BE
RESPONSIBLE TO COLLECT ALL
TRASH & RECYCLING WITH THEIR
CONTAINERS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL
TRASH AREA AND TAKE MATERIAL TO
THE LARGER CONTAINERS PROVIDED
BY THE CITY
SITE ACCESS DIAGRAM
A34
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
H
J
I
DN
ONE WAY
PICO BLVD
SIDEWALK APPROX.
6.5% SLOPE
38.83'
39.11'
38.83'
2 0
A P P R O A C H
8 '-6
"
F L A T
5 '-0
"
A P R O N & S I D E W A L K
+/- 1 0 '-2 "
R A M P 1 0 %
5 '-0
"
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
HVO
HVO
RAMP 1
38.92'
38.56'37.75'
38.67'
38.67'
SIDEWALK
3 6 '-0 "
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
3 6 '-8 "
18
'
-
9
"
12'-0"
24'-5"
27
'
-
6
"
2
2
9
.
4
10
7
.
7
4.
2
BIN UNLOADING
NO PARKING OR DELIVERIES
IN HATCHED ZONE
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
J
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
PICO BLVD
10% MAX
5'-0"
10% MAX
5'-0"8'-6"P.L.
11
'
-
6
"
CL
R
8'
-
2
"
M
I
N
2%
5'-0"
20% MAX
26'-7"
654 6.1
RAMP DOWN TO P1
20 %10 %
12
'
-
0
"
4
A6.20
5'-0"5'-0"
10 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
654 6.1
2 0 %
1 0 %
1 0 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
10
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
5'-0"5'-0"
SHEET NO.
PROJECT T
PROJECT N
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
ENLAR
RAMP
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 1 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 1 SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 2 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 2 SECTION
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
ENLARGED RAMP PLANS
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
C ED
4
A6.21
2
F
G
H
J
1 3 4
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
32.50'
32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVOHVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
F G H I
KoningEizenbergAr
1454 25th St, Santa Monic
310.828.6131 info@
310.828.0719 fax www
All designs, ideas, arrangements and
by these drawings are the property an
the Architect and shall neither be used
work nor be disclosed to any other pe
use whatsoever without written permi
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or
and employees waives any and all lia
responsibility for problems that may o
these plans, drawings, specifications,
are followed without the professional's
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alle
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN04'2'8'0 4'2'8'
RAMP 2 SECTIONRAMP 1 SECTION
87
H
J
I
6.1
O.H. GATE
DN
ONE WAY
PICO BLVD
SIDEWALK APPROX.
6.5% SLOPE
38.83'
39.11'
38.83'
2 0
1 0
A P P R O A C H
8 '-6
"
F L A T
5 '-0
"
A P R O N & S I D E W A L K
+/- 1 0 '-2 "
R A M P 1 0 %
5 '-0
"
560 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
HVO
HVO
RAMP 1
38.92'
38.56'37.75'
38.67'
38.67'
32.50'32.50'
SIDEWALK
3 6 '-0 "
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
3 6 '-8 "
18
'
-
9
"
12'-0"
24'-5"
27
'
-
6
"
2
2
9
.
4
10
7
.
7
4.
2
BIN UNLOADING
NO PARKING OR DELIVERIES
IN HATCHED ZONE
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
J
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
PICO BLVD
10% MAX
5'-0"
10% MAX
5'-0"8'-6"P.L.
11
'
-
6
"
CL
R
8'
-
2
"
M
I
N
2%
5'-0"
20% MAX
26'-7"
654 6.1
RAMP DOWN TO P1
20 %10 %
12
'
-
0
"
4
A6.20
5'-0"5'-0"
10 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
654 6.1
2 0 %
1 0 %
1 0 %
22.00'22.50'
32.00'32.50'
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
10
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
5'-0"5'-0"
Konin
1454 2
310.828
310.828
All designs
by these d
the Archite
work nor b
use whatso
Koning Eiz
and emplo
responsibi
these plan
are followe
ambiguities
SHEET NO.
PROJECT T
PROJECT N
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
ENLAR
RAMP
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 1 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 1 SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 2 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 2 SECTION
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
RAMP 2 PLANRAMP 1 PLAN
A35
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
C ED
4
A6.21
2
F
G
H
J
1 3 4
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
32.50'
32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVOHVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
F G H I
KoningEizenbergAr
1454 25th St, Santa Monic
310.828.6131 info@
310.828.0719 fax www
All designs, ideas, arrangements and
by these drawings are the property an
the Architect and shall neither be used
work nor be disclosed to any other pe
use whatsoever without written permi
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or
and employees waives any and all lia
responsibility for problems that may o
these plans, drawings, specifications,
are followed without the professional's
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alle
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN04'2'8'0 4'2'8'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
C ED
8'-0"41'-7"7'-11"
O.H. GATE
1 0 %
8'
-
2
"
12.00'12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
C
L
R
7
'
-
6
"
M
I
N
2 0 %
9 .7 %
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
F G H I
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
30.00'
PICO BLVD
P.L.
5'-0"5'-0"5'-0"42'-5"
1 0
1 0 5
1 9 .8
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
ENLARGED PARKING
RAMP
A6.21
DESCRIPTION DATE
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 3 SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 4 SECTION
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'0 4'2'8'
G
H
J
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
F G H I
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
30.00'
PICO BLVD
P.L.
5'-0"5'-0"5'-0"42'-5"
1 0
1 0 5
1 9 .8
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
ENLARGED PARKING
RAMP
A6.21
DESCRIPTION DATE
"1
"2
1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"4RAMP 4 SECTION
0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'
ENLARGED RAMP PLANS
RAMP 4 SECTION
RAMP 3 SECTION
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
C ED
8'-0"41'-7"7'-11"
O.H. GATE
1 0 %
8'
-
2
"
12.00'12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
C
L
R
7
'
-
6
"
M
I
N
2 0 %
9 .7 %
4
A6.21
2
F
G
H
J
1 3 4
I
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
32.50'
32.42'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
6' H FENCE & GATE
HVO
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
32.50'
31.35'31.58'
32.40'
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
0.5
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7 0.5
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
R1
44.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
F G H I
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
30.00'
PICO BLVD
P.L.
5'-0"5'-0"5'-0"42'-5"
1 0
1 0 5
1 9 .8
K
14
31
31
All
by
the
wo
us
Ko
an
res
the
are
am
SHE
PRO
PRO
∆ #
18
15
SAN
EN
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3RAMP 4 PLAN04'2'8'0 4'2'8'
2
C
E
3
D
2
A6.21
RAMP 3
DOWN TO P2
O.H. GATE BELOW
20'-9"
20
%
10
%
8'
-
1
0
"
12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
9.
7
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
C ED
8'-0"41'-7"7'-11"
O.H. GATE
1 0 %
8'
-
2
"
12.00'12.50'
21.14'
22.00'
C
L
R
7
'
-
6
"
M
I
N
2 0 %
9 .7 %
4
A6.21
21 3
O.H. GATE
PICO BLVD
(E) SIDE WALK
32.08'
PERF SLIDING
GATE
HVO
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
DRIVEWAY
15'-0"
UP FROM
PARKING
12'-0"
STANDARD
LOADING SPACE
12'W× 30'L×14' CLR
HEIGHT
RAMP 4
31.35'31.58'
3
32.42'
32.17'
10
10
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
49
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
6
"
30.50'29.62'
0 .4
7 .5
6 .3
2 .7
4 .7
6.
5
10
5
20
PERF SLIDING
GATE
PERF FENCE
31.00'30.00'
30
'
-
0
"
F G
O.H. GATE
C
L
R
8
'
-
2
"
M
I
N
5'-0"5 42'-5"
1 0
1 0
1 9 .8
1/8" = 1'-0"1RAMP 3 PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2RAMP 3 SECTION
0 4'2'8'
0 4'2'8'
RAMP 4 PLANRAMP 3 PLAN
A36
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
713 SF
1 BED
1181 SF
3 BED-A
870 SF
2 BED-A
755 SF
1 BED
699 SF
1 BED
1130 SF
3 BED-A
CTYD
PARKING BELOW ONE
STREET LEVEL EXCLUDED
FROM FAR PER 9.04.080.B.8.A
881 SF
2 BED
147 SF
SURF BD.
LOCKERS
453 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
MECH ROOM IN
GARAGE EXCLUDED
FROM FAR
BIKE PARKING BELOW
GRADE IN GARAGE
EXCLUDED FROM FAR
184 SF
PET SALON
529 SF
MAINTENANCE
155 SF
MECHANICAL
90 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
881 SF
2 BED-A
652 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1279 SF
FITNESS
1431 SF
3 BED
41 SF
PARCEL
PENDING
1170 SF
CAFE
154 SF
MAIL
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
541 SF
LOBBY
RECEPTION706 SF
1 BED-A
COURTYARD
737 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
752 SF
1 BED
546 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
737 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED
744 SF
1 BED
809 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3020 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
67 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
124 SF
STORAGE
31 SF
ELEC
161 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
182 SF
RESIDENT SPA
74 SF
W.C.
79 SF
STORAGE
487 SF
RESIDENT SPA880 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
818 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
56 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3444 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED-A
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
125 SF
STORAGE
170 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
210 SF
RESIDENT
MEETING
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
836 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
758 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
1192 SF
2 BED
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED-A
1194 SF
2 BED
3590 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
120 SF
STORAGE
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
POOL
ABV
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED
1442 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
841 SF
1 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
1081 SF
2 BED
721 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED
774 SF
1 BED
933 SF
2 BED
1060 SF
2 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
72 SF
W.C.
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED
1194 SF
2 BED
3728 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
F.A.R. AREA
CALCULATIONS
A0.41
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
AREA SCHEDULE (F.A.R.)
AREA NAME QTY AREA
GROUND FLOOR
1 BED 3 2,167 SF
2 BED 1 881 SF
2 BED-A 1 870 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
MAINTENANCE 1 529 SF
MECHANICAL 1 155 SF
PET SALON 1 184 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 543 SF
SURF BD. LOCKERS 1 147 SF
7,788 SF
R1
1 BED 10 7,387 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,347 SF
2 BED 1 1,027 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
CAFE 1 1,170 SF
ELEC 2 53 SF
FITNESS 1 1,279 SF
LOBBY RECEPTION 1 541 SF
MAIL 1 154 SF
PARCEL PENDING 1 41 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 3 665 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 182 SF
STORAGE 4 391 SF
W.C.1 74 SF
18,010 SF
R2
1 BED 11 8,325 SF
1 BED-A 3 2,023 SF
2 BED 2 2,220 SF
2 BED-A 1 880 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 118 SF
RESIDENT MEETING 1 210 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 487 SF
STORAGE 3 322 SF
17,424 SF
R3
1 BED 12 9,024 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,346 SF
2 BED 3 3,414 SF
2 BED-A 2 1,860 SF
3 BED 3 4,177 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 2 148 SF
20,106 SF
R4
1 BED 8 5,853 SF
1 BED-A 1 706 SF
2 BED 6 6,440 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 3 4,187 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 1 27 SF
W.C.1 72 SF
18,303 SF
Grand total 81,630 SF
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
AVG. UNIT SIZE
740 SF
680 SF
1,080 SF
900 SF
1,400 SF
1,160 SF
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA
UNIT TYPE QTY TOTAL AREA
1 BED 44 32,757 SF
1 BED-A 8 5,423 SF
2 BED 13 13,983 SF
2 BED-A 6 5,372 SF
3 BED 10 13,996 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
83 73,843 SF
F.A.R. CALCULATION
FLOOR AREAS PER 9.04.080
MIN. UNIT SIZE
-
600 SF
-
850 SF
-
1,080 SF
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
713 SF
1 BED
1181 SF
3 BED-A
870 SF
2 BED-A
755 SF
1 BED
699 SF
1 BED
1130 SF
3 BED-A
CTYD
PARKING BELOW ONE
STREET LEVEL EXCLUDED
FROM FAR PER 9.04.080.B.8.A
881 SF
2 BED
147 SF
SURF BD.
LOCKERS
453 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
MECH ROOM IN
GARAGE EXCLUDED
FROM FAR
BIKE PARKING BELOW
GRADE IN GARAGE
EXCLUDED FROM FAR
184 SF
PET SALON
529 SF
MAINTENANCE
155 SF
MECHANICAL
90 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
881 SF
2 BED-A
652 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1279 SF
FITNESS
1431 SF
3 BED
41 SF
PARCEL
PENDING
1170 SF
CAFE
154 SF
MAIL
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
541 SF
LOBBY
RECEPTION706 SF
1 BED-A
COURTYARD
737 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
752 SF
1 BED
546 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
737 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED
744 SF
1 BED
809 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3020 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
67 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
124 SF
STORAGE
31 SF
ELEC
161 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
182 SF
RESIDENT SPA
74 SF
W.C.
79 SF
STORAGE
487 SF
RESIDENT SPA880 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
818 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
56 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3444 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED-A
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
125 SF
STORAGE
170 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
210 SF
RESIDENT
MEETING
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
836 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
758 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
1192 SF
2 BED
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED-A
1194 SF
2 BED
3590 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
120 SF
STORAGE
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
POOL
ABV
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED
1442 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
841 SF
1 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
1081 SF
2 BED
721 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED
774 SF
1 BED
933 SF
2 BED
1060 SF
2 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
72 SF
W.C.
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED
1194 SF
2 BED
3728 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
F.A.R. AREA
CALCULATIONS
A0.41
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
AREA SCHEDULE (F.A.R.)
AREA NAME QTY AREA
GROUND FLOOR
1 BED 3 2,167 SF
2 BED 1 881 SF
2 BED-A 1 870 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
MAINTENANCE 1 529 SF
MECHANICAL 1 155 SF
PET SALON 1 184 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 543 SF
SURF BD. LOCKERS 1 147 SF
7,788 SF
R1
1 BED 10 7,387 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,347 SF
2 BED 1 1,027 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
CAFE 1 1,170 SF
ELEC 2 53 SF
FITNESS 1 1,279 SF
LOBBY RECEPTION 1 541 SF
MAIL 1 154 SF
PARCEL PENDING 1 41 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 3 665 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 182 SF
STORAGE 4 391 SF
W.C.1 74 SF
18,010 SF
R2
1 BED 11 8,325 SF
1 BED-A 3 2,023 SF
2 BED 2 2,220 SF
2 BED-A 1 880 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 118 SF
RESIDENT MEETING 1 210 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 487 SF
STORAGE 3 322 SF
17,424 SF
R3
1 BED 12 9,024 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,346 SF
2 BED 3 3,414 SF
2 BED-A 2 1,860 SF
3 BED 3 4,177 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 2 148 SF
20,106 SF
R4
1 BED 8 5,853 SF
1 BED-A 1 706 SF
2 BED 6 6,440 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 3 4,187 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 1 27 SF
W.C.1 72 SF
18,303 SF
Grand total 81,630 SF
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
AVG. UNIT SIZE
740 SF
680 SF
1,080 SF
900 SF
1,400 SF
1,160 SF
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA
UNIT TYPE QTY TOTAL AREA
1 BED 44 32,757 SF
1 BED-A 8 5,423 SF
2 BED 13 13,983 SF
2 BED-A 6 5,372 SF
3 BED 10 13,996 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
83 73,843 SF
F.A.R. CALCULATION
FLOOR AREAS PER 9.04.080
MIN. UNIT SIZE
-
600 SF
-
850 SF
-
1,080 SF
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
ZONING DISTRICT
SETBACKS:
LOT SIZE:
AVERAGE NATUR
GRADE (A.N.G.):
EXISTING USE:
REQD UNIT MIX %MIN UNITS REQD
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING 1:5 UNITS
SEE SHEET A36 FOR AVERAGE UNIT SIZES
PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
GF
P1
P2
TOTAL
STD
19
70
67
156
COMPACT
10
47
45
102
SHARE
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
39
117
117
273TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED
0
0
1
0
0
44
1.5
66
13.4
13
2
26
10.1
10
2
20
67
112
13.4
E.V.
0
0
5
5
PROPOSED
F.A.R.:
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
PERMITTED:
MAXIMUM F.A.R.
PERMITTED:
PARKING TABULATIONS
UNBUNDLED PARKING IS REQUIRED PER 9.28.110
6 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS REQUIRED (WHEN PROVIDING 249-299 TOTAL STALLS) PER 9.28.160
IN ADDITION TO THE 6 EV CHARGING STATIONS, EV STUBOUTS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR 9 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING
COMMERCIAL < 2,500 SF INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING
REPLACEMENT CODE REQ'D PARKING FOR CASA DEL MAR
139.4
2,000 SF @ 1/300 SF =6.7
127
273.1TOTAL REQ'D STALLS FOR PROJECT
UPPER STORY
SETBACKS:
OUTDOOR LIVING
AREAS:
RECYCLING &
REFUSE:
LOADING:
HC
9
0
0
9
FLOOR LEVEL
R4
R3
R2
R1
GROUND FLOOR
TOTAL # OF UNITS
PARKING REQ'S
REQ'D PARKING RATIO
TOTAL REQ'D STALLS
GUEST PARKING NOT REQD
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 100 BEDROOMS / 67 UNITS = 1.49
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1828 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 19 BEDROOMS / 12 UNTIS = 1.58
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 MARKET-RATE UNITS = 35 BEDROOMS / 22 UNITS = 1.59
AVERAGE BEDROOM RATIO FOR 1921 AFFORDABLE UNITS = 7 BEDROOMS / 4 UNITS = 1.75
ST
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
1B
1
0
3
2
0
6
0.75
4.5
2B
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
2
4
4
3
3
16
14
0
UNIT TYPE
AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS & PARKING REQUIREMENTS
1B
0
2
0
0
0
2
0.75
1.5
2B
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
3B
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1921 AFF 1921 AFF 1921 AFF
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
PARCEL
COVERAGE:
12 AFFORDABLE UNITS PROVIDED ON-SITE IN ADDITION TO 4 UNITS FROM 1921 OCEAN FRONT WALK
ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING UNIT LESS THAN .5 THAT RESULTS FROM
THIS UNIT MIX SHALL BE ROUNDED DOWN. ANY FRACTIONAL HOUSING
UNIT EQUAL TO .5 OR MORE SHALL BE ROUNDED UP.
B) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS:
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS COMBINED SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED FOR ALL OF THE MARKET
RATE UNITS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.2.A
1828 AFF 1828 AFF 1828 AFF
REPLACEMENT PARKING ALLOWED BY SMMC SECTION 9.28.040 (A)(5)(C)
SEE SHEET A37
PRIORITY PROCESSING
SMMC 9.64.050(J) - ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON-SITE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION SHALL RECEIVE PRIORITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK PROCESSING BY WHICH HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
SHALL HAVE PLAN CHECK REVIEW IN ADVANCE OF OTHER PENDING
DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED
LEVEL
R1
GF
TOTAL
SHORT-TERM
9
8
17
TOTAL
9
138
147
LONG-TERM RES.
0
126
126
LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 1 / BEDROOM
SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL = 10% OF LONG-TERM (2 MIN)
LONG-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/4,000 SF (4 MIN)
SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL = 1/3,000 SF (4 MIN)
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED
PER TABLE 9.28.140
(126 BEDROOMS * 1) =126
(.1 * 126) =13
4
4
TOTAL REQUIRED 147
LONG-TERM COM.
0
4
4
F.A.R. & PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
BICYCLE PARKING
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER
FROM THE GROUND FLOOR/SIDEWALK GRADE RELATIONSHIP STANDARD.
REFER TO TABLE 9.14.030(A)(2)(a)(i) AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A49.
AVERAGE BEDROOMS/UNIT - AFFORDABLE MUST BE GREATER THAN OR EQ. TO MARKET-RATE
2015 ZONING ORD
& 100% RESIDENT
STORIES:
REQUEST FOR MAJOR MODIFICATION
DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE CONDITIONS AND TO BEST
ACHIEVE UNIVERSAL ACCESS, THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING A
MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030(B)(5)(b) TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT BY THREE-
FEET WITHOUT INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT. REFER TO
TABLE 9.14.030 AND EXHIBIT ON SHEET A50.
HC-EV
1
0
0
1
F.A.R. CALCULATIONS
713 SF
1 BED
1181 SF
3 BED-A
870 SF
2 BED-A
755 SF
1 BED
699 SF
1 BED
1130 SF
3 BED-A
CTYD
PARKING BELOW ONE
STREET LEVEL EXCLUDED
FROM FAR PER 9.04.080.B.8.A
881 SF
2 BED
147 SF
SURF BD.
LOCKERS
453 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
MECH ROOM IN
GARAGE EXCLUDED
FROM FAR
BIKE PARKING BELOW
GRADE IN GARAGE
EXCLUDED FROM FAR
184 SF
PET SALON
529 SF
MAINTENANCE
155 SF
MECHANICAL
90 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
881 SF
2 BED-A
652 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1279 SF
FITNESS
1431 SF
3 BED
41 SF
PARCEL
PENDING
1170 SF
CAFE
154 SF
MAIL
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
541 SF
LOBBY
RECEPTION706 SF
1 BED-A
COURTYARD
737 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
752 SF
1 BED
546 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
737 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED
744 SF
1 BED
809 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3020 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
67 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
124 SF
STORAGE
31 SF
ELEC
161 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
182 SF
RESIDENT SPA
74 SF
W.C.
79 SF
STORAGE
487 SF
RESIDENT SPA880 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
818 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
754 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
56 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
3444 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED-A
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
125 SF
STORAGE
170 SF
STORAGE
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
210 SF
RESIDENT
MEETING
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED-A
1432 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
1027 SF
2 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
756 SF
1 BED
721 SF
1 BED
836 SF
1 BED
757 SF
1 BED757 SF
1 BED
745 SF
1 BED
758 SF
1 BED 744 SF
1 BED
810 SF
1 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
1192 SF
2 BED
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED-A
1194 SF
2 BED
3590 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
120 SF
STORAGE
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
POOL
ABV
881 SF
2 BED-A
651 SF
1 BED
640 SF
1 BED
1442 SF
3 BED
1385 SF
3 BED
841 SF
1 BED
706 SF
1 BED-A
1081 SF
2 BED
721 SF
1 BED
737 SF
1 BED
774 SF
1 BED
933 SF
2 BED
1060 SF
2 BED
53 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
812 SF
1 BED
677 SF
1 BED
62 SF
REFUSE &
RECYCLE
1193 SF
2 BED
72 SF
W.C.
1361 SF
3 BED
979 SF
2 BED
1194 SF
2 BED
3728 SF
OPEN CORRIDOR
22 SF
ELEC
27 SF
STORAGE
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
Δ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
F.A.R. AREA
CALCULATIONS
A0.41
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
AREA SCHEDULE (F.A.R.)
AREA NAME QTY AREA
GROUND FLOOR
1 BED 3 2,167 SF
2 BED 1 881 SF
2 BED-A 1 870 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
MAINTENANCE 1 529 SF
MECHANICAL 1 155 SF
PET SALON 1 184 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 543 SF
SURF BD. LOCKERS 1 147 SF
7,788 SF
R1
1 BED 10 7,387 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,347 SF
2 BED 1 1,027 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
CAFE 1 1,170 SF
ELEC 2 53 SF
FITNESS 1 1,279 SF
LOBBY RECEPTION 1 541 SF
MAIL 1 154 SF
PARCEL PENDING 1 41 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 3 665 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 182 SF
STORAGE 4 391 SF
W.C.1 74 SF
18,010 SF
R2
1 BED 11 8,325 SF
1 BED-A 3 2,023 SF
2 BED 2 2,220 SF
2 BED-A 1 880 SF
3 BED 2 2,816 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 118 SF
RESIDENT MEETING 1 210 SF
RESIDENT SPA 1 487 SF
STORAGE 3 322 SF
17,424 SF
R3
1 BED 12 9,024 SF
1 BED-A 2 1,346 SF
2 BED 3 3,414 SF
2 BED-A 2 1,860 SF
3 BED 3 4,177 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 2 148 SF
20,106 SF
R4
1 BED 8 5,853 SF
1 BED-A 1 706 SF
2 BED 6 6,440 SF
2 BED-A 1 881 SF
3 BED 3 4,187 SF
ELEC 1 22 SF
REFUSE & RECYCLE 2 115 SF
STORAGE 1 27 SF
W.C.1 72 SF
18,303 SF
Grand total 81,630 SF
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA 73,843 SF
RESIDENTIAL COMMON AREAS 6,617 SF
COMMERCIAL CAFE 1,170 SF *
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 81,630 SF
LOT AREA 45,120 SF
FAR 1.81
AVG. UNIT SIZE
740 SF
680 SF
1,080 SF
900 SF
1,400 SF
1,160 SF
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FLOOR AREA
UNIT TYPE QTY TOTAL AREA
1 BED 44 32,757 SF
1 BED-A 8 5,423 SF
2 BED 13 13,983 SF
2 BED-A 6 5,372 SF
3 BED 10 13,996 SF
3 BED-A 2 2,312 SF
83 73,843 SF
F.A.R. CALCULATION
FLOOR AREAS PER 9.04.080
MIN. UNIT SIZE
-
600 SF
-
850 SF
-
1,080 SF
*NOTE: OUTDOOR DINING EXCLUDED PER SMZO 9.04.090.A2
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
A37
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
COMMON
NOT USED
PRIVATE
LEGEND
440 SF
DECK
77 SF
DECK
101 SF
DECK
235 SF
DECK
248 SF
DECK
3231 SF
COURTYARD
113 SF
DECK
117 SF
DECK
10
'
-
7
"
5'-3"11
'
-
0
"
5'-7"
11
'
-
8
"
5'-1"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5'-4"
22'-6"
11
'
-
7
"
27'-10"
16
'
-
1
1
"
11
'
-
2
"
21'-8"
22'-6"
COMMON:3,230 SF
PRIVATE:1,330 SF
22'-6"
2039 SF
COURTYARD
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
129 SF
DECK
98 SF
DECK
140 SF
DECK 170 SF
DECK 127 SF
DECK66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
297 SF
DECK 266 SF
DECK
115 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
331 SF
DECK
12'-0"12'-0"
10'-0"12'-0"12'-0"
11
'
-
2
"
13
'
-
5
"
8'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
5
"
10
'
-
3
"
18'-10"
18
'
-
5
"
5'-3"
T Y P
1 2 '-0 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
6 '-8 "
14'-0"
14'-1"
6 '-1 "
COMMON:2,040 SF
PRIVATE:2,340 SF
2 0 '-1 0 "14'-11"
20'-4"
9 '-8 "
1 1 '-4 "
18'-11"
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
13'-1"
6 '-8 "
6 '-1 "
14'-1"
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"13'-1"6 '-8 "
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,570 SF
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK 143 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
5 '-3 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-8 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-7 "
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,930 SF
231 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
73 SF
DECK
143 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
328 SF
DECK
69 SF
DECK
2 0 '-2 "
14'-8"
8 '-4 "
11'-6"
5'-6"
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
1 3 '-2 "
5'-6"
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
13'-4"16'-0"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:2,020 SF
8 '-5 "
13'-10"
14'-6"
2 2 '-1 0 "
28138 SF
PARCEL
COVERAGE
4022 SF
COMMON ROOF
DECK
5 4 '-8 "
53'-2"
COMMON:4,020 SF
PRIVATE:0 SF
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
OPEN SPACE
CALCULATIONS &
PARCEL COVERAGE
A0.42
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
ROOF
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
PARCEL COVERAGE
COMMON
NOT USED
PRIVATE
LEGEND
440 SF
DECK
77 SF
DECK
101 SF
DECK
235 SF
DECK
248 SF
DECK
3231 SF
COURTYARD
113 SF
DECK
117 SF
DECK
10
'
-
7
"
5'-3"11
'
-
0
"
5'-7"
11
'
-
8
"
5'-1"
13
'
-
1
0
"
5'-4"
22'-6"
11
'
-
7
"
27'-10"
16
'
-
1
1
"
11
'
-
2
"
21'-8"
22'-6"
COMMON:3,230 SF
PRIVATE:1,330 SF
22'-6"
2039 SF
COURTYARD
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
129 SF
DECK
98 SF
DECK
140 SF
DECK 170 SF
DECK 127 SF
DECK66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
297 SF
DECK 266 SF
DECK
115 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
331 SF
DECK
12'-0"12'-0"
10'-0"12'-0"12'-0"
11
'
-
2
"
13
'
-
5
"
8'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
5
"
10
'
-
3
"
18'-10"
18
'
-
5
"
5'-3"
T Y P
1 2 '-0 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
6 '-8 "
14'-0"
14'-1"
6 '-1 "
COMMON:2,040 SF
PRIVATE:2,340 SF
2 0 '-1 0 "14'-11"
20'-4"
9 '-8 "
1 1 '-4 "
18'-11"
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
13'-1"
6 '-8 "
6 '-1 "
14'-1"
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"13'-1"6 '-8 "
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,570 SF
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK 143 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
105 SF
DECK
89 SF
DECK
5 '-3 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
16'-0"13'-4"
6 '-1 "
6 '-8 "
13'-1"6 '-8 "
TYP
13'-11"
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-7 "
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:1,930 SF
231 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
153 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK
104 SF
DECK
85 SF
DECK89 SF
DECK
73 SF
DECK
143 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
66 SF
DECK
328 SF
DECK
69 SF
DECK
2 0 '-2 "
14'-8"
8 '-4 "
11'-6"
5'-6"
1 2 '-5 "
5'-6"
1 2 '-1 "
1 3 '-2 "
5'-6"
5 '-6 "
TYP
12'-0"
6 '-8 "
13'-1"14'-1"
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
6 '-1 "
13'-4"16'-0"
COMMON:0 SF
PRIVATE:2,020 SF
8 '-5 "
13'-10"
14'-6"
2 2 '-1 0 "
28138 SF
PARCEL
COVERAGE
4022 SF
COMMON ROOF
DECK
5 4 '-8 "
53'-2"
COMMON:4,020 SF
PRIVATE:0 SF
310.828.6131 inf
310.828.0719 fax ww
All designs, ideas, arrangements a
by these drawings are the property
the Architect and shall neither be u
work nor be disclosed to any other
use whatsoever without written per
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and
and employees waives any and all
responsibility for problems that ma
these plans, drawings, specificatio
are followed without the profession
ambiguities, or conflicts which are
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 9040
OPEN SPACE
CALCULATIONS
PARCEL COVERA
A0
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
MAXIMUM PARCEL COVERAGE = 70% PER TABLE 9.14.030
PARCEL COVERAGE÷ SITE AREA
28,138 ÷ 45,120 = 62%
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA
PER TABLE 9.14.030 AND 9.21.090
100 SF/UNIT MIN TOTAL OPEN SPACE
60 SF/UNIT MIN PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
ALL UNITS HAVE 60 SF MIN PRIVATE OUTDOOR LIVING AREA.
MINIMUM PRIVATE O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 60 SF) = 4,980 SF
PROPOSED PRIVATE O.L.A. = 9,190 SF
MINIMUM ADDITIONAL COMMON O.L.A. (83 UNITS X 40 SF) = 3,300 SF
PROPOSED COMMON O.L.A. = 9,290 SF
ROOF
DESCRIPTION
SD PRICING SET
PARCEL COVERAGE
OUTDOOR LIVING AREA &
PARCEL COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
A38
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 UPPER STORY STEP-BACK CALCULATIONS
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
THIS LEVEL AT GROUND FLOOR OR BELOW.
NO UPPER STORY STEP BACK REQ'D
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
THIS LEVEL AT GROUND FLOOR OR BELOW.
NO UPPER STORY STEP BACK REQ'D
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=3117SF / 203' = 15.4'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1930SF / 207' = 9.3'
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK
- VICENTE TERRACE
=3710SF / 210' = 17.6'
3117SF
1930 SF
3710 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=2971SF / 203' = 14.6'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1760SF / 207' = 8.5'
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK
- VICENTE TERRACE
=3710SF / 210' = 17.6'
2971 SF
1760 SF
3710 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=2942SF / 203' = 14.5'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=2190 SF / 207' = 10.5'
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK
- VICENTE TERRACE
=5,030SF / 210' = 23.9'
2942 SF
2190 SF
5,030 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
21
7
'
-
8
"
215'-6"
216'-2"
5'-0"
13
0
'
-
7
"
327 SF SETBACK
AREA REQUIRED
- OCEAN AVENUE
5'
-
0
"
323 SF SETBACK
AREA REQUIRED
- VICENTE TERRACE
64'-8"
324 SF SETBACK
AREA REQUIRED
- PICO BLVD
5 '-0
"
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
SETBACK DIAGRAM
A0.43
DESCRIPTION DATE
GROUND FLOOR
R1
R2
R3
R4
PER TABLE 9.14.030
AT LEAST THIRTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING
ELEVATION ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR
HEIGHT SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIVE-FOOT
AVERAGE SETBACK FROM THE MINIMUM
REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK.
CODE SETBACK DIAGRAM
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
THIS LEVEL AT GROUND FLOOR OR BELOW.
NO UPPER STORY STEP BACK REQ'D
5'-0"
5 '-0
"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
=3117SF / 203' = 15.4'
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1930SF / 207' = 9.3'
3117SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=1760SF / 207' = 8.5'
STORY STEPBACK
RRACE
0' = 17.6'
1760 SF
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
5'-0"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK
RY STEPBACK - PICO BLVD
14.5'
AVG UPPER STORY
STEPBACK - OCEAN AVENUE
=2190 SF / 207' = 10.5'
STORY STEPBACK
RRACE
0' = 23.9'
2190 SF
5'-0"
STREET FRONTAGE
SETBACK5'-0"
F SETBACK
REQUIRED
BLVD
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
A0.43
DESCRIPTION DATE
R1
R2
R4
PER TABLE 9.14.030
AT LEAST THIRTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING
ELEVATION ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR
HEIGHT SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIVE-FOOT
AVERAGE SETBACK FROM THE MINIMUM
REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK.
CODE SETBACK DIAGRAM
MINIMUM UPPER STORY SETBACKS
A39
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 MATERIAL & PROJECT PRECEDENTS
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
MATERIAL PRECEDENTS
A0.20
DESCRIPTION DATE
PRELIMINARY PROJECT MATERIALS ARE INSPIRED BY A VERNACULAR
COASTAL LANDSCAPE INCLUDING FREE-FORM ROCKS, WEATHERED
VERTICAL WOOD PLANK RAIN-SCREEN, & VERTICAL TIMBER SCREENS.
SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER CONTRASTS THE TEXTURED WOOD RAIN-
SCREEN TO ESTABLISH A RHYTHM OF DISTINCT DWELLING VOLUMES.
PROJECTING SLATTED AND SEMI-TRANSPARENT SCREENS CASUALLY
LAYER VIEWS TO AND FROM THE PUBLIC REALM.
ALONG VICENTE TERRACE, AT THE UPPER MOST FLOOR, ADDITIONAL
SETBACKS AND A DISTINCT GLASS VOLUME LOWER THE PERCEPTION
OF BUILDING HEIGHT. THE SIMPLE GLASS VOLUME IS FURTHER
WRAPPED WITH A THIN ARBOR THAT PROVIDES SHADE TO OUTDOOR
LIVING AREAS AND FURTHER LAYERS THE BUILDING FACADE.
A40
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
OCEAN AVENUE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
P.L.P.L.
CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.CHA CHA CHICKEN RESTAURANT PICO BLVD.PROPOSED BUILDING VICENTE TERRACE CAPO RESTAURANT
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.34
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG OCEAN AVE. LOOKING WEST
0 10'5'20'
A41
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
BCEFGH A
P.L.P.L.
VICENTE
TERRACE
PICO BLVD.
OCEAN AVE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
A.N.G. 38.08'
(E) PALM
TREES TYP.
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
DI
STAIR PENTHOUSE
EXTENT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE
TRELLIS
MATERIAL
WD-1 VER
GL-1 TH
AL-1 FIX
AL-2 SO
GL-4 CU
CP-1 AC
GL-3 CA
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PAI
AL-4 PER
CP-2 AC
AL-3 SO
GL-2 TH
WD-2 TIM
WD-3 FIX
WD-4 TIM
SS-1 STA
TABLE 9.21.
ABOVE THE
ROOFTO
ELEVATO
STAIR PE
MECHAN
MECHAN
9.21.150 - SO
PHOTOV
SOLAR T
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
BUILDI
EAST
1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION - EAST 0 4'2'8'
SD PRIC
OCEAN AVENUE ELEVATION
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A42
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTELOCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOT OCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PICO BOULEVARD CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
P.L.P.L.
SITE
VICEROY HOTELOCEAN AVENUEPROPOSED BUILDINGSHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL
SITE AND CONTE
ELEVATIONS
DA0
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
SITE
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG PICO BLVD. LOOKING NORTH
0 10'5'20'
A43
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10
P.L.P.L.
PARKING EGRESS
PARKING INGRESS
OCEAN AVE
PICO BLVD.
A.N.G. 38.08'
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
B
O
V
E
A
.
N
.
G
.
47
'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
M
A
X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 4 6.1
(E) PALM
TREES TYP.
MECH.
ENCLOSURE
MECH.
ENCLOSURE
MECHANICAL
UNITS
SOLAR THERMAL
PANELS (E) STREET
TREES TYP. OF 4
EXTENT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE
LOADING
1'
-
8
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
0
"
6"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
0
"
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO
GRADE AT CORNER OF
OCEAN AVE & PICO BLVD3'
-
0
"
MATERIAL L
WD-1 VER
GL-1 THE
AL-1 FIXE
AL-2 SOL
GL-4 CUS
CP-1 ACR
GL-3 CAN
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PAI
AL-4 PER
CP-2 ACR
AL-3 SOL
GL-2 THE
WD-2 TIM
WD-3 FIX
WD-4 TIM
SS-1 STA
TABLE 9.21.
ABOVE THE
ROOFTOP
ELEVATO
STAIR PE
MECHAN
MECHAN
9.21.150 - SO
PHOTOVO
SOLAR TH
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
BUILDI
SOUTH
1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION - SOUTH 0 4'2'8'
SD PRIC
PICO BOULEVARD ELEVATIONR2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A44
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
VICENTE TERRACE CONTEXT ELEVATIONS
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
P.L.P.L.
VICEROY HOTEL OCEAN AVENUE PROPOSED BUILDING SHUTTERS ON THE BEACH HOTEL APPIAN WAY
P.L.P.L.
SITE
SITE AND CONTEXT
ELEVATIONS
DA0.35
PROPOSED ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
EXISTING ELEVATION ALONG VICENTE TERRACE LOOKING SOUTH
0 10'5'20'
A45
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R3
64.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
9 8 7 6 5 2 110
P.L.P.L.
OCEAN AVE.
VICENTE TERRACE
A.N.G. 38.08'
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
6
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
B
O
V
E
A
.
N
.
G
.
47
'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
M
A
X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
COURTYARD GATE
PATIO GATE FOR
UNIT, TYP OF 5
346.1
ELEVATOR OVERRUN
STAIR PENTHOUSE
TRELLIS
EXTENT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE
1'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
5'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
2'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
2'
-
8
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
1'
-
9
"
MATERIAL L
WD-1 VER
GL-1 THE
AL-1 FIX
AL-2 SOL
GL-4 CU
CP-1 ACR
GL-3 CAN
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PAI
AL-4 PER
CP-2 ACR
AL-3 SOL
GL-2 THE
WD-2 TIM
WD-3 FIX
WD-4 TIM
SS-1 STA
TABLE 9.21.
ABOVE THE
ROOFTO
ELEVATO
STAIR PE
MECHAN
MECHAN
9.21.150 - SO
PHOTOV
SOLAR T
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TIT
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA MO
BUILDI
NORTH
1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION - NORTH 0 4'2'8'
SD PRIC
VICENTE TERRACE ELEVATION
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A46
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
MATERIAL
WD-1 VE
GL-1 TH
AL-1 FIX
AL-2 SO
GL-4 CU
CP-1 AC
GL-3 CA
RW-1 RO
ST-1 PA
AL-4 PE
CP-2 AC
AL-3 SO
GL-2 TH
WD-2 TI
WD-3 FI
WD-4 TI
SS-1 ST
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
9876521 10346.1
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
F
R
O
M
A
.
N
.
G
.
47
'
-
0
"
A.N.G. 38.08'
3'
-
6
"
M
A
X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
ELEV PENTHOUSE
MECH. ENCLOSURE
(E)
SHUTTERS
HOTEL
STAIR PENTHOUSE
P.L.P.L.
RESIDENTIAL / GUEST
/ CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL
PARKING
PUMP RM
STAIR PENTHOUSE
MECHANICAL UNITS
PV ARRAY
PV ARRAY TRELLIS
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
OCEAN AVE
TABLE 9.21
ABOVE TH
ROOFTO
ELEVAT
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 - S
PHOTOV
SOLAR
All designs
by these dr
the Archite
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eiz
and employ
responsibil
these plans
are followe
ambiguities
SHEET NO.
PROJECT T
PROJECT N
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
BUILD
-COUR
0 4'2'8' 1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING SECTION -COURTYARD2
SD PR
COURTYARD ELEVATION
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R3
64.0'
R474.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A47
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
MATERIA
WD-1 V
GL-1 T
AL-1 F
AL-2 S
GL-4 C
CP-1 A
GL-3 C
RW-1 R
ST-1 P
AL-4 P
CP-2 A
AL-3 S
GL-2 T
WD-2 T
WD-3 F
WD-4 T
SS-1 S
R144.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
B C E F G HAD I
P.L.P.L.
STAIR PENTHOUSE
THIS ELEVATION IS CONCEALED
BY SHUTTERS HOTEL
EXTENT OF GARAGE BELOW
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
A.N.G. 38.08'
3 '-6 " M A X
PA
R
A
P
E
T
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
TABLE 9.
ABOVE T
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR
MECH
MECH
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
All design
by these d
the Archit
work nor
use whats
Koning Ei
and empl
responsib
these plan
are follow
ambiguitie
SHEET NO
PROJECT
PROJECT
∆ #
1828
1512
SANTA M
BUILD
WEST
0 4'2'8' 1/8" = 1'-0"1BUILDING ELEVATION- WEST
SD P
WEST ELEVATION - CONCEALEDR254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
PICO BLVDVICENTE TERRACE
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
A48
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
9876521 10
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
AB
V
A
.
N
.
G
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
B
L
D
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
CAFE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
LOADING
RAMP TO P1
P.L.P.L.
ROOF
PV PANELS
CONDENSER UNITS TYP
MECH. ENCLOSURE TYP
ROOF
PV PANELS
OCEAN
AVENUE
3 4 6.1
MAINTENANCE
L.T. RESI BIKE
PARKING
14
'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
0
"
18
'
-
8
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
ROOF
PV PANELS
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
3'
-
6
"
14
'
C
L
R
M
I
N
17
'
-
4
"
RAMP TO GF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
TRELLIS
10
'
-
8
"
TABLE 9.2
ABOVE TH
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SD PRI
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
BUILDING SECTION 1R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
A
VICENTE
TERRACE
4 7 '-0 " M A X F R O M A .N .G .
47
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
3 '-6 " M A X
P A R A P E T
MATERIAL LEGEND
WD-1 VERT THIN WD RAINSCREEN (ACCOYA)
GL-1 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (WHITE)
AL-1 FIXED ALUMINUM SLAT SCREEN
AL-2 SOLID ALUMINUM (WHITE)
GL-4 CUSTOM STEEL GLAZING
CP-1 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (WHITE)
GL-3 CANTILEVERED GLASS GUARDRAIL
RW-1 ROCK WALL (WAMBERAL)
ST-1 PAINTED STEEL ARBOR (WHITE)
AL-4 PERFORATED ALUMINUM (WHITE)
CP-2 ACRYLIC CEMENT PLASTER (GREY)
AL-3 SOLID ALUMINUM (GREY)
GL-2 THERM BRKN ALUM GLAZING (GREY)
WD-2 TIMBER SLAT SCREEN (ACCOYA)
WD-3 FIXED WOOD SLAT SCREEN
WD-4 TIMBER SLAT GUARDRAIL
SS-1 STAINLESS STEEL CABLE RAILING
TABLE 9.21.060 - ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS
ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT
ROOFTOP FEATURES & TRELLISES - 10'
ELEVATOR SHAFTS - 18'
STAIR PENTHOUSES 14'
MECHANICAL ENCLOSURES - 12'
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - 12'
9.21.150 - SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR ENERGY - 5'
SOLAR THERMAL | WATER PANELS - 7'
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25th St, Santa Monica, CA 90404
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
All designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings are the property and copyright of
the Architect and shall neither be used on any other
work nor be disclosed to any other person for any
use whatsoever without written permission.
Koning Eizenberg Architecture and/or its principals
and employees waives any and all liability or
responsibility for problems that may occur when
these plans, drawings, specifications, and/or designs
are followed without the professional's guidance with
ambiguities, or conflicts which are alleged.
A49
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
98 10
18
'
-
8
"
15
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
9'
-
3
"
CAFE
2 BED
2 BED1 BED
1 BED
1 BED - A
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
REFUSE & RECYCLE
CDM REPLACEMENTPARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
47'-0" ABV A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
P.L.
OCEANAVENUE
SIDEWALK
10
'
-
0
"
2'
-
1
1
"
Konin
1454 25
310.828. 310.828.
All designs, by these dra
the Architec work nor be use whatso
Koning Eize and employ
responsibilit these plans are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M WAIVER REQUEST
WAIVER REQUEST FOR ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN:
PER 9.14.030.A.2.a.i THE FINISHED GROUND FLOOR LEVEL ALONG THE COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD SHALL NOT EXCEED 18”
LOWER OR HIGHER THAN THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE ADJACENT SIDEWALK.
EXCEPTION 9.14.030.A.2.a.ii FOR PARCELS WITH A GRADE CHANGE OF 10% OR MORE ALLOW UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 36” ABOVE
THE ADJACENT SIDEWALK LEVEL. HOWEVER PICO BOULEVARD HAS AN APPROXIMATE SLOPE OF 7% AT THIS LOCATION.
DUE TO THE SLOPE OF PICO BOULEVARD THE MOST WEST PORTION OF THE CAFE FLOOR LEVEL IS 36” ABOVE THE PICO
SIDEWALK LEVEL, HENCE A WAIVER PER 9.43.040.B.2 IS REQUIRED.
36”
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO THE SIDEWALK
LEVEL AT THE CORNER OF OCEAN AVENUE
AND PICO BOULEVARD
SIDEWALK SLOPE ALONG PICO BOULEVARD
APPROXIMATELY 7%
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO
THE SIDEWALK LEVEL
AT THE CORNER OF
OCEAN AVENUE AND
PICO BOULEVARD
36”
A50
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 MAJOR MODIFICATION REQUEST
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
98 10
18
'
-
8
"
15
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
9'
-
3
"
CAFE
2 BED
2 BED
1 BED
1 BED
1 BED - A
L.T. RESI BIKE PARKING
REFUSE & RECYCLE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
P.L.
OCEAN
AVENUE
SIDEWALK
10
'
-
0
"
2'
-
1
1
"
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
MAJOR MODIFICATION REQUEST FOR ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN:
PER TABLE 9.14.030 THE MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO FLOOR) HEIGHT FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IS 16’-0”.
DUE TO THE SLOPE OF THE PARCEL AND THE ALIGNMENT OF THE CAFE FLOOR TO THE CORNER OF OCEAN AVENUE AND
PICO BOULEVARD THE PROJECT PROPOSES A FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT OF 19’-0”. THIS ALLOWS FOR THE ALIGNMENT
OF RESIDENTIAL FLOOR LEVELS PROVIDING AN ACCESSIBLE ACCESS AND EGRESS FOR EACH DWELLING. THE PROJECT
MASSING IS DESIGNED TO APPEAR AT 15’ IN HEIGHT COMPLYING WITH THE INTENT OF THE PROVISION. A 30” PLENUM
LOWERS THE CEILING TO THIS HEIGHT CONCEALING RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING AND BUILDING SERVICES.
A MAJOR MODIFICATION PER 9.43.030.B.5.b ALLOWS UP TO 4 FEET OF THE REQUIRED MAXIMUM GROUND FLOOR (FLOOR TO
FLOOR) HEIGHT. THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING 3 FEET.
15
’
-
0
”
19
’
-
0
”
9’
-
0
”
RESIDENTIAL FLOOR LEVELS ALIGN TO
PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE ACCESS & EGRESS
FOR EACH DWELLING.
GR
E
A
T
E
R
T
H
A
N
16
’
-
0
”
PE
R
C
E
P
T
I
O
N
O
F
GR
O
U
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
HE
I
G
H
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
E
S
19
’
-
0
”
GR
E
A
T
E
R
T
H
A
N
16
’
-
0
”
15
’
-
0
”
CO
M
P
L
I
E
S
W
I
T
H
IN
T
E
N
T
CAFE FLOOR ALIGNS TO THE CORNER OF
OCEAN AVENUE AND PICO BOULEVARD FOR
ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN
AWNING/ TRELLIS
AWNING/ TRELLIS
SIGNAGE LOCATED IN ‘GROUND FLOOR’ ZONE
A51
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 OCEAN AVENUE RENDERING
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
A52
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
A53
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF 748 SF
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
R1 FLOOR PLAN
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSIONPICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
734 SF 733 SF4 SF 837 SF734 SF
1173 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
1 7 '-8 "
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
A2.05
1 BED 12
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 3
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
3 BED 3
22
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
R3 FLOOR PLAN
A54
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R144.0'
R254.0'
ROOF85.0'
R364.0'
R474.0'
GROUND FLOOR32.5'
P122.0'
P212.0'
9876521 10
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
AB
V
A
.
N
.
G
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
B
L
D
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
CAFE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
LOADING
RAMP TO P1
P.L.P.L.
ROOF
PV PANELS
CONDENSER UNITS TYP
MECH. ENCLOSURE TYP
ROOF
PV PANELS
OCEAN
AVENUE
3 4 6.1
MAINTENANCE
L.T. RESI BIKE
PARKING
14
'
-
8
"
8'
-
8
"
9'
-
0
"
18
'
-
8
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
ROOF
PV PANELS
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
3'
-
6
"
14
'
C
L
R
M
I
N
17
'
-
4
"
RAMP TO GF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
TRELLIS
10
'
-
8
"
TABLE 9.2
ABOVE TH
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatso
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SD PRI
0 2'1'4'
0 4'2'8'
0 8'4'16'
0 10'5'20'
BUILDING SECTION 1
PROJECT WITH WAIVER & MAJOR MOD. AS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
A55
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A56
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A57
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019 PICO BOULEVARD / OCEAN AVENUE
CORNER RENDERING
GUARDRAIL
HANDRAILS
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A58
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
UP
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
FDC
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
W.C.
D.
F
.RES. FITNESS
ME
C
H
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
STORAGE
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
CANOPY ABOVE
290 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
360 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
48
'
-
7
"
105'-6"12'-2"
14
'
-
5
"
11
'
-
1
"
6' GATE & FENCE
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
2 9 '-1 0 "
1 2 '-4 "
35'-2"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
6'-5"
PORCH LIFT
STEPS
STEPS
RAMP
UPPER
COURTYARD
634 SF
1 BED
R111
874 SF
2 BED - A
R110
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
METER TYP.
(E) ELEC.
PULL BOX
646 SF
1 BED - A
R115
653 SF
1 BED
R106
714 SF
1373 SF
3 BED
R116
713 SF
1310 SF
3 BED
R113
680 SF
1 BED
R108
(E) SHUTTERS
HOTEL
(7) ON-SITE SHORT-
TERM BIKE PARKING
BACKFLOW
PREVENTERS
LOBBY RECEPTION
PARCEL PENDING
44.00'
45.31'
PARKING INGRESS
15'-0"
HVO
HVO
PARKING EGRESS
20'-0"
732 SF 748 SF
LINE OF
BLDG ABV
653 SF
1 BED
R114
ME
C
H
714 SF
ME
C
H
MAIL
ELEC40 SF
RR
634 SF
1 BED - A
R112
100 SF
STORAGE
(2) ON-SITE
SHORT-
TERM BIKE
PARKING
RR
OPEN TO
BELOW
653 SF
1 BED
R107
A6.12
A6.12 A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.13
STORAGE
WATER FEATURE
CANOPY ABOVE
440 SF
PATIO 2
ELEV
EL
E
V
ELEV
390 SF
PATIO 1
33'-8"
43
'
-
7
"
105'-6"
22'-11"
12'-2"
6' GATE & FENCE
CAFE AREA
INTERIOR 1,170 SF
PATIO 1 390 SF
PATIO 2 440 SF
TOTAL 2,000 SF
11'-5"
OUTLINE OF
BUILDING ABV
BUILD TO LINE
10'-0"
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
B U I L D T O L I N E
1 0 '-0 "
BUILD-TO-LINE FOR
CAFE EXCEEDS 10'
PER 9.14.030.C1
4 4 '-1 0 "
HVO
26'-2"
9'-3"
4 5 '-4 "
1 2 '-4 "
31'-10"
2 1 '-6 "
12'-6"
RES. FITNESS
RESIDENT SPA
W.C.
FDC D.
F
.
STORAGE
8 '-0
"
2 2 '-7 "
6 6 '-3 "
5 6 '-3 "
1 4 '-5 "
8 '-3 "
PICO BLVD.
OC
E
A
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
1340 SF
3 BED
R322
960 SF
2 BED - A
R321
1373 SF
3 BED
R317
646 SF
1 BED - A
R316
1310 SF
3 BED
R314
653 SF
1 BED
R315
788 SF
1 BED
R318
656 SF
1 BED
R319
40 SF
RR
653 SF
1 BED
R308
680 SF
1 BED
R306 653 SF
1 BED
R307
1174 SF
2 BED
R320
60 SF
RR
100 SF
STORAGE
ELEC
A6.14 A6.14 A6.14
A6.12A6.12A6.12
A6.13
A6.12 A6.12
A6.16
A6.16
A6.16
ME
C
H
ELEV
EL
E
V
48
'
-
7
"
7 '-1 1 "
105'-6"11'-2"32'-0"8'-10"
13
7
'
-
6
"
17
'
-
7
"
139'-2"
38'-0"
33'-6"
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMON
STORAGE / MEP
LEGEND
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT NO.
∆ #
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
1512
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
A2.05
1 BED 12
1 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
2 BED 3
2 BED - AFFORDABLE 2
3 BED 3
22
DESCRIPTION DATE
SD PRICING SET 5.10.18
PORCH LIFT
STEPS
2ND DOOR
R1 FLOOR PLANR3 FLOOR PLAN
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
A59
KoningEizenbergArchitecture
1454 25TH STREET, SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
310.828.6131 info@kearch.com
310.828.0719 fax www.kearch.com
1828 OCEAN AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CA 90405
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL
MARCH 8TH 2019
R1
44.0'
R2
54.0'
ROOF
85.0'
R3
64.0'
R4
74.0'
GROUND FLOOR
32.5'
P1
22.0'
P2
12.0'
9876521 10
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
47'-0" ABV
A.N.G
A.N.G 38.0'
AB
V
A
.
N
.
G
47
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
B
L
D
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
CAFE
CDM REPLACEMENT
PARKING
RESIDENTIAL PARKING
LOADING
RAMP TO P1
P.L.P.L.
ROOF
PV PANELS
CONDENSER UNITS TYP
MECH. ENCLOSURE TYP
ROOF
PV PANELS
OCEAN
AVENUE
3 4 6.1
MAINTENANCE
L.T. RESI BIKE
PARKING
9'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
ROOF
PV PANELS
(E) SHUTTERS HOTEL
3'
-
6
"
14
'
C
L
R
M
I
N
17
'
-
4
"
RAMP TO GF
REFUSE & RECYCLE
TRELLIS
10
'
-
8
"
R3A
59.5'
R1A
43.8'
9'
-
1
0
"
13
'
-
2
"
14
'
-
4
"
TABLE 9.2
ABOVE TH
ROOFT
ELEVA
STAIR P
MECHA
MECHA
9.21.150 -
PHOTO
SOLAR
Konin
1454 25
310.828.
310.828.
All designs,
by these dra
the Architec
work nor be
use whatsoe
Koning Eize
and employ
responsibilit
these plans
are followed
ambiguities,
SHEET NO.
PROJECT TI
PROJECT NO
∆ #
1828 O
1512
SANTA M
SD PRI
PORCH LIFT
2ND DOOR
STEPS
ZONING CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT DESIGN
WITHOUT WAIVER OR MAJOR MODIFICATION
AS SHOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT ON APPEAL MARCH 8TH 2019
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
December 19, 2018
VIA HAND DELIVERY
David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main St., Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Appeal
1828 Ocean Avenue Project
Development Review Permit 15ENT-0300, Major Modification 18ENT-0226,
Waiver 18ENT-0227
Approved by Planning Commission on December 5, 2018
Dear Mr. Martin:
UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn and Patricia Young (collectively “Appelants”), hereby
respectfully appeal the Planning Commission’s approval of the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project
(“Project”) proposed by Koning Eizenberg Architecture. This appeal challenges the Project’s
Development Review Permit, Major Modification and Waiver (collectively “Entitlements”) for
the reasons stated herein. Under Santa Monica Municipal Code (“SMMC” or “Code”) Section
9.37.130(B)1(c), the last day to file an appeal is December 19, 2018.
Additionally, the Appellants and the general public were erroneously notified of the
proposed Entitlements, which were approved during the public hearing held on December 5,
2018. The sign posted on the project site pursuant to Section 9.37.030(E) of the Code incorrectly
states that the Project includes 1,000 square feet of restaurant/café space (Attachment D). The
Project that was approved includes 2,000 square feet of restaurant/café space.1 The City’s
Discretionary Permit Application requires the sign to contain an “explanation of the request.”2
The application also requires a signature from the property owner acknowledging the sign
posting requirements, “and that failure to post the sign/required information and failure to
conform to placement/graphic standards will result in delay in the required public hearing."3
Because the posting was erroneous as to a key component of the project, the approval of the
Project Entitlements should be reversed, and public hearing for the Project Entitlements should
be rescheduled with proper notice given according to the requirements set forth in Section
9.37.030 of the Code.
1 1828 Ocean Avenue staff report, p. 1.
2 Discretionary Permit Application, available at:
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Applications-Forms/Discretionary-Permit-Application.pdf.
3 Id.
Page 2 of 3
Is the appeal related to the discretionary action and findings issued for the proposed
project?
The Project approved on December 5, 2018, was modified from the first time the Project
came before the Planning Commission on October 3, 2018. The Applicant proposed minor
changes, including an additional setback and aesthetic features. None of these proposed changes
sufficiently addressed Appellants’ concerns regarding consistency with the Code and potential
impacts on the environment, and sent a letter to the Planning Commission prior to the December
5 hearing outlining these concerns. It is hereto attached as Attachment A. As the December 5
hearing was a continuance of the October 3 hearing, Appellants submitted more thorough
comments during the comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and
prior to the October 3 hearing. Both letters are hereto attached as Attachment B and C,
respectively. In sum, the Project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel
complex, and therefore contravenes the spirit and purpose of the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay
district standards. It is inconsistent with the applicable land use plans and zoning and the Project
may have significant impacts on the environment, so several required findings to approve the
Entitlements cannot be made, and the Project should not be approved.
Is the appeal related to the conditions of approval?
The conditions of approval implemented by the Planning Commission when the Project
was approved on December 5 are insufficient. Specifically, Project Specific Condition #2, which
seeks to assure that the residential units will only be operated as multi-dwelling units merely
reiterates what is already required by the Code, and does not address a major loophole in the
code which has recently been explored by the Planning Commission, Rent Control Board, and
more recently, by the City Council in a study session on December 18, 2018. Appellants raised
these concerns in a letter to the Planning Commission (Attachment A). Condition #2 states:
The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as defined in SMMC
Section 9.51.020(A)(2), or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined in SMMC
Section 9.51.020(B)(15).4
In order to both address this loophole and ensure that the proposed residential units
remain as such, the following conditions should be implemented by the City Council:
- A condition, running with the land, that bans its conversion to Lodging uses as
defined in SMMC § 9.51.030(B)(15). The Project seeks to conform with LUCE
policies that encourage the production of housing, such as Policy LU 3.2 which is to
“Focus on Housing in Transit-Accessible Corridors,” and Policy LU 10.3, which is to
“Focus on additional affordable and workforce housing . . .” This condition will help
ensure that the Project fulfills its original purpose.
- Require leases to be offered for terms of no less than a year. The Project should also
prohibit “home-sharing” and vacation rentals as defined in SMMC § 6.20. These
4 December 5, 2018 Planning Commission Report for 1828 Ocean Avenue, p. 33.
Page 3 of 3
conditions will further address the concern that the residential units within the Project
will be converted into corporate rental units.
Is the appeal related to non-compliance with the Santa Monica Municipal Code?
Appellants raise several concerns related to the Project’s compliance with the SMMC in
their comments on the DEIR (Attachment B). In sum, Appellants argue that the Project is an
extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, and therefore does not comply with the
underlying zoning for the Project which prohibits the proliferation of hotels and large restaurants.
Is the appeal related to environmental impacts associated with the project?
Appellants argue that finding of fact E required to approve the Development Review
Permit cannot be made. Finding of fact E states that the proposed project will not have any
significant or potentially significant impacts on the environment. Appellants explain why finding
of fact E cannot be made in Attachment C.
The Project is also inconsistent with Section 30212 of the Coastal Act, which encourages
low cost visitor accommodations. Inconsistency with the Coastal Act is a potentially significant
impact on the environment, as the Coastal Act was used as one of the regulatory frameworks for
analyzing the Project’s impacts on Land Use and Planning in the DEIR. In sum, the Project
should provide community spaces instead of 2,000 square feet of commercial or restaurant use in
order to comply with Section 30213 of the Coastal Act. Appellants elaborate on this argument in
Attachment A.
In sum, Appellants object to the Planning Commission’s approval of this Project due to
its inconsistencies with the Code and potential impacts on the environment. The findings
required to approve the Project cannot be made, and the City Council should not allow this
Project to be approved as it is currently proposed. If the Project is approved, however, short-term
rentals of any kind, hosted or un-hosted, should not be permitted as the Project is arguably an
extension of its neighboring hotels, and any use that is not long-term residential could be
considered a lodging use.
Appellants respectfully reserve the right to supplement this appeal justification at future
hearings and proceedings for this Project. Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water
Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1120 (CEQA litigation not limited only to
claims made during EIR comment period).
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 11
Attachment A
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
December 5, 2018
Via Email
Santa Monica Planning Commission
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Comments
1828 Ocean Avenue Project
Development Review Permit 15ENT-0300, Major Modification 18ENT-0226,
Waiver 18ENT-0227
Dear Chair Fonda-Bonardi and Honorable Planning Commissioners:
On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 (“Local 11”), Jim Conn, and Patricia Young
(collectively “Commenters”), we write to express our concerns with the modified 1828 Ocean
Avenue Project (“Project”). While the changes are proposed in response to some of the Planning
Commission’s recommendations from the original hearing on October 3, 2018 they do not satisfy
the Commenters’ objections, which were also raised in writing and oral testimony. The
Applicant is requesting a Development Review Permit, Major Modification, and Waiver
(collectively “Entitlements”), for which the required findings cannot be made due to
inconsistencies with applicable zoning and land use plans and potentially significant impacts on
the environment. Additionally, Commenters believe that the Project is inconsistent with the
Coastal Act. Commenters urge the Planning Commission to withhold approval for the
requested Entitlements until the Commenters’ objections are sufficiently addressed.
I. The required findings for the requested entitlements cannot be made despite the
proposed design modifications.
Prior to the October 3, 2018 hearing, Commenters submitted a letter which outlines
several reasons why the findings required to approve the requested Entitlements cannot be made,
hereto attached as Attachment A. These objections include, but are not limited to the following:
- Required findings A and D for granting a Development Review Permit, which address
the issues of neighborhood compatibility and consistency with the “Municipal Code,
General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plan,” respectively, cannot be made for DRP
15-ENT-0300. SMMC §§ 9.40.050(A), (D). The Project is arguably an extension of the
Casa del Mar and Shutters hotel complex, and therefore inconsistent with the spirit and
purpose of the Oceanfront (OF) and Beach Overlay District (BCH) development
standards, which prohibit hotel development. SMMC § 9.20.060. The Project also
conflicts with Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Policy D18.8 due to
inconsistencies with the development standards listed above.
Comments on 1828 Ocean Avenue
December 5, 2018
Page 2 of 4
- Required finding E for granting a Development Review Permit cannot be made because
the Project may have significant impacts on the environment. SMMC § 9.40.050(E).
- The Project is not eligible for a Major Modification because it is arguably an extension of
the hotels.
- Required finding B cannot be made for the requested Major Modification and Waiver, as
it requires that “[t]he project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the applicable
zone districts.” SMMC § 9.43.100(B). As mentioned earlier, the Project contravenes the
purpose of the OF and BCH district standards.
- Required finding D cannot be made for the requested Major Modification and Waiver, as
it requires that the requested modification is justified by “environmental features, site
conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees.” SMMC § 9.43.100(D).
This finding cannot be made as a 0.6 percent slope is too minor to justify the approval of
the requested modification in the absence of other special circumstances.
The Applicant is proposing some changes, including an additional setback and aesthetic features,
intended to soften the design impact on Vicente Terrace in particular. None of these proposed
changes address Commenters’ concerns regarding consistency with the Code and potential
impacts on the environment. The requested entitlements cannot be approved at this time.
II. The proposed Project is inconsistent with the Section 30213 of the Coastal Act,
which encourages low cost visitor accommodations.
Because the Project lies within the Coastal Zone, analysis of the Project’s Land Use and
Planning impacts in the DEIR must consider the requirements of the Coastal Act. The Project
conflicts with Section 30213 of the Coastal Act because it does not promote or encourage lower
cost visitor accommodations. Section 30213 states:
Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where
feasible, provided. Developments providing public recreational opportunities are
preferred.
Instead of proposing 2,000 square feet of commercial space, the Project should provide “lower
cost visitor and recreational facilities” for the public, as encouraged by the Coastal Act. The
commercial spaces could instead be, for example, community spaces that could be rented out at a
reduced or complimentary rate for public events, etc. There are several ways to use such
desirable space near the beach for truly public-serving uses rather than commercial uses.
III. If the Planning Commission decides to approve the Project, strict conditions of
approval should be imposed to ensure compliance with SMMC § 6.20, Home-
Share and Vacation Rentals.
Commenters raised concerns regarding the use of the proposed residential units as short-
term rental uses in their comments on the DEIR (hereto attached as Attachment B), and in public
testimony at the October 3 hearing. These concerns were echoed by several members of the
Comments on 1828 Ocean Avenue
December 5, 2018
Page 3 of 4
public and Planning Commissioners themselves, but the issue was not sufficiently addressed.
Commenters maintain that the findings for the requested entitlements cannot be made, if the
Planning Commission does decide to approve them, strict conditions of approval should be
imposed to ensure the Project’s proposed residential units will remain residential.
A major loophole in the Code that allows corporate rentals to proliferate in Santa Monica
has recently become a major concern amongst various city agencies, including the Rent Control
Board, Planning Commission, and City Council. At its August 9, 2018 meeting, the Rent Control
Board studied potential new language that could begin to address this deficiency in the code. In
an internal memorandum to the Rent Control Board, the board’s General Counsel stated:
Today, a new threat to the rental housing supply has emerged, as an increasing number of
landlords have begun to rent to corporate entities who use rent-controlled units for other
than the provision of long-term, permanent housing, or themselves rent units to short-
term visitors—a practice that, in another context, the Court of Appeal recognized is not
the provision of housing.1
A Santa Monica Daily Press (SMDP) article explains that several buildings in downtown Santa
Monica advertise corporate rentals for “just over 31 days – the threshold for a ‘short-term
rental’.”2 The Planning Commission must go beyond existing Code requirements, and add the
following conditions to the Project to address this issue:
- A condition, running with the land, that bans its conversion to “Lodging” uses as
defined in SMMC § 9.51.030(B)(15). The Project seeks to conform with LUCE
policies that encourage the production of housing, such as Policy LU 3.2 to “[f]ocus
on Housing in Transit-Accessible Corridors,” and Policy LU 10.3, which includes to
“[f]ocus on additional affordable and workforce housing.” This condition will help
ensure that the Project fulfills its original purpose.
- Require leases to be offered for terms of no less than a year. This will further address
the concern that the residential units within the Project will be converted into
corporate rental units.
IV. Conclusion
Despite the proposed modifications, the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project cannot entitlements
be approved by the Planning Commission. The Project is inconsistent with applicable land use
plans, including the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay District, because it is arguably an expansion
of the Shutters and Casa del Mar hotel complex. In addition, the Project is inconsistent with the
Coastal Act and may have significant impacts on the environment. The requested entitlements
1 See City of Santa Monica (8/9/18) Rent Control Board memo, p. 2,
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Rent_Control/About_the_Rent_Control_Board/Staff_Reports/2
018/Item%2012A%20Corporate%20Housing.pdf.
2 Kate Cagle, “Housing’s corporate takeover is an open secret,” SMDP (Aug. 27, 2018), available at:
http://www.smdp.com/housings-corporate-takeover-is-an-open-secret/168855
Comments on 1828 Ocean Avenue
December 5, 2018
Page 4 of 4
should be denied until the Project complies with the Code and other regulatory frameworks,
including relevant provisions of the Coastal Act.
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 11
Attachment B
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
May 25, 2018
Via Email
Rachel Kwok, Environmental Planner
City of Santa Monica, Planning Division
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
rachel.kwok@smgov.net
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Comments
1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk Projects
Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2016091033)
Dear Ms. Kwok:
On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 (“Local 11”), Jim Conn, and Patricia Young
(collectively “Commenters”), we respectively write to provide the City of Santa Monica the
following comments regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) prepared for
the above-referenced 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk Projects (“Projects”),
proposed by Koning Eizenberg Architecture (“Applicant”). Our concerns specifically relate to
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the Santa Monica
Municipal Code (“SMMC”).
For all intents and purposes, the Projects will function as extensions of the hotels adjacent
to the Project Sites. The 1828 Ocean Avenue Project (“Ocean Avenue Project”) would be built
directly adjacent to the Shutters on the Beach Hotel, and the 1921 Ocean Front Walk Project
(“Ocean Front Walk Project”) adjacent to the Hotel Casa del Mar. This is significant because the
DEIR’s analysis with respect to compliance with land use and zoning policies relies on the
premise that the Projects are mixed-use residential developments that do not contain hotel uses.
The Commenters object to the DEIR’s conclusion that the Projects would not result in
any significant impacts requiring mitigation measures aside from those related to construction
and cultural resources. The Commenters also object to the DEIR’s conclusion that the Projects
are consistent with the City’s Local Coastal Program’s Land Use Policy (“LUP”) as it is
currently awaiting several stages of City approvals. In addition, the DEIR’s analysis of the
Projects’ potential impacts on historical resources is inadequate. Finally, the DEIR insufficiently
analyzes the potential cumulative impacts on traffic, as the pending Pier Bridge Replacement
Project is not factored into the environmental analysis.
Commenters respectfully urge the City to withhold all Project approvals until the issues
raised below are fully resolved. The DEIR should be revised and recirculated, as the
Commenters raise significant flaws in the environmental study that must be addressed and
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 2 of 9
provided to the public for an additional opportunity to comment. See Pub. Res. Code Section
21092.1.
I. Project Background
The proposed Ocean Avenue Project is 47 feet in height and 90,000 square feet, with a
Floor Area Ratio (“FAR”) of 1.99. It would contain up to 83 residential units and up to 2,000
square feet of ground-level commercial uses, including 750 square feet of outdoor dining and
1,250 square feet of indoor dining. It would also include a subterranean parking garage providing
277 parking spaces and 142 bicycle parking spaces. The Project would demolish and replace the
existing surface parking lot that currently provides the parking for the Hotel Casa del Mar. The
Project Site is approximately 45,120 square feet in area, and is bordered by Ocean Avenue to the
east, Vicente Terrace to the north, Pico Boulevard to the south, and the Shutters on the Beach
Hotel to the west. (DEIR, pp. 2-1–2-7).
The Ocean Front Walk Project would replace an existing vacant lot with up to 22
residential units and up to 4,000 square feet of ground-level commercial uses, including two
restaurant/cafe tenants and a “semi-subterranean” garage with 61 vehicular parking spaces and
59 bicycle parking spaces. The Ocean Front Walk Project Site is approximately 23,209 square
feet in area and is bordered by Ocean Front Walk to the west, Ocean Way to the east, Bay Street
to the south, and the Hotel Casa del Mar to the north. (DEIR, pp. 2-1–2-7).
The Applicant proposes to construct the Projects simultaneously during a two-year
construction period beginning as early as fall 2018 and ending in summer 2020. Alternatively,
construction of the Projects could be staggered, extending the opening date into 2021. (DEIR, pp.
2-27–2-28).
II. Standing of Commenters
Mr. Conn is a Santa Monica resident living approximately 0.3 miles from the Ocean
Avenue Project Site, and 0.4 miles from the Ocean Front Walk Project Site. Similarly, Ms.
Young lives approximately 0.6 miles from the Ocean Avenue Project Site, and 0.7 miles from
the Ocean Front Walk Project Site. Such geographic proximity alone is sufficient to establish
standing under CEQA. See Bozung v. LAFCO (1975) 13 Cal.3d 263, 272 (plaintiff living 1,800
feet from annexed property has standing to challenge the annexation); see also Citizens Ass’n for
Sensible Dev. V. County of Inyo (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 151, 158 (“a property owner, taxpayer,
or elector who establishes a geographical nexus with the site of the challenged project has
standing.”). Furthermore, absent adequate analysis and full mitigation of Project-related impacts,
Commenters will be adversely affected by the Projects’ impacts on traffic. Hence, Commenters
have a beneficial interest in the Projects’ compliance with CEQA. See Braude v. City of Los
Angeles (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 83, 87.
Local 11 represents more than 30,000 workers employed in hotels, restaurants, airports,
sports arenas, and convention centers throughout Southern California and Arizona. Members of
Local 11, including over 1,500 who work in Santa Monica and many Santa Monica residents,
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 3 of 9
join together to fight for improved living standards and working conditions. As such, Local 11 is
a stakeholder in these Projects, and worker and labor organizations have a long history of
engaging in the CEQA process to secure safe working conditions, reduce environmental impacts,
and maximize community benefits. The courts have held that “unions have standing to litigate
environmental claims.” Bakersfield Citizens v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1198.
Furthermore, this comment letter is made to exhaust remedies under Pub. Res Code §
21177 concerning the Projects, and incorporates by this reference all written and oral comments
submitted on the Projects by any commenting party or agency. It is well established that any
party, as Commenters here, who participates in the administrative process can assert all factual
and legal issues raised by anyone. See Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2006) 144
Cal.App.4th 865, 875.
III. Brief Background on CEQA
CEQA requires lead agencies to analyze the potential environmental impacts of its
actions in an environmental impact report (“EIR”). See, e.g., Pub. Res. Code § 21100; Cmtys.
for a Better Env’t v. S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310. The EIR is the very
heart of CEQA. Dunn-Edwards v. BAAQMD (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 644, 652. “The ‘foremost
principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford
the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory
language.” Cmtys. for a Better Env’t v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109; see
also Lincoln Place Tenants Ass’n. v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 425, 443-44
(“[t]he fundamental goals of environmental review under CEQA are information, participation,
mitigation, and accountability.”) (citing Cal. Code Regs. (“CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002).
CEQA’s Purpose: CEQA has two primary purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform
decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project.
See CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(1). To this end, public agencies must ensure that its
analysis ”stay in step with evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes."
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (“Cleveland II”)
(2017) 3 Cal.5th 497, 504. Hence, an analysis which “understates the severity of a project's
impacts impedes meaningful public discussion and skews the decisionmaker's perspective
concerning the environmental consequences of the project, the necessity for mitigation measures,
and the appropriateness of project approval.” Id., on remand (“Cleveland III”) 17 Cal.App.5th
413, 444; see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564
(quoting Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47
Cal.3d 376, 392).
Second, CEQA requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage by
requiring implementation of “environmentally superior” alternatives and all feasible mitigation
measures. CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) & (3); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley, 52 Cal.3d
at 564. If a project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the
project only if it finds that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on
the environment where feasible” and that any significant unavoidable effects on the environment
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 4 of 9
are “acceptable due to overriding concerns.” Pub. Res. Code § 21081; see also Guidelines §
15092(b)(2)(A) & (B).
Standard of Review for EIRs: Although courts review an EIR using an ‘abuse of
discretion’ standard, that standard does not permit a court to “‘uncritically rely on every study or
analysis presented by a project proponent in support of its position … [,] [a] clearly inadequate
or unsupported study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v.
Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355 (quoting Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at
409 n. 12). A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decisionmaking and informed public participation, thereby
thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.” San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v.
County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 713, 722; see also Galante Vineyards v. Monterey
Peninsula Water Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1117; County of Amador v. El
Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 931, 946.
Substantial Evidence: Under CEQA, substantial evidence includes facts, a reasonable
assumption predicated upon fact, or expert opinion supported by fact; not argument, speculation,
unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, clearly inaccurate or erroneous evidence, or evidence of
social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on
the environment. See e.g., Pub. Res. Code §§ 21080(e), 21082.2(c); CEQA Guidelines §§
15064(f)(5), 15384. As defined under CEQA Guidelines § 15384(a) (emphasis added),
substantial evidence is "enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this
information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other
conclusions might also be reached . . . . " As such, courts will not blindly trust bare
conclusions, bald assertions, and conclusory comments without the “disclosure of the ‘analytic
route the . . . agency traveled from evidence to action.’” Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v.
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 404 405 (quoting Topanga Assn. for a
Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 515); see also Citizens of
Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 568-569; Cleveland III, 17
Cal.App.5th at 441 (agency ”obliged to disclose what it reasonably can … [or] substantial
evidence showing it could not do so.”).
IV. The Ocean Avenue Project and Ocean Front Walk Project are extensions of the
Shutters on the Beach Hotel and the Hotel Casa del Mar, respectively.
The landowner of the two Project Sites is Thomas Edward Collection, which also owns
the Hotel Casa del Mar and Shutters on the Beach Hotel. The Ocean Avenue Project Site is
currently a surface parking that provides 127 parking spaces for Casa del Mar. The Ocean
Avenue Project will replace all 127 spaces for the hotel when the building opens. The Ocean
Front Walk Project “is proposed to be constructed with pivot windows, mimicking the Casa del
Mar’s windows, and sedimentary-textured and sand-colored concrete exterior panels that would
be compatible with the Casa del Mar’s cast stone and nearby bluffs,” essentially producing the
appearance of contiguity between the Project and hotel (DEIR Appendix C, p. 74). The project
site is contiguous with and directly abuts Casa del Mar.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 5 of 9
The DEIR does not indicate that the land use entitlements would be granted with
conditions of approval that would ensure that the Projects operate separately from the hotels. In
fact, given the proximity of the Projects to the hotels, guests would be encouraged to patronize
the ground floor businesses within the Projects. Given the common ownership of the existing
hotels and the Project Sites, the proximity of the Project Sites to the hotels, the comingling of
Project and hotel uses, and the Projects’ aesthetic design elements that match the hotels, these
Projects should properly be considered extensions of the Hotel Casa del Mar and Shutters on the
Beach Hotel for purposes of land use approvals and environmental review.
a. As the Projects are extensions of the Hotels, SB 743 does not exempt
aesthetic and parking impacts from being considered significant.
Under SB 743, “[a]esthetic and parking impacts of a residential, mixed-use residential, or
employment center project on an infill site within a transit priority area shall not be considered
significant impacts on the environment.” Pub. Res. Code § 21099(d)(1). The DEIR argues that
the Projects meet the criteria set forth in SB 743 because both Project Sites are: (1) located
within a transit priority area within one-half mile of a major transit stop and (2) include a mixed-
use residential project within an established urban area (p. 98). While the Projects may be
located within a transit priority area, they should not be considered a “residential, mixed-use
residential, or employment center project,” as the Projects are properly considered an extension
of hotel uses. The DEIR should therefore be revised to include analysis of the aesthetic and
parking impacts of the Projects.
V. The Projects conflict with applicable land use plans and zoning codes.
a. As they are extensions of the Hotels, the Projects are inconsistent with
applicable land use plans and zoning.
Oceanfront District and Proposition S/Beach Overlay District: The Projects are located
within the Oceanfront District and Beach Overlay District (“BOD”), which prohibit the
development of hotels. The voters adopted Proposition S in 1990, which modified the zoning
code to create the BOD. The purpose of the BOD is to “protect the public health, safety and
welfare of present and future residents of the City of Santa Monica . . . by avoiding the
deleterious effects of uncontrolled growth in the Beach Overlay District and preserving the
unique and diverse character of the Santa Monica oceanfront.” SMMC § 9.20.010.
The District explicitly prohibits the following uses: hotels, motels, and “[r]estaurants
and/or food service facilities of more than two thousand square feet and/or exceeding one story
in height.” SMMC § 9.20.060. Properly understood as extensions of the currently-existing hotels,
the proposed Projects contain hotel uses and restaurant uses that are prohibited in the District. In
addition, the Projects propose 6,000 square feet of restaurant space, triple the amount of square
footage permitted in the district (DEIR, p. 2-10). The proposed Projects contain hotel and food
service uses that are prohibited in the Oceanfront District and Beach Overlay District, and
therefore do not conform to the zoning standards.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 6 of 9
Beach and Oceanfront District Goals and Policies outlined in the Land Use and
Circulation Element (“LUCE”) of Santa Monica’s General Plan: Because the Projects contain
hotel uses, they conflict with goals and policies in the LUCE covering the Beach and Oceanfront
District. Policy D18.8 encourages “visitor serving uses consistent with Proposition S [which
created the Beach Overlay District] in commercial areas” and Policy D18.9 encourages the
replacement of existing hotels and motels “to assure their long term economic viability . . .
provided they are not expanded.” (LUCE pp. 2.6–2.8). It also suggests the option to pursue
“voter approval to modify Proposition S to allow existing hotels and motels to redevelop
provided they are not expanded.” Id. As explained above, the Projects are expansions of the Casa
del Mar and Shutters on the Beach, and are therefore inconsistent with Policy D18.9 of the
LUCE, which discourages hotel and motel expansion.
b. The requirements for Casa del Mar’s Conditional Use Permit for alcohol
service will not be met during the construction of the Ocean Avenue Project.
SMMC § 9.31.040(B) requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) for the
on-site consumption of alcohol, and the Ocean Avenue Project Site currently provides the 127
parking spaces required by Casa del Mar’s CUP 97-003, Miscellaneous Condition 11. (DEIR, p.
216). The DEIR mentions two scenarios for the replacement of the parking spaces during
construction. In the first, parking would be provided at a “nearby off-site parking location with
valet service,” but the DEIR does not specify how this off-site location will be secured or how
close it will be to the current parking lot (DEIR, p. 2-27). In the second scenario, the parking
would be provided at the Ocean Front Walk Site, but the DEIR again does not elaborate on how
and when this would be executed. Id. The DEIR also does not mention how the hotel will be
prohibited from selling alcohol during this possible period of noncompliance with its CUP. In
sum, the proposed Ocean Avenue Project creates uncertainties around how the conditions of
Casa del Mar’s CUP will be met during the Project’s construction.
c. The DEIR cannot adequately analyze the Projects’ consistency with the
City’s pending Local Coastal Program.
The Projects are located in the California Coastal Zone, and are therefore subject to the
California Coastal Act and the regulations of the local agency’s Local Coastal Program (“LCP”).
As stated in the DEIR, the City is currently updating its LCP Land Use Plan (“LUP”), as it has
only been partially certified since 1992 (DEIR, p. 4.11-22).
The City’s Planning Department website lays out the projected timeline for the approval
of the LUP, and expects a final City Council hearing for the certification of the LUP’s EIR in
July 2018.1 The DEIR anticipates that work could begin on the Projects as early as Fall 2018,
meaning that the LUP could quite possibly be certified prior to or during the entitlement and
permitting processes for the Projects. The DEIR discusses the proposed updates to the LUP for
informational purposes, but it does not detail the outstanding disagreements between Coastal
Commission staff and City staff (p. 4.11-22). These policy disagreements, which mainly focus
1 https://www.smgov.net/Departments/PCD/Plans/Local-Coastal-Plan-Update/
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 7 of 9
on coastal access and parking, could constitute the most significant changes to the LUP, and
should therefore be factored into the environmental analysis.2 There are outstanding policy
disagreements between Coastal Commission staff and City staff regarding the LUP, and it is
possible that some of these disagreements may not be resolved until the Coastal Commission
holds its certification hearings after the City Council tentatively adopts the LUP in July 2018.3
Therefore, the projected LUP provisions referenced in the DEIR are too speculative to be used to
analyze the potential environmental impacts of the Projects pursuant to the Coastal Act.
d. Assuming that the Projects were considered residential, strict compliance with
SMMC § 6.20, Home-Share and Vacation Rentals should be required.
SMMC § 6.20 was added to regulate short-term rentals in order to “ensure that residential
housing remains available to long-term tenants, and because short-term rentals have undesirable
impacts that threaten the stability and character of the City’s neighborhoods and result in
increased rents.”4 The Projects propose up to 105 residential units on desirable real estate near
the beach. In February 2018, city staff prepared a “Short-Term Rental Program Update” for City
Council, which outlined both the “successes and challenges” since the law took effect on June
12, 2015, through October 31, 2017.5 Staff currently estimates that there are a total of 689
unlawful short-term rentals in Santa Monica listed on various online platforms, 7% of which are
located in the same zip code as the Projects.6 As the residential units in the Projects could be
rented out as unlawful short-term rentals if strict compliance with the law is not ensured,
conditions should be added to the land use entitlement approvals.
Even if home-shares were to be operated lawfully, they could violate Proposition S. The
city would collect Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from the hosts, making the home-shares
function effectively as hotel rooms. As mentioned in a previous section, hotels are strictly
prohibited in the Beach Overlay District [which was established by Proposition S]. SMMC §
9.20.060. Therefore, if home-shares are operated within the Projects, this could constitute a
violation of the SMMC.
VI. The DEIR insufficiently addresses the potential environmental impacts of the
Projects.
a. The Projects may have potentially significant impacts on historical resources.
There are several historical resources surrounding the Project Sites. The Ocean Avenue
Project is located within view of two sites that could be eligible historical resources: the potential
Seaview/Vicente Terrace District and the Ye Olde Mucky Duck building. To be eligible for
historical significance under the National Register, one requirement is that the district, site,
2 Planning Commission Staff Report, March 21, 2018, pp. 14-15.
3 Id.
4 Short-Term Rental Program Update, February 9, 2018, p. 1.
5 Id.
6 Id. at 8.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 8 of 9
building, structure, or object must “possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association . . .” 36 CFR § 60.4.
As the Projects are in significant view of the District and Ye Olde Mucky Duck building,
they could directly impact the “integrity” of the setting. The DEIR states that the Projects will
not impact the two sites’ eligibility for historical significance, but the Projects’ architectural style
is clearly distinct from the character of the District and Ye Olde Mucky Duck building (pp. 4.4-
11–4.4-13). Therefore, the Projects may negatively impact the eligibility of the district and Ye
Olde Mucky Duck’s for historic significance under the National Register.
This may also impact the two sites’ eligibility for the California Register, as the
California Register automatically includes “California properties formally determined eligible
for, or listed in, the National Register of Historic Places.” Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1(d)(1).
Construction of the Ocean Front Walk Project may also jeopardize the Ocean Front Walk
Project Site itself, which is also arguably of historical significance. In addition to the requirement
that a site “possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and
association,” it must also, inter alia, (a) be “associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of our history,” (b) be “associated with the lives of persons
significant in our past,” or (c) “have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in
prehistory or history.” 36 CFR § 60.4. In 1941, the Ocean Front Walk Project Site was enclosed
by a gate and an outlook tower was erected when Casa Del Mar was taken over by the U.S. Navy
for use as a hotel (DEIR Appendix C, p. 25). Given this notable chapter in the its history, the
DEIR should conduct a thorough study of the potential historical significance of the Ocean Front
Walk Project Site itself.
As discussed in the previous paragraphs, the Projects may impact the eligibility of the
potential Seaview/Vicente Terrace Historical District, Ye Olde Mucky Duck building, and Ocean
Front Walk Project Site itself for inclusion in the California Register. Therefore, the Projects
may have potentially significant impacts on historical resources, and further study is required.
b. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the cumulative impacts of the
Projects on traffic.
Under the CEQA Guidelines, “cumulative impacts” are defined as “two or more
individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or
increase other environmental impacts.” CEQA Guidelines § 15355. The City is currently
contemplating three options to replace the Santa Monica Pier Bridge, two of which will
temporarily relocate vehicular access from its current location at Colorado Avenue and Ocean
Avenue to Moss Avenue and Appian Way.7 If either of these options are ultimately selected by
the city, they will alter traffic patterns west of Ocean Avenue. The DEIR explicitly references
this and states that it does not include an analysis of either of these alternatives (pp. 4.17–4.24).
7 Alternative 1 and Alternative 3, the latter of which is deemed the “Locally Preferred Alternative,” Santa Monica
Pier Bridge Replacement Project DEIR, pp. S-2–S-12.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 9 of 9
Because the potential cumulative effect of Alternatives 1 and 3 of the Pier Bridge Replacement
Project and the Projects will be to increase traffic, the City should require revisions to the DEIR
to adequately study and mitigate these potentially significant impacts.
VII. DEIR Recirculation is Required
CEQA requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is
added to the draft EIR following public review but before certification. See Pub. Res. Code §
21092.1; CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(c). Examples of “significant new information”
include when “[a] new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a
new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented” or “[a] substantial increase in the severity
of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the
impact to a level of insignificance.” CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(a)(1)-(2). The issues raised
throughout this letter meet these criteria, and therefore require the DEIR to be recirculated.
VIII. Conclusion
In summary, the Commenters are concerned with various issues related to CEQA and the
SMMC. Given the potentially significant environmental impacts discussed above, the City
should revise and recirculate the DEIR with new environmental analysis and prepare an adequate
statement of overriding considerations for any unmitigated impacts.
Commenters reserve the right to supplement these comments at future hearings and
proceedings for the Projects. See Cmtys. for a Better Env’t v. City of Richmond, (2010) 184
Cal.App.4th 70, 86 (EIR invalidated based on comments submitted after Final EIR completed);
Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109,
1120 (CEQA litigation not limited only to claims made during EIR comment period).
Finally, to the extent not already on the notice list, Commenters request all notices of
CEQA actions and any approvals, CEQA determinations related to the Projects, or public
hearings to be held on the Projects under state or local law requiring local agencies to mail such
notices to any person who has filed a written request for them. See Pub. Res. Code §§ 21080.4,
21083.9, 21092, 21092.2, 21108, 21167(f) and Gov. Code § 65092. Please send notice by regular
and electronic mail to: Danielle Wilson, 464 Lucas Ave., Suite #201, Los Angeles, CA 90017,
and danielle.wilson@unitehere11.org (cc: cdu@unitehere11.org).
Thank you for consideration of these comments. We ask that this letter be placed in the
administrative record for the Projects.
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 11
Attachment C
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
October 2, 2018
Via Email
Santa Monica Planning Commission
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Comments
1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk Projects
Case No.: Environmental Impact Report 18ENT-0215, Development Review Permit
15ENT-0300, Major Modification 18ENT-0226, Waiver 18ENT-0227, Development
Review Permit 15ENT-0297
Dear Chair Fresco and Honorable Planning Commissioners:
On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 (“Local 11”), Jim Conn, and Patricia Young
(collectively “Commenters”), we write to provide comments to the City of Santa Monica
regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) and discretionary entitlements
(“Entitlements”) prepared for the 1828 Ocean Avenue (“Ocean Avenue Project”) and 1921
Ocean Front Walk (“Ocean Front Walk Project”) projects (collectively, “Projects”) for Koning
Eizenberg Architecture (“Applicant”).
Arguably, the Projects are properly understood as extensions of the Hotel Casa del Mar
and Shutters on the Beach, and the FEIR should reflect this fact. The required findings for the
requested entitlements cannot be made, as the Projects are inconsistent with applicable land use
plans, zoning, and CEQA. Commenters urge the Planning Commission to withhold all
project approvals until the FEIR is recirculated and the Commenters’ objections are
sufficiently addressed.
I. The FEIR insufficiently addresses comments raised in response to the DEIR.
Commenters raised several concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”)
on the premise that the Projects should be understood as extensions of the Hotel Casa del Mar
and Shutters on the Beach hotel. Edward Thomas Hospitality Corporation (“ETHC”) owns both
hotels1 and the adjacent Project Sites at 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk,2
whose development would arguably create a “hotel complex” along the beach. The Ocean
1 https://www.edwardthomasco.com/
2 The Public Hearing Notice included in the Planning Commission staff reports lists “NEXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC” as
the property owner. The mailing address for the tax assessor’s bill for NEXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC is registered at
9950 Santa Monica Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90401, which is ETHC’s corporate office.
2
Avenue Project Site is already currently an extension of the Casa del Mar, as the surface parking
lot on the site satisfies the parking requirements for the hotel’s CUP for alcohol service.3 The
Applicant is now seeking entitlements to arguably expand its hotel complex by proposing
adjacent, mixed-use developments that include ground floor retail and luxury rooftop amenities,
such as the rooftop pool atop the proposed Ocean Avenue Project.
As the FEIR does not address the land use and environmental arguments raised regarding the
DEIR, the FEIR is insufficient and should be recirculated to address these issues. Commenters
raised concerns regarding compliance with SB 743, applicable land use plans and zoning, and the
spirit and purpose of Proposition S. See comments on DEIR, Attachment A.
II. The proposed Ocean Avenue Project is arguably an extension of the ETHC hotel
complex, not an affordable housing development as was the city’s intention for
the project site.
In July 2007, the city solicited proposals in order to exchange city-owned property at 1920
Ocean Way (today, 1921 Ocean Front Walk) for another site that could “increase the number of
affordable housing units that would otherwise be built at 1920 Ocean Way.”4 The Ocean Avenue
site was ultimately selected as it was deemed to have the greatest potential to yield affordable
housing, which was estimated at about 80 units. Staff then recommended a request for proposals
to solicit developers, with minimum requirements of 40 affordable units and additional units that
would address “City housing needs, such as housing suitable for artists, families, local workers,
and persons at risk of homelessness . . . (with a total cumulative yield estimated at about 80
units).”5 Today, the Ocean Avenue Project proposes 12 affordable units out of 83 total units, and
4 off-site affordable units at the Ocean Front Walk site, totaling 16 affordable units out of 105
total units.6
III. Required findings for Development Review Permits 15ENT-0300 for the Ocean
Avenue Project (“DRP 15ENT-0300”) and 15ENT-0297 for the Ocean Front
Walk Project (“DRP 15ENT-0297”) cannot be made
A Development Review Permit (“DRP”) is required for any project that exceeds Tier 1
maximum limits and for new construction and new additions to existing buildings of more than
10,000 SF of floor area located in Residential Districts.7 Santa Monica Municipal Code
(“SMMC”) § 9.40.020(A). The Projects exceed both of these thresholds, and therefore a DRP is
required for both Projects. In order to grant a DRP, the Planning Commission must make the
findings of fact set forth in SMMC § 9.40.050. Several required findings cannot be made for the
Projects. Findings A, D and E cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300 (Ocean Avenue Project)
because the Project does not comply with the General Plan and has potentially significant
impacts on the environment. Likewise, findings A, D, and E cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-
0297 (Ocean Front Walk Project) because of inconsistencies with applicable land use plans and
3 FEIR, p. 4.12-1.
4 City Council staff report for agenda item 8-B, November 11, 2008, Attachment B.
5 Id.
6 Planning Commission staff report for October 3, 2018, agenda item 8-B, p. 6 (“Ocean Avenue Staff Report”).
7 Id., p. 3.
3
zoning and because the Project has potentially significant impacts on the environment.
A. SMMC § 9.40.050 findings of fact A, D, and E cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0300
(Ocean Avenue Project)
a. Finding of fact A cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300
Finding of fact A states:
The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and placement of
proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project are
consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible and relate harmoniously
to surrounding sites and neighborhoods[.]
SMMC § 9.40.050(A). This finding cannot be made because the Project is inconsistent with the
spirit and purpose of the Oceanfront (OF) and Beach Overlay District (BCH) development
standards. This finding requires that “proposed uses within the project are consistent with
applicable standards,” which, in this case, include the two zoning districts in which the Project is
proposed. Both zoning districts prohibit the development of hotels. Because the Project is
arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, it contravenes the spirit and
purpose of the standards of the OF and BCH districts. Therefore, finding of fact A cannot be
made.
b. Finding of fact D cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300
Finding of fact D states that “The project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code,
General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plan.” SMMC § 9.40.050(D). The Project is
inconsistent with the General Plan in that it conflicts with the goals, objectives, and policies in
the Santa Monica Land Use and Circulation Element (“LUCE”) that pertain to the OF and BCH
districts. Specifically, Goal D18 is to: “Preserve the low-scale character and appearance of the
Beach and Oceanfront District, and ensure its continued role as Santa Monica’s character-
defining open space” (p. 2.6-28). Even though the proposed Project has been refined since the
DEIR was released, it is still a new five-story, 81,630 square foot building, a significant increase
in massing and scale from the current surface parking lot use. Since the proposed Project is large
and dense, it will not preserve the low-scale appearance of the Beach and Oceanfront Districts,
and therefore conflicts with LUCE Goal D18.
The Project also conflicts with LUCE Policy D18.8: “Encourage visitor serving uses
consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado
Avenue and Pico Boulevard” (p. 2.6-28). As mentioned elsewhere, the Project is arguably an
extension of the Casa del Mar and Shutters hotel complex, and therefore contravenes the spirit
and purpose of Proposition S, which prohibits hotel development in the Beach Overlay District.
The Project site is located west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard,
but encourages uses arguably inconsistent with the purpose of Proposition S. Therefore, the
Project conflicts with LUCE Policy D18.8.
4
The Project is also inconsistent with LUCE Policy LU10.3: “Focus on additional affordable
and workforce housing with an emphasis on employment centers in proximity to transit
facilities” (p. 2.1-17). The Housing Element defines “workforce housing” as “between 120% and
180% of the County Average Median Income (AMI).8 In Affordable Housing Scenario A, the
Project proposes 12 residential units affordable to 50 percent Income Households and 67 market
rate units. It does not address units that would be considered “workforce housing” (FEIR, pp. 2-
17 – 2-18). Because the Project lies within a transit priority area (FEIR p. 3-3), the Project’s lack
of workforce housing units conflicts with LUCE policy LU10.3.
c. Finding E cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300
Finding of fact E states:
Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have been
reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures incorporated in the
project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted[.]
SMMC § 9.40.050(E). The Commenters object to the FEIR’s conclusion that the Project would
not result in any significant impacts requiring mitigation measures aside from those related to
construction and cultural resources, even with the refinements to the Project made since the
DEIR. The Ocean Avenue Project was analyzed with the 1921 Ocean Front Walk project in a
single EIR. Finding E cannot be made for either DRP. The Project may have negative impacts on
historical resources and cumulative impacts on traffic.
As stated in our comments submitted with respect to the DEIR, the Project is located
within view of the potential Seaview/Vicente Terrace District and the Ye Olde Mucky Duck
Building. It may directly impact the integrity of the setting, potentially threatening the eligibility
of the district and building for historic significance under the National Register.9 Furthermore, in
1941, the Ocean Front Walk Project Site was enclosed by a gate and an outlook tower was
erected when Casa Del Mar was taken over by the U.S. Navy for use as a hotel (DEIR Appendix
C, p. 25). Given this notable chapter in the its history, the FEIR should conduct a more thorough
study of the potential historical significance of the Ocean Front Walk Project Site itself.
The Projects may also have negative cumulative impacts on traffic, due to the pending
Santa Monica Pier Bridge replacement project, which is not adequately addressed in the FEIR.
B. Findings of fact A, D, and E cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
a. Finding of fact A cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
8 2013-2021 Housing Element – City of Santa Monica, p. 34.
9 See comments on DEIR, pp. 7-8, Attachment A.
5
Finding of fact A states:
The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and placement of
proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project are
consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible and relate harmoniously to
surrounding sites and neighborhoods;
SMMC § 9.40.050(A). The Project does not comply with the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay
Districts development standards. This finding requires that “proposed uses within the project are
consistent with applicable standards,” which, in this case, refer to the two zoning districts in
which the Project is proposed. Both districts prohibit the development of hotels. Because the
Project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, it contravenes the
spirit and purpose of the OF and BCH district standards.
The Project also does not “relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods.”
The Project is bordered across Bay Street to the south by Crescent Bay Park, and across Ocean
Way to the east by a box-like three-story, multi-family apartment building. The proposed project
is a four-story, modern/contemporary building “composed of staggered solid and void spaces,”
distinct from the styles of the surrounding uses, including the immediately adjacent Casa del Mar
to the north.10 Because the proposed Project is distinct in style and massing from surrounding
uses, it is not compatible with the surrounding sites and neighborhoods. Finding A cannot be
made.
b. Finding of fact D cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
Finding of fact D requires that “[t]he project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code,
General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plan.” SMMC § 9.40.050(D). The Project is
inconsistent with the General Plan because the Project conflicts with the development standards
of the Oceanfront District (OF). One of the purposes of the OF is to “[a]void the deleterious
effects of uncontrolled growth and preserve the unique and diverse character of the Santa Monica
oceanfront by limiting the proliferation of excessive hotel, motel, and large restaurant
development in the oceanfront area.” SMMC § 9.14.010(D). As mentioned above, the Ocean
Front Walk Project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, and
therefore contravenes the purpose of the OF district standards. Finding D therefore cannot be
made.
The proposed Project is also inconsistent with Policy D18.2 and Policy D18.8 in the LUCE.
Policy D18.2 seeks to “[r]espect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas
in the design and construction of new buildings.”11 As mentioned earlier, the Project’s design
and massing is distinct from surrounding uses, such as the adjacent Casa del Mar, Crescent Bay
Park, and multi-family apartment buildings, and therefore conflicts with LUCE Policy D18.2.
LUCE Policy D18.8 is to “[e]ncourage visitor serving uses consistent with Proposition S in
10 Planning Commission staff report for October 3, 2018, agenda item 8-A, p. 8 (“Ocean Front Walk Staff Report”).
11 Land Use and Circulation Element, p. 2.6-28.
6
commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard.”12 The
Project site is located west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard, but
as the Project is arguably an extension of a hotel use, it contravenes the purpose of Proposition S.
Since the Project is inconsistent with policies outlined in the LUCE, the Project is inconsistent
with the General Plan, and finding D cannot be made.
b. Finding E cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
Finding of fact E states:
Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have been
reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures incorporated in the
project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted[.]
SMMC § 9.40.050(E). The impacts of the Ocean Front Walk Project were analyzed with the
1828 Ocean Avenue in a single EIR. See above analysis of finding E for DRP 15ENT-0300.
IV. The requested Major Modification and Waiver cannot be granted because the
Project is not eligible for such allowances, and the required findings cannot be
made.
a. The Project is not eligible for a Major Modification because it is arguably an extension of
the hotels.
The Project is not eligible for a Major Modification, per SMMC § 9.43.030(A), which states:
“The provisions of this Section shall apply to specific development proposals that are for uses
permitted by right or by discretionary review in the District. In no case shall a major
modification be granted pursuant to this Section to permit a new use or activity that is not
otherwise permitted in the District where the property is located . . .” The Project is located in the
OF and BOD, where hotel uses are prohibited. The Project is arguably an extension of a hotel
use, and therefore contravenes the purpose of the standards of the districts in which it is located.
A Major Modification should not be granted under these circumstances.
b. Required findings of fact in SMMC § 9.43.100 cannot be made
In order to grant Major Modifications and Waivers, the decision-making body must be
able to make findings of fact pursuant to SMMC § 9.43.100. In this case, findings B and D
cannot be made.
12 Id.
7
Finding of fact B requires that “[t]he project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the
applicable zone districts.” SMMC § 9.43.100(B). As mentioned above, the Project is arguably an
expansion of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, and therefore contravenes the purpose of
the OF and BOH district standards. Therefore, finding of fact B cannot be made.
Finding of fact D states:
The approval of the requested modification is justified by environmental features, site
conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees[.]
SMMC § 9l43.100(D). The Applicant is requesting relief from development standards due to the
gently sloping 0.6 percent grade of the property. As mentioned earlier, the ZO allows for
modifications to the development standards for parcels with a ten percent grade or more,
significantly greater than that of the Applicant’s property. As a site condition, a minor 0.6
percent slope does not justify the approval of the requested modification. Finding D therefore
cannot be made.
V. Conclusion
In sum, Commenters raise several objections related to the Projects’ compliance with CEQA
and the SMMC. The FEIR must be recirculated to sufficiently address Commenters concerns,
and the Planning Commission should deny all project approvals until then. The Projects should
be revised to reflect the needs of the community, comply with the Municipal Code and
applicable state law, and provide sufficient affordable housing along the desirable Santa Monica
State Beach.
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst, UNITE HERE Local 11
Danielle.wilson@unitehere11.org
Attachment D
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
December 19, 2018
VIA HAND DELIVERY
David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main St., Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Appeal
1828 Ocean Avenue Project
Development Review Permit 15ENT-0300, Major Modification 18ENT-0226,
Waiver 18ENT-0227
Approved by Planning Commission on December 5, 2018
Dear Mr. Martin:
UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn and Patricia Young (collectively “Appelants”), hereby
respectfully appeal the Planning Commission’s approval of the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project
(“Project”) proposed by Koning Eizenberg Architecture. This appeal challenges the Project’s
Development Review Permit, Major Modification and Waiver (collectively “Entitlements”) for
the reasons stated herein. Under Santa Monica Municipal Code (“SMMC” or “Code”) Section
9.37.130(B)1(c), the last day to file an appeal is December 19, 2018.
Additionally, the Appellants and the general public were erroneously notified of the
proposed Entitlements, which were approved during the public hearing held on December 5,
2018. The sign posted on the project site pursuant to Section 9.37.030(E) of the Code incorrectly
states that the Project includes 1,000 square feet of restaurant/café space (Attachment D). The
Project that was approved includes 2,000 square feet of restaurant/café space.1 The City’s
Discretionary Permit Application requires the sign to contain an “explanation of the request.”2
The application also requires a signature from the property owner acknowledging the sign
posting requirements, “and that failure to post the sign/required information and failure to
conform to placement/graphic standards will result in delay in the required public hearing."3
Because the posting was erroneous as to a key component of the project, the approval of the
Project Entitlements should be reversed, and public hearing for the Project Entitlements should
be rescheduled with proper notice given according to the requirements set forth in Section
9.37.030 of the Code.
1 1828 Ocean Avenue staff report, p. 1.
2 Discretionary Permit Application, available at:
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Applications-Forms/Discretionary-Permit-Application.pdf.
3 Id.
Page 2 of 3
Is the appeal related to the discretionary action and findings issued for the proposed
project?
The Project approved on December 5, 2018, was modified from the first time the Project
came before the Planning Commission on October 3, 2018. The Applicant proposed minor
changes, including an additional setback and aesthetic features. None of these proposed changes
sufficiently addressed Appellants’ concerns regarding consistency with the Code and potential
impacts on the environment, and sent a letter to the Planning Commission prior to the December
5 hearing outlining these concerns. It is hereto attached as Attachment A. As the December 5
hearing was a continuance of the October 3 hearing, Appellants submitted more thorough
comments during the comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and
prior to the October 3 hearing. Both letters are hereto attached as Attachment B and C,
respectively. In sum, the Project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel
complex, and therefore contravenes the spirit and purpose of the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay
district standards. It is inconsistent with the applicable land use plans and zoning and the Project
may have significant impacts on the environment, so several required findings to approve the
Entitlements cannot be made, and the Project should not be approved.
Is the appeal related to the conditions of approval?
The conditions of approval implemented by the Planning Commission when the Project
was approved on December 5 are insufficient. Specifically, Project Specific Condition #2, which
seeks to assure that the residential units will only be operated as multi-dwelling units merely
reiterates what is already required by the Code, and does not address a major loophole in the
code which has recently been explored by the Planning Commission, Rent Control Board, and
more recently, by the City Council in a study session on December 18, 2018. Appellants raised
these concerns in a letter to the Planning Commission (Attachment A). Condition #2 states:
The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as defined in SMMC
Section 9.51.020(A)(2), or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined in SMMC
Section 9.51.020(B)(15).4
In order to both address this loophole and ensure that the proposed residential units
remain as such, the following conditions should be implemented by the City Council:
- A condition, running with the land, that bans its conversion to Lodging uses as
defined in SMMC § 9.51.030(B)(15). The Project seeks to conform with LUCE
policies that encourage the production of housing, such as Policy LU 3.2 which is to
“Focus on Housing in Transit-Accessible Corridors,” and Policy LU 10.3, which is to
“Focus on additional affordable and workforce housing . . .” This condition will help
ensure that the Project fulfills its original purpose.
- Require leases to be offered for terms of no less than a year. The Project should also
prohibit “home-sharing” and vacation rentals as defined in SMMC § 6.20. These
4 December 5, 2018 Planning Commission Report for 1828 Ocean Avenue, p. 33.
Page 3 of 3
conditions will further address the concern that the residential units within the Project
will be converted into corporate rental units.
Is the appeal related to non-compliance with the Santa Monica Municipal Code?
Appellants raise several concerns related to the Project’s compliance with the SMMC in
their comments on the DEIR (Attachment B). In sum, Appellants argue that the Project is an
extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, and therefore does not comply with the
underlying zoning for the Project which prohibits the proliferation of hotels and large restaurants.
Is the appeal related to environmental impacts associated with the project?
Appellants argue that finding of fact E required to approve the Development Review
Permit cannot be made. Finding of fact E states that the proposed project will not have any
significant or potentially significant impacts on the environment. Appellants explain why finding
of fact E cannot be made in Attachment C.
The Project is also inconsistent with Section 30212 of the Coastal Act, which encourages
low cost visitor accommodations. Inconsistency with the Coastal Act is a potentially significant
impact on the environment, as the Coastal Act was used as one of the regulatory frameworks for
analyzing the Project’s impacts on Land Use and Planning in the DEIR. In sum, the Project
should provide community spaces instead of 2,000 square feet of commercial or restaurant use in
order to comply with Section 30213 of the Coastal Act. Appellants elaborate on this argument in
Attachment A.
In sum, Appellants object to the Planning Commission’s approval of this Project due to
its inconsistencies with the Code and potential impacts on the environment. The findings
required to approve the Project cannot be made, and the City Council should not allow this
Project to be approved as it is currently proposed. If the Project is approved, however, short-term
rentals of any kind, hosted or un-hosted, should not be permitted as the Project is arguably an
extension of its neighboring hotels, and any use that is not long-term residential could be
considered a lodging use.
Appellants respectfully reserve the right to supplement this appeal justification at future
hearings and proceedings for this Project. Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water
Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1120 (CEQA litigation not limited only to
claims made during EIR comment period).
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 11
Attachment A
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
December 5, 2018
Via Email
Santa Monica Planning Commission
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Comments
1828 Ocean Avenue Project
Development Review Permit 15ENT-0300, Major Modification 18ENT-0226,
Waiver 18ENT-0227
Dear Chair Fonda-Bonardi and Honorable Planning Commissioners:
On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 (“Local 11”), Jim Conn, and Patricia Young
(collectively “Commenters”), we write to express our concerns with the modified 1828 Ocean
Avenue Project (“Project”). While the changes are proposed in response to some of the Planning
Commission’s recommendations from the original hearing on October 3, 2018 they do not satisfy
the Commenters’ objections, which were also raised in writing and oral testimony. The
Applicant is requesting a Development Review Permit, Major Modification, and Waiver
(collectively “Entitlements”), for which the required findings cannot be made due to
inconsistencies with applicable zoning and land use plans and potentially significant impacts on
the environment. Additionally, Commenters believe that the Project is inconsistent with the
Coastal Act. Commenters urge the Planning Commission to withhold approval for the
requested Entitlements until the Commenters’ objections are sufficiently addressed.
I. The required findings for the requested entitlements cannot be made despite the
proposed design modifications.
Prior to the October 3, 2018 hearing, Commenters submitted a letter which outlines
several reasons why the findings required to approve the requested Entitlements cannot be made,
hereto attached as Attachment A. These objections include, but are not limited to the following:
- Required findings A and D for granting a Development Review Permit, which address
the issues of neighborhood compatibility and consistency with the “Municipal Code,
General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plan,” respectively, cannot be made for DRP
15-ENT-0300. SMMC §§ 9.40.050(A), (D). The Project is arguably an extension of the
Casa del Mar and Shutters hotel complex, and therefore inconsistent with the spirit and
purpose of the Oceanfront (OF) and Beach Overlay District (BCH) development
standards, which prohibit hotel development. SMMC § 9.20.060. The Project also
conflicts with Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Policy D18.8 due to
inconsistencies with the development standards listed above.
Comments on 1828 Ocean Avenue
December 5, 2018
Page 2 of 4
- Required finding E for granting a Development Review Permit cannot be made because
the Project may have significant impacts on the environment. SMMC § 9.40.050(E).
- The Project is not eligible for a Major Modification because it is arguably an extension of
the hotels.
- Required finding B cannot be made for the requested Major Modification and Waiver, as
it requires that “[t]he project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the applicable
zone districts.” SMMC § 9.43.100(B). As mentioned earlier, the Project contravenes the
purpose of the OF and BCH district standards.
- Required finding D cannot be made for the requested Major Modification and Waiver, as
it requires that the requested modification is justified by “environmental features, site
conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees.” SMMC § 9.43.100(D).
This finding cannot be made as a 0.6 percent slope is too minor to justify the approval of
the requested modification in the absence of other special circumstances.
The Applicant is proposing some changes, including an additional setback and aesthetic features,
intended to soften the design impact on Vicente Terrace in particular. None of these proposed
changes address Commenters’ concerns regarding consistency with the Code and potential
impacts on the environment. The requested entitlements cannot be approved at this time.
II. The proposed Project is inconsistent with the Section 30213 of the Coastal Act,
which encourages low cost visitor accommodations.
Because the Project lies within the Coastal Zone, analysis of the Project’s Land Use and
Planning impacts in the DEIR must consider the requirements of the Coastal Act. The Project
conflicts with Section 30213 of the Coastal Act because it does not promote or encourage lower
cost visitor accommodations. Section 30213 states:
Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where
feasible, provided. Developments providing public recreational opportunities are
preferred.
Instead of proposing 2,000 square feet of commercial space, the Project should provide “lower
cost visitor and recreational facilities” for the public, as encouraged by the Coastal Act. The
commercial spaces could instead be, for example, community spaces that could be rented out at a
reduced or complimentary rate for public events, etc. There are several ways to use such
desirable space near the beach for truly public-serving uses rather than commercial uses.
III. If the Planning Commission decides to approve the Project, strict conditions of
approval should be imposed to ensure compliance with SMMC § 6.20, Home-
Share and Vacation Rentals.
Commenters raised concerns regarding the use of the proposed residential units as short-
term rental uses in their comments on the DEIR (hereto attached as Attachment B), and in public
testimony at the October 3 hearing. These concerns were echoed by several members of the
Comments on 1828 Ocean Avenue
December 5, 2018
Page 3 of 4
public and Planning Commissioners themselves, but the issue was not sufficiently addressed.
Commenters maintain that the findings for the requested entitlements cannot be made, if the
Planning Commission does decide to approve them, strict conditions of approval should be
imposed to ensure the Project’s proposed residential units will remain residential.
A major loophole in the Code that allows corporate rentals to proliferate in Santa Monica
has recently become a major concern amongst various city agencies, including the Rent Control
Board, Planning Commission, and City Council. At its August 9, 2018 meeting, the Rent Control
Board studied potential new language that could begin to address this deficiency in the code. In
an internal memorandum to the Rent Control Board, the board’s General Counsel stated:
Today, a new threat to the rental housing supply has emerged, as an increasing number of
landlords have begun to rent to corporate entities who use rent-controlled units for other
than the provision of long-term, permanent housing, or themselves rent units to short-
term visitors—a practice that, in another context, the Court of Appeal recognized is not
the provision of housing.1
A Santa Monica Daily Press (SMDP) article explains that several buildings in downtown Santa
Monica advertise corporate rentals for “just over 31 days – the threshold for a ‘short-term
rental’.”2 The Planning Commission must go beyond existing Code requirements, and add the
following conditions to the Project to address this issue:
- A condition, running with the land, that bans its conversion to “Lodging” uses as
defined in SMMC § 9.51.030(B)(15). The Project seeks to conform with LUCE
policies that encourage the production of housing, such as Policy LU 3.2 to “[f]ocus
on Housing in Transit-Accessible Corridors,” and Policy LU 10.3, which includes to
“[f]ocus on additional affordable and workforce housing.” This condition will help
ensure that the Project fulfills its original purpose.
- Require leases to be offered for terms of no less than a year. This will further address
the concern that the residential units within the Project will be converted into
corporate rental units.
IV. Conclusion
Despite the proposed modifications, the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project cannot entitlements
be approved by the Planning Commission. The Project is inconsistent with applicable land use
plans, including the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay District, because it is arguably an expansion
of the Shutters and Casa del Mar hotel complex. In addition, the Project is inconsistent with the
Coastal Act and may have significant impacts on the environment. The requested entitlements
1 See City of Santa Monica (8/9/18) Rent Control Board memo, p. 2,
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Rent_Control/About_the_Rent_Control_Board/Staff_Reports/2
018/Item%2012A%20Corporate%20Housing.pdf.
2 Kate Cagle, “Housing’s corporate takeover is an open secret,” SMDP (Aug. 27, 2018), available at:
http://www.smdp.com/housings-corporate-takeover-is-an-open-secret/168855
Comments on 1828 Ocean Avenue
December 5, 2018
Page 4 of 4
should be denied until the Project complies with the Code and other regulatory frameworks,
including relevant provisions of the Coastal Act.
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 11
Attachment B
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
May 25, 2018
Via Email
Rachel Kwok, Environmental Planner
City of Santa Monica, Planning Division
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
rachel.kwok@smgov.net
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Comments
1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk Projects
Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2016091033)
Dear Ms. Kwok:
On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 (“Local 11”), Jim Conn, and Patricia Young
(collectively “Commenters”), we respectively write to provide the City of Santa Monica the
following comments regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) prepared for
the above-referenced 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk Projects (“Projects”),
proposed by Koning Eizenberg Architecture (“Applicant”). Our concerns specifically relate to
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the Santa Monica
Municipal Code (“SMMC”).
For all intents and purposes, the Projects will function as extensions of the hotels adjacent
to the Project Sites. The 1828 Ocean Avenue Project (“Ocean Avenue Project”) would be built
directly adjacent to the Shutters on the Beach Hotel, and the 1921 Ocean Front Walk Project
(“Ocean Front Walk Project”) adjacent to the Hotel Casa del Mar. This is significant because the
DEIR’s analysis with respect to compliance with land use and zoning policies relies on the
premise that the Projects are mixed-use residential developments that do not contain hotel uses.
The Commenters object to the DEIR’s conclusion that the Projects would not result in
any significant impacts requiring mitigation measures aside from those related to construction
and cultural resources. The Commenters also object to the DEIR’s conclusion that the Projects
are consistent with the City’s Local Coastal Program’s Land Use Policy (“LUP”) as it is
currently awaiting several stages of City approvals. In addition, the DEIR’s analysis of the
Projects’ potential impacts on historical resources is inadequate. Finally, the DEIR insufficiently
analyzes the potential cumulative impacts on traffic, as the pending Pier Bridge Replacement
Project is not factored into the environmental analysis.
Commenters respectfully urge the City to withhold all Project approvals until the issues
raised below are fully resolved. The DEIR should be revised and recirculated, as the
Commenters raise significant flaws in the environmental study that must be addressed and
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 2 of 9
provided to the public for an additional opportunity to comment. See Pub. Res. Code Section
21092.1.
I. Project Background
The proposed Ocean Avenue Project is 47 feet in height and 90,000 square feet, with a
Floor Area Ratio (“FAR”) of 1.99. It would contain up to 83 residential units and up to 2,000
square feet of ground-level commercial uses, including 750 square feet of outdoor dining and
1,250 square feet of indoor dining. It would also include a subterranean parking garage providing
277 parking spaces and 142 bicycle parking spaces. The Project would demolish and replace the
existing surface parking lot that currently provides the parking for the Hotel Casa del Mar. The
Project Site is approximately 45,120 square feet in area, and is bordered by Ocean Avenue to the
east, Vicente Terrace to the north, Pico Boulevard to the south, and the Shutters on the Beach
Hotel to the west. (DEIR, pp. 2-1–2-7).
The Ocean Front Walk Project would replace an existing vacant lot with up to 22
residential units and up to 4,000 square feet of ground-level commercial uses, including two
restaurant/cafe tenants and a “semi-subterranean” garage with 61 vehicular parking spaces and
59 bicycle parking spaces. The Ocean Front Walk Project Site is approximately 23,209 square
feet in area and is bordered by Ocean Front Walk to the west, Ocean Way to the east, Bay Street
to the south, and the Hotel Casa del Mar to the north. (DEIR, pp. 2-1–2-7).
The Applicant proposes to construct the Projects simultaneously during a two-year
construction period beginning as early as fall 2018 and ending in summer 2020. Alternatively,
construction of the Projects could be staggered, extending the opening date into 2021. (DEIR, pp.
2-27–2-28).
II. Standing of Commenters
Mr. Conn is a Santa Monica resident living approximately 0.3 miles from the Ocean
Avenue Project Site, and 0.4 miles from the Ocean Front Walk Project Site. Similarly, Ms.
Young lives approximately 0.6 miles from the Ocean Avenue Project Site, and 0.7 miles from
the Ocean Front Walk Project Site. Such geographic proximity alone is sufficient to establish
standing under CEQA. See Bozung v. LAFCO (1975) 13 Cal.3d 263, 272 (plaintiff living 1,800
feet from annexed property has standing to challenge the annexation); see also Citizens Ass’n for
Sensible Dev. V. County of Inyo (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 151, 158 (“a property owner, taxpayer,
or elector who establishes a geographical nexus with the site of the challenged project has
standing.”). Furthermore, absent adequate analysis and full mitigation of Project-related impacts,
Commenters will be adversely affected by the Projects’ impacts on traffic. Hence, Commenters
have a beneficial interest in the Projects’ compliance with CEQA. See Braude v. City of Los
Angeles (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 83, 87.
Local 11 represents more than 30,000 workers employed in hotels, restaurants, airports,
sports arenas, and convention centers throughout Southern California and Arizona. Members of
Local 11, including over 1,500 who work in Santa Monica and many Santa Monica residents,
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 3 of 9
join together to fight for improved living standards and working conditions. As such, Local 11 is
a stakeholder in these Projects, and worker and labor organizations have a long history of
engaging in the CEQA process to secure safe working conditions, reduce environmental impacts,
and maximize community benefits. The courts have held that “unions have standing to litigate
environmental claims.” Bakersfield Citizens v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1198.
Furthermore, this comment letter is made to exhaust remedies under Pub. Res Code §
21177 concerning the Projects, and incorporates by this reference all written and oral comments
submitted on the Projects by any commenting party or agency. It is well established that any
party, as Commenters here, who participates in the administrative process can assert all factual
and legal issues raised by anyone. See Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2006) 144
Cal.App.4th 865, 875.
III. Brief Background on CEQA
CEQA requires lead agencies to analyze the potential environmental impacts of its
actions in an environmental impact report (“EIR”). See, e.g., Pub. Res. Code § 21100; Cmtys.
for a Better Env’t v. S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310. The EIR is the very
heart of CEQA. Dunn-Edwards v. BAAQMD (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 644, 652. “The ‘foremost
principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford
the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory
language.” Cmtys. for a Better Env’t v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109; see
also Lincoln Place Tenants Ass’n. v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 425, 443-44
(“[t]he fundamental goals of environmental review under CEQA are information, participation,
mitigation, and accountability.”) (citing Cal. Code Regs. (“CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002).
CEQA’s Purpose: CEQA has two primary purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform
decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project.
See CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(1). To this end, public agencies must ensure that its
analysis ”stay in step with evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes."
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (“Cleveland II”)
(2017) 3 Cal.5th 497, 504. Hence, an analysis which “understates the severity of a project's
impacts impedes meaningful public discussion and skews the decisionmaker's perspective
concerning the environmental consequences of the project, the necessity for mitigation measures,
and the appropriateness of project approval.” Id., on remand (“Cleveland III”) 17 Cal.App.5th
413, 444; see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564
(quoting Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47
Cal.3d 376, 392).
Second, CEQA requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage by
requiring implementation of “environmentally superior” alternatives and all feasible mitigation
measures. CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) & (3); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley, 52 Cal.3d
at 564. If a project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the
project only if it finds that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on
the environment where feasible” and that any significant unavoidable effects on the environment
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 4 of 9
are “acceptable due to overriding concerns.” Pub. Res. Code § 21081; see also Guidelines §
15092(b)(2)(A) & (B).
Standard of Review for EIRs: Although courts review an EIR using an ‘abuse of
discretion’ standard, that standard does not permit a court to “‘uncritically rely on every study or
analysis presented by a project proponent in support of its position … [,] [a] clearly inadequate
or unsupported study is entitled to no judicial deference.’” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v.
Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355 (quoting Laurel Heights, 47 Cal.3d at
409 n. 12). A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decisionmaking and informed public participation, thereby
thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.” San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v.
County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 713, 722; see also Galante Vineyards v. Monterey
Peninsula Water Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1117; County of Amador v. El
Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 931, 946.
Substantial Evidence: Under CEQA, substantial evidence includes facts, a reasonable
assumption predicated upon fact, or expert opinion supported by fact; not argument, speculation,
unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, clearly inaccurate or erroneous evidence, or evidence of
social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on
the environment. See e.g., Pub. Res. Code §§ 21080(e), 21082.2(c); CEQA Guidelines §§
15064(f)(5), 15384. As defined under CEQA Guidelines § 15384(a) (emphasis added),
substantial evidence is "enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this
information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other
conclusions might also be reached . . . . " As such, courts will not blindly trust bare
conclusions, bald assertions, and conclusory comments without the “disclosure of the ‘analytic
route the . . . agency traveled from evidence to action.’” Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v.
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 404 405 (quoting Topanga Assn. for a
Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 515); see also Citizens of
Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 568-569; Cleveland III, 17
Cal.App.5th at 441 (agency ”obliged to disclose what it reasonably can … [or] substantial
evidence showing it could not do so.”).
IV. The Ocean Avenue Project and Ocean Front Walk Project are extensions of the
Shutters on the Beach Hotel and the Hotel Casa del Mar, respectively.
The landowner of the two Project Sites is Thomas Edward Collection, which also owns
the Hotel Casa del Mar and Shutters on the Beach Hotel. The Ocean Avenue Project Site is
currently a surface parking that provides 127 parking spaces for Casa del Mar. The Ocean
Avenue Project will replace all 127 spaces for the hotel when the building opens. The Ocean
Front Walk Project “is proposed to be constructed with pivot windows, mimicking the Casa del
Mar’s windows, and sedimentary-textured and sand-colored concrete exterior panels that would
be compatible with the Casa del Mar’s cast stone and nearby bluffs,” essentially producing the
appearance of contiguity between the Project and hotel (DEIR Appendix C, p. 74). The project
site is contiguous with and directly abuts Casa del Mar.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 5 of 9
The DEIR does not indicate that the land use entitlements would be granted with
conditions of approval that would ensure that the Projects operate separately from the hotels. In
fact, given the proximity of the Projects to the hotels, guests would be encouraged to patronize
the ground floor businesses within the Projects. Given the common ownership of the existing
hotels and the Project Sites, the proximity of the Project Sites to the hotels, the comingling of
Project and hotel uses, and the Projects’ aesthetic design elements that match the hotels, these
Projects should properly be considered extensions of the Hotel Casa del Mar and Shutters on the
Beach Hotel for purposes of land use approvals and environmental review.
a. As the Projects are extensions of the Hotels, SB 743 does not exempt
aesthetic and parking impacts from being considered significant.
Under SB 743, “[a]esthetic and parking impacts of a residential, mixed-use residential, or
employment center project on an infill site within a transit priority area shall not be considered
significant impacts on the environment.” Pub. Res. Code § 21099(d)(1). The DEIR argues that
the Projects meet the criteria set forth in SB 743 because both Project Sites are: (1) located
within a transit priority area within one-half mile of a major transit stop and (2) include a mixed-
use residential project within an established urban area (p. 98). While the Projects may be
located within a transit priority area, they should not be considered a “residential, mixed-use
residential, or employment center project,” as the Projects are properly considered an extension
of hotel uses. The DEIR should therefore be revised to include analysis of the aesthetic and
parking impacts of the Projects.
V. The Projects conflict with applicable land use plans and zoning codes.
a. As they are extensions of the Hotels, the Projects are inconsistent with
applicable land use plans and zoning.
Oceanfront District and Proposition S/Beach Overlay District: The Projects are located
within the Oceanfront District and Beach Overlay District (“BOD”), which prohibit the
development of hotels. The voters adopted Proposition S in 1990, which modified the zoning
code to create the BOD. The purpose of the BOD is to “protect the public health, safety and
welfare of present and future residents of the City of Santa Monica . . . by avoiding the
deleterious effects of uncontrolled growth in the Beach Overlay District and preserving the
unique and diverse character of the Santa Monica oceanfront.” SMMC § 9.20.010.
The District explicitly prohibits the following uses: hotels, motels, and “[r]estaurants
and/or food service facilities of more than two thousand square feet and/or exceeding one story
in height.” SMMC § 9.20.060. Properly understood as extensions of the currently-existing hotels,
the proposed Projects contain hotel uses and restaurant uses that are prohibited in the District. In
addition, the Projects propose 6,000 square feet of restaurant space, triple the amount of square
footage permitted in the district (DEIR, p. 2-10). The proposed Projects contain hotel and food
service uses that are prohibited in the Oceanfront District and Beach Overlay District, and
therefore do not conform to the zoning standards.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 6 of 9
Beach and Oceanfront District Goals and Policies outlined in the Land Use and
Circulation Element (“LUCE”) of Santa Monica’s General Plan: Because the Projects contain
hotel uses, they conflict with goals and policies in the LUCE covering the Beach and Oceanfront
District. Policy D18.8 encourages “visitor serving uses consistent with Proposition S [which
created the Beach Overlay District] in commercial areas” and Policy D18.9 encourages the
replacement of existing hotels and motels “to assure their long term economic viability . . .
provided they are not expanded.” (LUCE pp. 2.6–2.8). It also suggests the option to pursue
“voter approval to modify Proposition S to allow existing hotels and motels to redevelop
provided they are not expanded.” Id. As explained above, the Projects are expansions of the Casa
del Mar and Shutters on the Beach, and are therefore inconsistent with Policy D18.9 of the
LUCE, which discourages hotel and motel expansion.
b. The requirements for Casa del Mar’s Conditional Use Permit for alcohol
service will not be met during the construction of the Ocean Avenue Project.
SMMC § 9.31.040(B) requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) for the
on-site consumption of alcohol, and the Ocean Avenue Project Site currently provides the 127
parking spaces required by Casa del Mar’s CUP 97-003, Miscellaneous Condition 11. (DEIR, p.
216). The DEIR mentions two scenarios for the replacement of the parking spaces during
construction. In the first, parking would be provided at a “nearby off-site parking location with
valet service,” but the DEIR does not specify how this off-site location will be secured or how
close it will be to the current parking lot (DEIR, p. 2-27). In the second scenario, the parking
would be provided at the Ocean Front Walk Site, but the DEIR again does not elaborate on how
and when this would be executed. Id. The DEIR also does not mention how the hotel will be
prohibited from selling alcohol during this possible period of noncompliance with its CUP. In
sum, the proposed Ocean Avenue Project creates uncertainties around how the conditions of
Casa del Mar’s CUP will be met during the Project’s construction.
c. The DEIR cannot adequately analyze the Projects’ consistency with the
City’s pending Local Coastal Program.
The Projects are located in the California Coastal Zone, and are therefore subject to the
California Coastal Act and the regulations of the local agency’s Local Coastal Program (“LCP”).
As stated in the DEIR, the City is currently updating its LCP Land Use Plan (“LUP”), as it has
only been partially certified since 1992 (DEIR, p. 4.11-22).
The City’s Planning Department website lays out the projected timeline for the approval
of the LUP, and expects a final City Council hearing for the certification of the LUP’s EIR in
July 2018.1 The DEIR anticipates that work could begin on the Projects as early as Fall 2018,
meaning that the LUP could quite possibly be certified prior to or during the entitlement and
permitting processes for the Projects. The DEIR discusses the proposed updates to the LUP for
informational purposes, but it does not detail the outstanding disagreements between Coastal
Commission staff and City staff (p. 4.11-22). These policy disagreements, which mainly focus
1 https://www.smgov.net/Departments/PCD/Plans/Local-Coastal-Plan-Update/
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 7 of 9
on coastal access and parking, could constitute the most significant changes to the LUP, and
should therefore be factored into the environmental analysis.2 There are outstanding policy
disagreements between Coastal Commission staff and City staff regarding the LUP, and it is
possible that some of these disagreements may not be resolved until the Coastal Commission
holds its certification hearings after the City Council tentatively adopts the LUP in July 2018.3
Therefore, the projected LUP provisions referenced in the DEIR are too speculative to be used to
analyze the potential environmental impacts of the Projects pursuant to the Coastal Act.
d. Assuming that the Projects were considered residential, strict compliance with
SMMC § 6.20, Home-Share and Vacation Rentals should be required.
SMMC § 6.20 was added to regulate short-term rentals in order to “ensure that residential
housing remains available to long-term tenants, and because short-term rentals have undesirable
impacts that threaten the stability and character of the City’s neighborhoods and result in
increased rents.”4 The Projects propose up to 105 residential units on desirable real estate near
the beach. In February 2018, city staff prepared a “Short-Term Rental Program Update” for City
Council, which outlined both the “successes and challenges” since the law took effect on June
12, 2015, through October 31, 2017.5 Staff currently estimates that there are a total of 689
unlawful short-term rentals in Santa Monica listed on various online platforms, 7% of which are
located in the same zip code as the Projects.6 As the residential units in the Projects could be
rented out as unlawful short-term rentals if strict compliance with the law is not ensured,
conditions should be added to the land use entitlement approvals.
Even if home-shares were to be operated lawfully, they could violate Proposition S. The
city would collect Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from the hosts, making the home-shares
function effectively as hotel rooms. As mentioned in a previous section, hotels are strictly
prohibited in the Beach Overlay District [which was established by Proposition S]. SMMC §
9.20.060. Therefore, if home-shares are operated within the Projects, this could constitute a
violation of the SMMC.
VI. The DEIR insufficiently addresses the potential environmental impacts of the
Projects.
a. The Projects may have potentially significant impacts on historical resources.
There are several historical resources surrounding the Project Sites. The Ocean Avenue
Project is located within view of two sites that could be eligible historical resources: the potential
Seaview/Vicente Terrace District and the Ye Olde Mucky Duck building. To be eligible for
historical significance under the National Register, one requirement is that the district, site,
2 Planning Commission Staff Report, March 21, 2018, pp. 14-15.
3 Id.
4 Short-Term Rental Program Update, February 9, 2018, p. 1.
5 Id.
6 Id. at 8.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 8 of 9
building, structure, or object must “possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association . . .” 36 CFR § 60.4.
As the Projects are in significant view of the District and Ye Olde Mucky Duck building,
they could directly impact the “integrity” of the setting. The DEIR states that the Projects will
not impact the two sites’ eligibility for historical significance, but the Projects’ architectural style
is clearly distinct from the character of the District and Ye Olde Mucky Duck building (pp. 4.4-
11–4.4-13). Therefore, the Projects may negatively impact the eligibility of the district and Ye
Olde Mucky Duck’s for historic significance under the National Register.
This may also impact the two sites’ eligibility for the California Register, as the
California Register automatically includes “California properties formally determined eligible
for, or listed in, the National Register of Historic Places.” Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1(d)(1).
Construction of the Ocean Front Walk Project may also jeopardize the Ocean Front Walk
Project Site itself, which is also arguably of historical significance. In addition to the requirement
that a site “possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and
association,” it must also, inter alia, (a) be “associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of our history,” (b) be “associated with the lives of persons
significant in our past,” or (c) “have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in
prehistory or history.” 36 CFR § 60.4. In 1941, the Ocean Front Walk Project Site was enclosed
by a gate and an outlook tower was erected when Casa Del Mar was taken over by the U.S. Navy
for use as a hotel (DEIR Appendix C, p. 25). Given this notable chapter in the its history, the
DEIR should conduct a thorough study of the potential historical significance of the Ocean Front
Walk Project Site itself.
As discussed in the previous paragraphs, the Projects may impact the eligibility of the
potential Seaview/Vicente Terrace Historical District, Ye Olde Mucky Duck building, and Ocean
Front Walk Project Site itself for inclusion in the California Register. Therefore, the Projects
may have potentially significant impacts on historical resources, and further study is required.
b. The DEIR does not sufficiently address the cumulative impacts of the
Projects on traffic.
Under the CEQA Guidelines, “cumulative impacts” are defined as “two or more
individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or
increase other environmental impacts.” CEQA Guidelines § 15355. The City is currently
contemplating three options to replace the Santa Monica Pier Bridge, two of which will
temporarily relocate vehicular access from its current location at Colorado Avenue and Ocean
Avenue to Moss Avenue and Appian Way.7 If either of these options are ultimately selected by
the city, they will alter traffic patterns west of Ocean Avenue. The DEIR explicitly references
this and states that it does not include an analysis of either of these alternatives (pp. 4.17–4.24).
7 Alternative 1 and Alternative 3, the latter of which is deemed the “Locally Preferred Alternative,” Santa Monica
Pier Bridge Replacement Project DEIR, pp. S-2–S-12.
DEIR Comments: 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk
May 25, 2018
Page 9 of 9
Because the potential cumulative effect of Alternatives 1 and 3 of the Pier Bridge Replacement
Project and the Projects will be to increase traffic, the City should require revisions to the DEIR
to adequately study and mitigate these potentially significant impacts.
VII. DEIR Recirculation is Required
CEQA requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is
added to the draft EIR following public review but before certification. See Pub. Res. Code §
21092.1; CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(c). Examples of “significant new information”
include when “[a] new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a
new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented” or “[a] substantial increase in the severity
of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the
impact to a level of insignificance.” CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(a)(1)-(2). The issues raised
throughout this letter meet these criteria, and therefore require the DEIR to be recirculated.
VIII. Conclusion
In summary, the Commenters are concerned with various issues related to CEQA and the
SMMC. Given the potentially significant environmental impacts discussed above, the City
should revise and recirculate the DEIR with new environmental analysis and prepare an adequate
statement of overriding considerations for any unmitigated impacts.
Commenters reserve the right to supplement these comments at future hearings and
proceedings for the Projects. See Cmtys. for a Better Env’t v. City of Richmond, (2010) 184
Cal.App.4th 70, 86 (EIR invalidated based on comments submitted after Final EIR completed);
Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109,
1120 (CEQA litigation not limited only to claims made during EIR comment period).
Finally, to the extent not already on the notice list, Commenters request all notices of
CEQA actions and any approvals, CEQA determinations related to the Projects, or public
hearings to be held on the Projects under state or local law requiring local agencies to mail such
notices to any person who has filed a written request for them. See Pub. Res. Code §§ 21080.4,
21083.9, 21092, 21092.2, 21108, 21167(f) and Gov. Code § 65092. Please send notice by regular
and electronic mail to: Danielle Wilson, 464 Lucas Ave., Suite #201, Los Angeles, CA 90017,
and danielle.wilson@unitehere11.org (cc: cdu@unitehere11.org).
Thank you for consideration of these comments. We ask that this letter be placed in the
administrative record for the Projects.
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 11
Attachment C
464 Lucas Ave., Suite 201 • Los Angeles, California 90017 • (213) 481-8530 • FAX (213) 481-0352
October 2, 2018
Via Email
Santa Monica Planning Commission
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: UNITE HERE Local 11, Jim Conn, and Patricia Young Comments
1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk Projects
Case No.: Environmental Impact Report 18ENT-0215, Development Review Permit
15ENT-0300, Major Modification 18ENT-0226, Waiver 18ENT-0227, Development
Review Permit 15ENT-0297
Dear Chair Fresco and Honorable Planning Commissioners:
On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 (“Local 11”), Jim Conn, and Patricia Young
(collectively “Commenters”), we write to provide comments to the City of Santa Monica
regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) and discretionary entitlements
(“Entitlements”) prepared for the 1828 Ocean Avenue (“Ocean Avenue Project”) and 1921
Ocean Front Walk (“Ocean Front Walk Project”) projects (collectively, “Projects”) for Koning
Eizenberg Architecture (“Applicant”).
Arguably, the Projects are properly understood as extensions of the Hotel Casa del Mar
and Shutters on the Beach, and the FEIR should reflect this fact. The required findings for the
requested entitlements cannot be made, as the Projects are inconsistent with applicable land use
plans, zoning, and CEQA. Commenters urge the Planning Commission to withhold all
project approvals until the FEIR is recirculated and the Commenters’ objections are
sufficiently addressed.
I. The FEIR insufficiently addresses comments raised in response to the DEIR.
Commenters raised several concerns about the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”)
on the premise that the Projects should be understood as extensions of the Hotel Casa del Mar
and Shutters on the Beach hotel. Edward Thomas Hospitality Corporation (“ETHC”) owns both
hotels1 and the adjacent Project Sites at 1828 Ocean Avenue and 1921 Ocean Front Walk,2
whose development would arguably create a “hotel complex” along the beach. The Ocean
1 https://www.edwardthomasco.com/
2 The Public Hearing Notice included in the Planning Commission staff reports lists “NEXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC” as
the property owner. The mailing address for the tax assessor’s bill for NEXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC is registered at
9950 Santa Monica Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90401, which is ETHC’s corporate office.
2
Avenue Project Site is already currently an extension of the Casa del Mar, as the surface parking
lot on the site satisfies the parking requirements for the hotel’s CUP for alcohol service.3 The
Applicant is now seeking entitlements to arguably expand its hotel complex by proposing
adjacent, mixed-use developments that include ground floor retail and luxury rooftop amenities,
such as the rooftop pool atop the proposed Ocean Avenue Project.
As the FEIR does not address the land use and environmental arguments raised regarding the
DEIR, the FEIR is insufficient and should be recirculated to address these issues. Commenters
raised concerns regarding compliance with SB 743, applicable land use plans and zoning, and the
spirit and purpose of Proposition S. See comments on DEIR, Attachment A.
II. The proposed Ocean Avenue Project is arguably an extension of the ETHC hotel
complex, not an affordable housing development as was the city’s intention for
the project site.
In July 2007, the city solicited proposals in order to exchange city-owned property at 1920
Ocean Way (today, 1921 Ocean Front Walk) for another site that could “increase the number of
affordable housing units that would otherwise be built at 1920 Ocean Way.”4 The Ocean Avenue
site was ultimately selected as it was deemed to have the greatest potential to yield affordable
housing, which was estimated at about 80 units. Staff then recommended a request for proposals
to solicit developers, with minimum requirements of 40 affordable units and additional units that
would address “City housing needs, such as housing suitable for artists, families, local workers,
and persons at risk of homelessness . . . (with a total cumulative yield estimated at about 80
units).”5 Today, the Ocean Avenue Project proposes 12 affordable units out of 83 total units, and
4 off-site affordable units at the Ocean Front Walk site, totaling 16 affordable units out of 105
total units.6
III. Required findings for Development Review Permits 15ENT-0300 for the Ocean
Avenue Project (“DRP 15ENT-0300”) and 15ENT-0297 for the Ocean Front
Walk Project (“DRP 15ENT-0297”) cannot be made
A Development Review Permit (“DRP”) is required for any project that exceeds Tier 1
maximum limits and for new construction and new additions to existing buildings of more than
10,000 SF of floor area located in Residential Districts.7 Santa Monica Municipal Code
(“SMMC”) § 9.40.020(A). The Projects exceed both of these thresholds, and therefore a DRP is
required for both Projects. In order to grant a DRP, the Planning Commission must make the
findings of fact set forth in SMMC § 9.40.050. Several required findings cannot be made for the
Projects. Findings A, D and E cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300 (Ocean Avenue Project)
because the Project does not comply with the General Plan and has potentially significant
impacts on the environment. Likewise, findings A, D, and E cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-
0297 (Ocean Front Walk Project) because of inconsistencies with applicable land use plans and
3 FEIR, p. 4.12-1.
4 City Council staff report for agenda item 8-B, November 11, 2008, Attachment B.
5 Id.
6 Planning Commission staff report for October 3, 2018, agenda item 8-B, p. 6 (“Ocean Avenue Staff Report”).
7 Id., p. 3.
3
zoning and because the Project has potentially significant impacts on the environment.
A. SMMC § 9.40.050 findings of fact A, D, and E cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0300
(Ocean Avenue Project)
a. Finding of fact A cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300
Finding of fact A states:
The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and placement of
proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project are
consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible and relate harmoniously
to surrounding sites and neighborhoods[.]
SMMC § 9.40.050(A). This finding cannot be made because the Project is inconsistent with the
spirit and purpose of the Oceanfront (OF) and Beach Overlay District (BCH) development
standards. This finding requires that “proposed uses within the project are consistent with
applicable standards,” which, in this case, include the two zoning districts in which the Project is
proposed. Both zoning districts prohibit the development of hotels. Because the Project is
arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, it contravenes the spirit and
purpose of the standards of the OF and BCH districts. Therefore, finding of fact A cannot be
made.
b. Finding of fact D cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300
Finding of fact D states that “The project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code,
General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plan.” SMMC § 9.40.050(D). The Project is
inconsistent with the General Plan in that it conflicts with the goals, objectives, and policies in
the Santa Monica Land Use and Circulation Element (“LUCE”) that pertain to the OF and BCH
districts. Specifically, Goal D18 is to: “Preserve the low-scale character and appearance of the
Beach and Oceanfront District, and ensure its continued role as Santa Monica’s character-
defining open space” (p. 2.6-28). Even though the proposed Project has been refined since the
DEIR was released, it is still a new five-story, 81,630 square foot building, a significant increase
in massing and scale from the current surface parking lot use. Since the proposed Project is large
and dense, it will not preserve the low-scale appearance of the Beach and Oceanfront Districts,
and therefore conflicts with LUCE Goal D18.
The Project also conflicts with LUCE Policy D18.8: “Encourage visitor serving uses
consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado
Avenue and Pico Boulevard” (p. 2.6-28). As mentioned elsewhere, the Project is arguably an
extension of the Casa del Mar and Shutters hotel complex, and therefore contravenes the spirit
and purpose of Proposition S, which prohibits hotel development in the Beach Overlay District.
The Project site is located west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard,
but encourages uses arguably inconsistent with the purpose of Proposition S. Therefore, the
Project conflicts with LUCE Policy D18.8.
4
The Project is also inconsistent with LUCE Policy LU10.3: “Focus on additional affordable
and workforce housing with an emphasis on employment centers in proximity to transit
facilities” (p. 2.1-17). The Housing Element defines “workforce housing” as “between 120% and
180% of the County Average Median Income (AMI).8 In Affordable Housing Scenario A, the
Project proposes 12 residential units affordable to 50 percent Income Households and 67 market
rate units. It does not address units that would be considered “workforce housing” (FEIR, pp. 2-
17 – 2-18). Because the Project lies within a transit priority area (FEIR p. 3-3), the Project’s lack
of workforce housing units conflicts with LUCE policy LU10.3.
c. Finding E cannot be made for DRP 15ENT-0300
Finding of fact E states:
Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have been
reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures incorporated in the
project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted[.]
SMMC § 9.40.050(E). The Commenters object to the FEIR’s conclusion that the Project would
not result in any significant impacts requiring mitigation measures aside from those related to
construction and cultural resources, even with the refinements to the Project made since the
DEIR. The Ocean Avenue Project was analyzed with the 1921 Ocean Front Walk project in a
single EIR. Finding E cannot be made for either DRP. The Project may have negative impacts on
historical resources and cumulative impacts on traffic.
As stated in our comments submitted with respect to the DEIR, the Project is located
within view of the potential Seaview/Vicente Terrace District and the Ye Olde Mucky Duck
Building. It may directly impact the integrity of the setting, potentially threatening the eligibility
of the district and building for historic significance under the National Register.9 Furthermore, in
1941, the Ocean Front Walk Project Site was enclosed by a gate and an outlook tower was
erected when Casa Del Mar was taken over by the U.S. Navy for use as a hotel (DEIR Appendix
C, p. 25). Given this notable chapter in the its history, the FEIR should conduct a more thorough
study of the potential historical significance of the Ocean Front Walk Project Site itself.
The Projects may also have negative cumulative impacts on traffic, due to the pending
Santa Monica Pier Bridge replacement project, which is not adequately addressed in the FEIR.
B. Findings of fact A, D, and E cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
a. Finding of fact A cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
8 2013-2021 Housing Element – City of Santa Monica, p. 34.
9 See comments on DEIR, pp. 7-8, Attachment A.
5
Finding of fact A states:
The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and placement of
proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project are
consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible and relate harmoniously to
surrounding sites and neighborhoods;
SMMC § 9.40.050(A). The Project does not comply with the Oceanfront and Beach Overlay
Districts development standards. This finding requires that “proposed uses within the project are
consistent with applicable standards,” which, in this case, refer to the two zoning districts in
which the Project is proposed. Both districts prohibit the development of hotels. Because the
Project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, it contravenes the
spirit and purpose of the OF and BCH district standards.
The Project also does not “relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods.”
The Project is bordered across Bay Street to the south by Crescent Bay Park, and across Ocean
Way to the east by a box-like three-story, multi-family apartment building. The proposed project
is a four-story, modern/contemporary building “composed of staggered solid and void spaces,”
distinct from the styles of the surrounding uses, including the immediately adjacent Casa del Mar
to the north.10 Because the proposed Project is distinct in style and massing from surrounding
uses, it is not compatible with the surrounding sites and neighborhoods. Finding A cannot be
made.
b. Finding of fact D cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
Finding of fact D requires that “[t]he project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code,
General Plan, and any applicable Specific Plan.” SMMC § 9.40.050(D). The Project is
inconsistent with the General Plan because the Project conflicts with the development standards
of the Oceanfront District (OF). One of the purposes of the OF is to “[a]void the deleterious
effects of uncontrolled growth and preserve the unique and diverse character of the Santa Monica
oceanfront by limiting the proliferation of excessive hotel, motel, and large restaurant
development in the oceanfront area.” SMMC § 9.14.010(D). As mentioned above, the Ocean
Front Walk Project is arguably an extension of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, and
therefore contravenes the purpose of the OF district standards. Finding D therefore cannot be
made.
The proposed Project is also inconsistent with Policy D18.2 and Policy D18.8 in the LUCE.
Policy D18.2 seeks to “[r]espect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas
in the design and construction of new buildings.”11 As mentioned earlier, the Project’s design
and massing is distinct from surrounding uses, such as the adjacent Casa del Mar, Crescent Bay
Park, and multi-family apartment buildings, and therefore conflicts with LUCE Policy D18.2.
LUCE Policy D18.8 is to “[e]ncourage visitor serving uses consistent with Proposition S in
10 Planning Commission staff report for October 3, 2018, agenda item 8-A, p. 8 (“Ocean Front Walk Staff Report”).
11 Land Use and Circulation Element, p. 2.6-28.
6
commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard.”12 The
Project site is located west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard, but
as the Project is arguably an extension of a hotel use, it contravenes the purpose of Proposition S.
Since the Project is inconsistent with policies outlined in the LUCE, the Project is inconsistent
with the General Plan, and finding D cannot be made.
b. Finding E cannot be made for DRP 15-ENT-0297
Finding of fact E states:
Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have been
reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures incorporated in the
project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted[.]
SMMC § 9.40.050(E). The impacts of the Ocean Front Walk Project were analyzed with the
1828 Ocean Avenue in a single EIR. See above analysis of finding E for DRP 15ENT-0300.
IV. The requested Major Modification and Waiver cannot be granted because the
Project is not eligible for such allowances, and the required findings cannot be
made.
a. The Project is not eligible for a Major Modification because it is arguably an extension of
the hotels.
The Project is not eligible for a Major Modification, per SMMC § 9.43.030(A), which states:
“The provisions of this Section shall apply to specific development proposals that are for uses
permitted by right or by discretionary review in the District. In no case shall a major
modification be granted pursuant to this Section to permit a new use or activity that is not
otherwise permitted in the District where the property is located . . .” The Project is located in the
OF and BOD, where hotel uses are prohibited. The Project is arguably an extension of a hotel
use, and therefore contravenes the purpose of the standards of the districts in which it is located.
A Major Modification should not be granted under these circumstances.
b. Required findings of fact in SMMC § 9.43.100 cannot be made
In order to grant Major Modifications and Waivers, the decision-making body must be
able to make findings of fact pursuant to SMMC § 9.43.100. In this case, findings B and D
cannot be made.
12 Id.
7
Finding of fact B requires that “[t]he project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the
applicable zone districts.” SMMC § 9.43.100(B). As mentioned above, the Project is arguably an
expansion of the Casa del Mar/Shutters hotel complex, and therefore contravenes the purpose of
the OF and BOH district standards. Therefore, finding of fact B cannot be made.
Finding of fact D states:
The approval of the requested modification is justified by environmental features, site
conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees[.]
SMMC § 9l43.100(D). The Applicant is requesting relief from development standards due to the
gently sloping 0.6 percent grade of the property. As mentioned earlier, the ZO allows for
modifications to the development standards for parcels with a ten percent grade or more,
significantly greater than that of the Applicant’s property. As a site condition, a minor 0.6
percent slope does not justify the approval of the requested modification. Finding D therefore
cannot be made.
V. Conclusion
In sum, Commenters raise several objections related to the Projects’ compliance with CEQA
and the SMMC. The FEIR must be recirculated to sufficiently address Commenters concerns,
and the Planning Commission should deny all project approvals until then. The Projects should
be revised to reflect the needs of the community, comply with the Municipal Code and
applicable state law, and provide sufficient affordable housing along the desirable Santa Monica
State Beach.
Sincerely,
Danielle Wilson
Research Analyst, UNITE HERE Local 11
Danielle.wilson@unitehere11.org
Attachment D
City of Santa Monica
City Planning Division
CITY COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT INFORMATION
CASE NUMBER: Appeal 18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, 18ENT-0392
LOCATION: 1828 Ocean Avenue
APPLICANT: Hank Koning, Architect
PROPERTY OWNER: NXT2 SHUTTERS, LLC
CASE PLANNER: Russell Bunim, AICP, Acting Senior Planner
REQUEST: Three Appeals of Planning Commission’s approval of a
Development Review Permit, Waiver, and Major
Modification to allow a new five-story (47 feet) 81,630
square-foot mixed project consisting of 83 residential
units, 2,000 square-feet of ground floor commercial
space, and 273 automobile parking spaces within a
three-level subterranean parking garage. Waiver
application seeking relief from the Active Commercial
Design standard which requires the ground floor level
along commercial boulevards not to exceed 18 inches
lower or higher from the adjacent sidewalk. The
proposed project has a ground floor level 36 inches
above the adjacent sidewalk. Major Modification
application seeking relief from the Active Commercial
Design standard which requires the ground floor (floor to
floor) height to be within 11 feet to 16 feet. The proposed
project has a ground floor (floor to floor) height of 19 feet.
The 83 residential units are intended for use by persons
as their permanent place of residence and shall not be
used as Corporate Housing or Lodging for persons who
intend their occupancy to be temporary. Consistent with
Proposition S, this project does not propose or constitute
an expansion of any hotel use. Other than continuation
of the use of the property by Hotel Casa Del Mar for
2
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
parking for guests, visitors and/or employees of that
hotel, there shall be no hotel amenities from the adjacent
hotel -- e.g., housekeeping, valet (except as referenced
above), food/room service -- provided at the Project.
In connection with providing up to 16 affordable units in
this project, the developer shall coordinate with the
City's Housing Division and an agency to facilitate
support services for the households occupying the
affordable units in the project, and make every effort to
coordinate and complement the services of other similar
providers for affordable residents of 50% income
households or greater in the neighboring area. The
support services shall be in place prior to the issuance
of certificate of occupancy of the affordable units.
Waiver application seeking relief from the Active
Commercial Design (ACD) Standard which requires the
ground floor level along commercial boulevards not to
exceed 18 inches lower or higher from the adjacent
sidewalk. The proposed project has a ground floor level
36 inches above the adjacent sidewalk on Pico
Boulevard.
Major Modification application seeking relief from the
ACD Standard which requires the ground floor (floor to
floor) height to be within 11 feet to 16 feet. The proposed
project has a ground floor (floor to floor) height of 19 feet
in the commercial space located at the corner of Ocean
Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Twelve 50% income units (6 one-bedroom, 5 two-
bedroom, and 1 three-bedroom) deed-restricted
affordable units located on-site. Additionally, four 50%
income units from 1921 Ocean Front Walk will be
located on-site (2 one-bedroom, 1 two-bedroom, and 1
three-bedroom)
CEQA STATUS: An EIR was prepared to analyze the potential
environmental effects of the 1921 Ocean Front Walk
Project and the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project. The EIR
analyzes the impacts of each project individually and
cumulatively. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was
published on September 13, 2016 for a 30-day comment
period. On April 10, 2018, a Notice of Completion and
Public Availability of the Draft EIR was published,
3
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
commencing a 45-day public comment period for the
Draft EIR. The Final EIR was published on August 30,
2018, and certified by the Planning Commission on
October 3, 2018.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
April 23, 2019 Determination Date
Appeal granted based on the following findings.
X
Appeal Denied; Application approved based on the following
findings and subject to the conditions below.
Other:
EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS IF NOT
APPEALED:
April 23, 2019
EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS
GRANTED:
October 22, 2022
LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE EXTENSION
OF EXPIRATION DATES:
12 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 evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such
summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
FINDINGS
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMITS FINDINGS
A. The physical location, size, massing, setbacks, pedestrian orientation, and
placement of proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses
within the project are consistent with applicable standards and are both compatible
and relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods in that the
proposed project includes a mixed-use commercial and residential building that
complies with the Oceanfront (OF) and Beach Overlay (BCH) Districts
development standards. The proposed commercial and residential land uses
relate harmoniously to the existing land uses including hotels, multi-family housing,
and retail along Ocean Avenue, Pico Boulevard, and Vicente Terrace. The building
includes outdoor dining with the commercial tenant space on the gro und floor at
4
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
the corner of Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard. The restaurant is 2,000 square
feet maximum, which is consistent with Proposition S, codified in the BCH District.
The project complies with the height, setbacks, and pedestrian orientation
requirements for commercial uses in the OF District. Additionally, the project is
setback 15 to 22 feet along Vicente Terrace, which is an additional 10 feet or more
beyond the required five-foot setback and provides an upper-floor stepback on
Vicente Terrace which is across the street from low-scale and low-density
residential uses and a potential historic district.
B. The rights-of-way can accommodate autos, bicycles, pedestrians, and multi-modal
transportation methods, including adequate parking and access, in that the project
will provide 273 parking spaces in a three-level subterranean garage with vehicle
access from Pico Boulevard. Furthermore, the project includes pedestrian
entrances to the residential units from Ocean Avenue, Pico Boulevard, and Vicente
Terrace and pedestrian access to the commercial tenant spaces from Ocean
Avenue and Pico Boulevard. 17 (4 commercial and 13 residential) short-term
bicycle spaces are located along the building frontages on Pico Boulevard and
Ocean Avenue. 130 (4 commercial and 126 residential) long-term bicycle places
will be provided.
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 in an urbanized area that is already adequately served by
existing City infrastructure. No new safety services or public infrastructure will be
required for this project.
D. The project is generally consistent with the Municipal Code, General Plan, and a ny
applicable Specific Plan, in that the project is located in the Oceanfront District land
use designation in the LUCE. The development parameters in the LUCE are
implemented in the Zoning Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. The proposed project
complies with all of the development standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed development is also consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies in the LUCE. Specifically, Policy D18.2 seeks to respect the scale and
character of the district’s existing residential areas in the design and construction
of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages visitor serving uses consistent with
Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between Colorado
Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
The proposed project complies with these goals and policies in that it is a mixed-
use building with a small ground floor café facing Ocean Avenue and Pico
Boulevard with residential as the proposed use on the upper floors. The project’s
height and mass are consistent with height and mass of the neighboring hotels
(Shutters and Viceroy) and is setback from the low-density multi-family residential
on Vicente Terrace on the lower floors and steps back on the upper -floor.
5
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
The Oceanfront District designation is intended to maintain and enhance the
Oceanfront District as an important visitor serving destination with lodging,
restaurants, shopping and recreation, as well as to protect the existing residential
enclaves in the area. The unique character and scale of the area is maintain ed,
centering on the Landmark Santa Monica Pier. New residential and commercial
uses are consistent with the character of existing buildings and improvements.
As little change is expected to occur within this District, many of the existing uses
remain, including residential, local and visitor-serving uses such as restaurants,
hotels, beach clubs, and public facilities. Existing hotels may remodel and rebuild,
not to exceed existing floor area and building footprint, in accordance with
Proposition S. Future uses protect the residential enclaves, maintaining the
existing character of the Oceanfront District, and support its function as a local and
regional recreational amenity.
The proposed project complies with these goals and policies in that the mixed -use
residential and commercial building is designed with an inviting and activated
ground floor, includes a variety of housing unit types and affordability, and formed
in a manner that is sensitive to the context of the adjacent properties. Lastly, the
commercial tenant space intended for a restaurant use is no more than 2,000
square- feet consistent with Proposition S.
E. Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant
environmental impacts or any potentially significant envir onmental impacts have
been reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures
incorporated in the project.
In accordance with CEQA, an EIR was prepared to analyze the potential
environmental effects of the 1921 Ocean Front Walk Project and the 1828 Ocean
Avenue Project. While the Projects would require two separate development
review permits, both projects are analyzed together in the EIR as required by
CEQA. Under CEQA, an agency cannot "piecemeal" the environmental review for
a project. Per CEQA, a "project" is defined as the "whole of the action." An EIR
must include an analysis of the environmental effects of the project, which includes
a future expansion or other action if: (1) it is a reasonably foreseeable
consequence of the initial project; and (2) the future expansion or action will be
significant in that it will likely change the scope or nature of the initial project or its
environmental effects. In the case of the 1828 Ocean Avenue Project and the 1921
Ocean Front Walk Project, the affordable housing requirement for the 1921 Ocean
Front Walk Project may be provided off -site at 1828 Ocean Avenue (affordable
housing Scenario A). The EIR clearly provides an analysis of each site
independently while also evaluating the potential fo r combined effects given the
proximity of the Project Sites.
In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Preparation
(NOP) was published on September 13, 2016 for a 30-day comment period which
indicated the City’s intent to prepare an EIR for both projects. The NOP was
6
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
distributed to Federal, State, Regional, and City agencies, neighborhood groups,
and occupants and owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project sites and was
published on the City’s Planning and Community Development website.
Additionally, a public scoping meeting was held on October 20, 2016, to present
the projects and receive comments on the scope of the EIR.
On April 10, 2018, a Notice of Completion and Public Availability of the Draft EIR
was published, commencing a 45-day public comment period for the Draft EIR.
The environmental issues studied in detail in the Draft EIR include:
Aesthetics
Air Quality
Construction Effects
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Neighborhood Effects
Noise and Vibration
Population and Housing
Fire Protection
Police Protection
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities – Wastewater and Water Supply
Other issue areas such as Agricultural/Forestry Resources, Biological Resources,
Mineral Resources, Neighborhood Effects, Recreation, and Solid Waste were
determined to be less than significant in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the EIR).
The Final EIR, which was published in August 2018, contains all comments and
responses to comments received during the comment period as well as minor
changes to the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR was available for a 45 -day public review
period, during which a total of 9 comment letters were received. Most of the
comment letters were from members of the public and 2 were from commenting
agencies.
Comments were raised regarding the mass/scale of the buildings, traffic impacts
of the projects, and concerns regarding short-term rentals of the residential units.
Responses to all comments received are included in the Final EIR.
Significant Impacts
7
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Based on the analysis provided in the EIR, there are no significant and unavoidable
impacts associated with the 1921 Ocean Front Walk Project or the 1828 Ocean
Avenue Project (individually and on a cumulative basis).
8
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Alternatives Studied
Although there were no significant environmental impacts identified. In accordance
with CEQA, the EIR studied five alternatives to the projects, which are intended to
reduce the environmental impacts of the projects:
Alternative 1 – No Project/No Build (Existing Conditions)
Alternative 2 – Projects with Less than 7,500 square feet
Alternative 3 – Tier 1 Development with On-Site Affordable Housing
Alternative 4 – Tier 2 Development with Reduced FAR and Reduced Density
Alternative 5 – Tier 1 Development with Reduced Density
Environmentally Superior Alternative
In general, the environmentally superior alternative as defined by CEQA should
minimize adverse impacts to the project site and its surrounding environment. Of
the alternatives considered, the "No Project/No Build Alternative” does not create
any new impacts; therefore, it is environmentally superior to the project, which
proposes to change existing conditions. However, the No Project/No Build
Alternative does not meet any of the project objectives. CEQA Guidelines section
15126.6 states that if the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project/No
Build Alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative
from among the other alternatives.
The remaining alternatives were reviewed in accordance with the State CEQA
Guidelines requirement to identify an environmentally superior Alternative other
than the No Project/No Build Alternative. Of the remaining Alternatives, Alternative
2, with 4,999 sf of cultural use and 2,500 sf restaurant at the 1921 Ocean Front
Walk Site, would be the environmentally superior alternative. However, Alternative
2 would not meet the project objectives and would violate P roposition S. Further,
while Alternative 2 would incrementally reduce environmental impacts, it would not
be supportive of City goals and policies to accommodate housing needs and
sustainable development patterns to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The proje ct as
proposed would provide a higher level of community benefits and greater support
for the goals and policies related to the provision of in -fill housing development in
high quality transit areas.
F. The project promotes the general welfare of the community in that it allows for the
redevelopment of existing, underutilized property with a mixed -use project that is
compliant with the LUCE vision for the area. The proposed project provides 83
residential units and features space for a neighborhood serving ground-floor
commercial use. Further, the project would provide community benefits including
four additional affordable residential units for a total of twelve units (15% of the
project) affordable to 50% income level households, a specified market -rate unit
mix of 15% studios, 50% one-bedrooms, 20% two-bedrooms, and 15% three
bedrooms, an average number of bedrooms for the market -rate units of at least
1.2, enhanced development impact fees (i.e. Transportation Impact Fee, Parks &
Recreation Impact Fee) 14% above the base fee, and enhanced Transportation
9
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Demand Management elements such as 75% transportation allowance and free
bike valet for the commercial uses if vehicle valet is provided.
G. The project has no unacceptable adverse effects on public health or safety in that
the project is a mixed-use project consisting of residential uses and is designed to
accommodate neighborhood-serving commercial uses. The commercial uses are
located along Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard, which is an appropriate location
given other commercial uses in the area. The project complies with all
development standards in the Zoning Ordinance and conditions of approval for
project operations ensure that the project will not adversely affect public health or
safety.
H. The project provides Community Benefits consistent with Chapter 9.23 of the
Zoning Ordinance in that it provides 50% more affordable housing units than would
be required by the City’s Affordable Housing Production Program, a minimum unit
mix, a minimum average number of bedrooms, and enhanced development fees
14% above the base fee for the Transportation Impact Fee and Parks and
Recreation Impact Fee (i.e. Open Space). As a result, the project would provide
community benefits including 12 residential units (15% of the project) affordable to
50% income level households, a specified market -rate unit mix of 15% studios,
50% one-bedrooms, 20% two- bedrooms, and 15% three bedrooms, an average
number of bedrooms for the market- rate units of at least 1.2, enhanced
development impact fees (i.e. Transportation Impact Fee, Parks & Recreation
Impact Fee) 14% above the base fee, and enhanced Transportation Demand
Management elements such as 75% transportation allowance and free bike valet
for the commercial uses if vehicle valet is provided.
WAIVER AND MAJOR MODIFICATION FINDINGS
A. The requested modification is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable
area or specific plan in that the project is located in Oceanfront District land use
designation in the LUCE.
Waiver
The development parameters in the LUCE are implemented in the Zoning
Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. Specifically, Policy D18.2 seeks to respect the scale
and character of the district’s existing residential areas in the design and
construction of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages visitor serving uses
consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between
Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard. The proposed project is consistent with the
LUCE in that it provides a small 2,000 square-foot commercial tenant space in the
Oceanfront District. The commercial tenant space is even with the sidewalk level,
but since the property slopes approximately seven percent on a corner property,
the level tenant space is 36 inches higher than the sidewa lk along Pico Boulevard.
10
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Major Modification
The development parameters in the LUCE are implemented in the Zoning
Ordinance for Tier 2 projects. Specifically, Policy D18.2 seeks to respect the scale
and character of the district’s existing residential areas in the design and
construction of new buildings and Policy D18.8 encourages visitor serving uses
consistent with Proposition S in commercial areas west of Ocean Avenue between
Colorado Avenue and Pico Boulevard. In an effort to align the ground floor of the
café at sidewalk grade on Ocean Avenue and align the residential units above the
café with the residential levels, the floor height exceeds the maximum 16 feet. The
applicant has proposed a design in which the floor to ceiling height would be 15
feet and is therefore trying to comply with the intent of the ACD standard. From the
interior and exterior of the building, the project will have the appearance of code
compliance. As depicted on Sheet A50 of the project plans, the ceiling will have a
4-foot ceiling thickness.
B. The project as modified meets the intent and purpose of the applicable zone
districts in that the project is located in the OF and BCH Districts and complies with
the established property development standards that govern height, FAR, and
setbacks of the proposed building. The OF District was intended to: (A) Maintain
and enhance the beach area as an important visitor -serving destination with
lodging, restaurants, shopping, and recreation that support it as a regional,
national, and international tourist destination, (B) Preserve the unique scale,
character, and uses along the Ocean Front Walk and on the Santa Monica Pier,
(C) Protect the existing residential mix in the area while providing for coastal -
related, lodging, dining, recreation, and shopping needs of tourists and others in
the oceanfront area. Conditionally permit other uses such as office, new
residential, and cultural uses, and (D) Avoid the deleterious effects of uncontrolled
growth and preserve the unique and diverse character of the Santa Moni ca
oceanfront by limiting the proliferation of excessive hotel, motel, and large
restaurant development in the oceanfront area. The BCH District was intended to
add a new overlay district to the City of Santa Monica’s Zoning Districts. This
initiative ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare of
present and future residents of the City of Santa Monica [the “City”] by avoiding
the deleterious effects of uncontrolled growth in the Beach Overlay District and
preserving the unique and diverse character of the Santa Monica oceanfront. This
purpose is achieved by limiting the proposed proliferation of excessive hotel, motel
and large restaurant development within the Beach Overlay District. Such
development ignores the need to preserve Santa Monica’s greatest asset — its
oceanfront setting, view, and access to coastal resources — and to maintain its
beach and oceanfront parks as open recreational area for present and future
generations.
Waiver
The proposed project’s ground floor aligns with the adjacent sidewalk on Ocean
Avenue. However, since the sidewalk slopes seven percent (36 inches) along the
front of the café on Pico Boulevard over the course of 26 feet (the width of the
11
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
tenant space), the project’s ground floor cannot be located within 18 inches of the
adjacent sidewalk on Pico Boulevard without sinking 18 inches below the Ocean
Avenue sidewalk and requiring people to otherwise step down into the commercial
space from Ocean Avenue. The proposed design meets the intent of the Act ive
Commercial Design standards.
Major Modification
The proposed project has a 19-foot ground floor (floor to floor) height in order for
the building to be constructed with the upper floors to be constructed on the same
surface levels. In an effort to align the ground floor of the café at sidewalk grade
on Ocean Avenue and align the residential units above the café with the residential
levels, the floor height exceeds the maximum 16 feet. The applicant has proposed
a design in which the floor to ceiling height would be 15 feet and is therefore trying
to comply with the intent of ACD standard. From the interior and exterior of the
building, the project will have the appearance of code compliance. As depicted on
Sheet A50 of the project plans, the ceiling will have a 4-foot ceiling thickness.
C. The approval or conditional approval of the requested modification will not be
detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working
on the site or result in a change in land use or density that would be inconsistent
with the requirements of this Ordinance.
Waiver
Specifically, the project is a mixed-use development located in the Oceanfront
District where a mix of uses are permitted. The project will have vehicle access
provided from Pico Boulevard to a subterranean garage on site and there will be
no detrimental impacts to persons in the general vicinity. The driveway and garage
comply with the Hazardous Visual Obstructions (HVO) standards as prescribed in
SMMC Section 9.28.120(B)(4). In order to set the ground floor level with the
sidewalk on Ocean Avenue on a lot that slopes seven percent on Pico Boulevard,
the Waiver allows the tenant space to be 36 inches higher than the sidewalk level
on Pico Boulevard.
Major Modification
Specifically, the project is a mixed-use development located in the Oceanfront
District where a mix of uses are permitted. The project will have vehicle access
provided from Pico Boulevard to a subterranean garage on site and there will be
no detrimental impacts to persons in the general vicinity. The driveway and garage
comply with the Hazardous Visual Obstructions (HVO) standards as prescribed in
SMMC Section 9.28.120(B)(4).
D. The approval of the requested modification is justified by environmental features,
site conditions, location of existing improvements, architecture or sustainability
considerations, or retention of historic features or mature trees in that the project
is proposed on property in a neighborhood consisting of a variety of buildings types
and uses.
12
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Waiver
The request is justified by the site condition containing an approximate 7 percent
slope along Pico Boulevard which creates a 36 inch grade differential for the
commercial space which has a ground floor at the same grade as the sidewalk on
Ocean Avenue.
Major Modification
The request is justified by the site condition containing an approximate 7 percent
slope along Pico Boulevard and the practical difficulty of constructing a building
with even floor plates on the upper levels and complying with a m inimum ground
floor (floor to floor) height on a sloping project site.
E. The proposed design meets the Design Objectives of the Santa Monica Design
Guidelines, Division 4: Administration and Permits 4.33 in that the Santa Monica
Design Guidelines have not been established, and therefore the proposed Waiver
and Major Modification requests are not subject to design criteria.
F. The proposed project will not significantly affect the properties in the immediate
neighborhood as a result of approval or conditio nal approval of the Waiver and
Major Modification or be incompatible with the neighborhood character.
Waiver
The request for a 36 inch grade differential for the commercial space on Pico
Boulevard does not increase the overall height and scale or the densi ty of the
proposed development. Specifically, the request allows the building to have a
ground floor for the commercial space to be level with Ocean Avenue.
Major Modification
The request for a 19-foot-tall ground floor (floor to floor) height does not increase
the overall height and scale or the density of the proposed development.
Specifically, the request would allow the construction of the two residential levels
above the commercial tenant space to be at the same level as the other three
buildings on the site which is a preferred design for ADA accessibility. Otherwise,
the building would need to incorporate stairs and lifts as residents walk around the
building on the residential floors.
G. The subject property is currently vacant. The proposed Waiver and Major
Modification requests do not affect a City-Designated Historic Resource.
13
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
MITIGATION MEASURES AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Section A - Final EIR Mitigation Measures
MM-ARCH-1:
1. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards (qualified Archaeologist) to oversee an archaeological monitor who shall
be present during construction excavations such as clearing/grubbing, grading,
trenching, or any other construction excavation activity associated with the Project.
The frequency of monitoring shall be based on the rate of excavation and grading
activities, the materials being excavated (younger sediments vs. older sediments),
and the depth of excavation, and if found, the abundance and type of archaeological
resources encountered. Full-time monitoring may be reduced to part-time
inspections, or ceased entirely, if determined adequate by the qualified
Archaeologist. Prior to commencement of excavation activities, an Archaeological
Sensitivity Training shall be given for construction personnel. The training session,
shall be carried out by the qualified Archaeologist and will focus on how to identify
archaeological resources that may be encountered during earthmoving activities and
the procedures to be followed in such an event.
MM-ARCH-2:
2. In the event that historic (e.g., bottles, foundations, refuse dumps/privies, etc.) or
prehistoric (e.g., hearths, burials, stone tools, shell and faunal bone remains, etc.)
archaeological resources are unearthed, ground -disturbing activities shall be halted
or diverted away from the vicinity of the find so that the find can be evaluated. An
appropriate buffer area shall be established by the qualified Archaeologist around the
find where construction activities shall not be allowed to continue. Work shall be
allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. All archaeological resources unearthed
by Project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified Archaeologist. If
the resources are prehistoric or Native American in origin, the Applicant shall retain
a Native American representative from a Gabrielino Tribe who shall be present to
monitor further construction excavations and shall coordinate with the City and
Qualified Archaeologist regarding the treatment and curation of any prehistoric
archaeological resources. If a resource is determined by the qualified Archaeologist
to constitute a “historical resource” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)
or a “unique archaeological resource” pursuant to Public Resources Code Section
21083.2(g), the qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the Applicant and the
City to develop a formal treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the
resources. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public
Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources.
Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If
preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of
archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with
14
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any archaeological material
collected shall be curated at a public, non -profit institution with a research interest in
the materials, such as the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the
material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be donated
to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
MM-ARCH-3:
3. Prior to the release of the grading bond that is required for a grading permit to
guarantee that grading will be completed in conformity with the approved building
plans and terms of the grading permit, the qualified Archaeologist shall prepare a final
report and appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation Site Forms at
the conclusion of archaeological monitoring. The report shall include a description of
resources unearthed, if any, treatment of the resources, results of the artifact
processing, analysis, and research, and evaluation of the resources with respect to
the California Register of Historical Resources and CEQA. The report and the Site
Forms shall be submitted by the Project applicant to the City, the South Central
Coastal Information Center, and representatives of other appropriate or concerned
agencies to signify the satisfactory completion of the development and required
mitigation measures.
MM-ARCH-4:
4. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during implementation of the
Project, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as
to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the
NAHC. The NAHC shall then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely
Descendent (MLD). The MLD may, with the permission of the land owner, or his or
her authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American
remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the
excavation work means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human
remains and any associated grave goods. The MLD shall complete their inspection
and make their recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access by the land
owner to inspect the discovery. The recommendation may inc lude the scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with
Native American burials. Upon the discovery of the Native American remains, the
landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally ac cepted
cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human
remains are located, is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until
the landowner has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in this mitigation measure,
with the MLD regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the
possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with
the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for
treatment. Whenever the NAHC is unable to identify a MLD, or the MLD identified
fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner or his or her authorized
15
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
representative rejects the recommendation of the descendants and the mediation
provided for in Subdivision (k) of Section 5097.94, if invoked, fails to provide
measures acceptable to the landowner, the landowner or his or her authorized
representative shall inter the human remains and items associated with Native
American human remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not
subject to further and future subsurface disturbance.
MM-PALEO-1:
5. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
Paleontologist to develop and implement a paleontological monit oring program for
construction excavations that would encounter older Quaternary alluvial sediments
(associated with sediments below six feet deep across the Project Site). The qualified
Paleontologist hold a pregrading/excavation meeting for construction personnel to
discuss the monitoring program and how to identify paleontological resources that
may be encountered during earthmoving activities, and the procedures to be followed
in such an event. A qualified Paleontologist is defined as a paleontologist m eeting
the criteria established by the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology. The qualified
Paleontologist shall supervise a paleontological monitor who shall be present at such
times as required by the Paleontologist during construction excavations into old er
alluvial sediments. Monitoring shall consist of visually inspecting fresh exposures of
rock for larger fossil remains and, where appropriate, collecting wet or dry screened
sediment samples of promising horizons for smaller fossil remains. The frequency of
monitoring inspections shall be determined by the qualified Paleontologist and shall
be based on the rate of excavation and grading activities, the materials being
excavated, and the depth of excavation, and if found, the abundance and type of
fossils encountered. Full-time monitoring can be reduced to part-time inspections, or
ceased entirely, if determined adequate by the qualified Paleontologist.
MM-PALEO-2:
6. If a potential fossil is found, the paleontological monitor shall be allowed to temporaril y
divert or redirect grading and excavation activities in the area of the exposed fossil to
facilitate evaluation of the discovery. An appropriate buffer area shall be established
by the qualified Paleontologist around the find where construction activitie s shall not
be allowed to continue. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area.
At the qualified Paleontologist’s discretion, and to reduce any construction delay, the
grading and excavation contractor shall assist in removing rock/sediment samples for
initial processing and evaluation. If preservation in place is not feasible, the qualified
Paleontologist shall implement a paleontological salvage program to remove the
resources from their location. Any fossils encountered and recovered sh all be
prepared to the point of identification and catalogued before they are submitted to
their final repository. Any fossils collected shall be curated at a public, non -profit
institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural His tory
Museum of Los Angeles County, if such an institution agrees to accept the fossils. If
no institution accepts the fossil collection, they shall be donated to a local school in
16
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
the area for educational purposes. Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs
shall also be filed at the repository and/or school.
MM-PALEO-3:
7. Prior to the release of the grading bond that is required for a grading permit to
guarantee that grading will be completed in conformity with the approved building plans
and terms of the grading permit, the qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a report
summarizing the results of the monitoring and salvaging efforts, the methodology used in
these efforts, as well as a description of the fossils collected and their significance. The
report shall be submitted by the Applicant to the City, the Natural History Museum of Los
Angeles County, and representatives of other appropriate or concerned agencies to
signify the satisfactory completion of the Project and required mitigation measures.
MM-NOISE-1:
8. Construction Noise Management Plan. A Construction Noise Management Plan shall
be prepared by the applicant and approved by the City. The Plan shall address noise
impacts and outline measures that would be used to reduce impacts. Measures shall
include:
To the extent that they exceed the applicable construction noise limits,
construction activities shall be restricted to between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. Monday through Friday, in accordance with Section 4.12.110(d) of the
SMMC.
The construction contractor(s) shall ensure that construction equipment is
properly maintained and in working order per manufacturer specifications and
that all construction equipment is equipped with manufacturer-approved mufflers
and baffles.
The construction contractor(s) shall place noise-generating construction
equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, to
the extent practical to the satisfaction of the Department of Building and Safety.
All stationary construction equipment will be located and oriented so that emitted
noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the Project Site.
Heavily loaded trucks shall be routed away from residential streets, conforming
to the City’s recommended haul route corridors.
Construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces
of high noise-generating equipment simultaneously, to the extent practical.
The construction contractor(s) shall implement noise attenuation measures,
which may include temporary noise barriers and/or noise blankets placed
between noise-generating construction equipment and activities and the off -site
17
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
noise sensitive receptors to the satisfaction of the City’s Department of Building
and Safety.
MM-NOISE-2:
9. Construction Vibration. The applicant and its contractor(s) shall implement the
following vibration-reduction measures:
The construction contractor(s) shall restrict the use of large bulldozers and other
similarly large vibration-generating equipment, so that the vibration-generating
portion of the equipment (i.e., the motor, engine, power plant, or similar) remains
at the minimum applicable distances shown on Table 4.13 -15 of the EIR as
measured to guest rooms of Shutters on the Beach, and the residential structures
designed for long-term human occupancy along Vicente Terrace, unless it can
be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City based on in -situ measurements
(prior to initiation of full-scale demolition/excavation) that vibration levels can be
kept below the threshold of 80 VdB at vibration sensitive receptor locations where
sleeping occurs through any combination of revised setbacks, alternative
construction equipment, alternative construction methods, alternative
sequencing of activities, or limitations of hours (between 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM)
during which such activity can occur. The vibration measurements, if undertaken,
shall be performed by a qualified acoustician, approved by the City at the
contractor/Applicant’s sole cost.
MM-TRAF-1
10. The applicant shall prepare, implement, and maintain a Construction Traffic
Mitigation Plan (Plan) for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit
to address traffic during construction and shall be designed to:
Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding street network;
Minimize parking 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; and
Provide for coordination with adjacent or nearby construction projects
The Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the following City departments:
Public Works, Fire, Planning and Community Development, and Police, to ensure
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:
18
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction
A detailed 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 area 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. Further, the Plan shall address, in addition to
normal traffic and pedestrian conditions, conditions regarding beach accessibility
and parking, for pedestrians and automobiles, and avoidance of conflicts with
loading activities at the hotels that are adjacent to the Project Site. Such plans
shall be reviewed and approved by the Strategic and Transportation Planning
Division prior to commencement of construction and implemented in accordance
with this approval.
Work within the public right-of-way shall be performed between 9:00 AM and 4:00
PM. This work 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.
Streets and equipment shall be cleaned 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
Permit.
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 parking 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
Construction.
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 Plan).
19
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
The applicant shall obtain a Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation Permit,
Sewer Permit, 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 within the public right-of-way.
The applicant shall provide timely notification of construction schedules to all
affected agencies (e.g., MTA. Big Blue Bus, Police Department, Fire Department,
Public Works Department, and Planning and Community Development
Department) and to all owners and residential and commerc ial 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.
Coordination with MTA regarding construction activities that may impact Metro
bus lines or result in closures lasting over six months shall be initiated at least 30
days in advance of construction activities.
The applicant shall obtain Strategic and Transportation Planning Division
approval of any haul routes for earth, concrete, or construction materials and
equipment hauling.
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Project Specific Conditions
1. The Architectural Review Board shall pay particular attention to the following:
The relationship of the building along Vicente Terrace and Pico Boulevard and
the connectivity to the public sidewalk.
The ground floor commercial tenant space and the connectivity to the sidewalk
along Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard.
The building design on Vicente Terrace and compatibility to the adjacent low
density neighborhood.
The planting design details throughout the project.
The landscaped and open space area on the corner of Ocean Avenue and
Vicente Terrace.
The terraced landscaping on Vicente Terrace should not be dominated by
concrete planter boxes and should create a more natural, soft-planted area.
The pedestrian experience on Pico Boulevard by establishing a visual sense of
arrival at the project site that can be anticipated from up the block.
20
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
On the Pico Boulevard side of the project, consider providing an interactive
feature, work of public art, or other element that would be of interest to
pedestrians on route to the beach.
2. There shall be no construction staging on Vicente Terrace.
3. On Vicente Terrace, no hedges or physical screens are permitted on private open
space areas.
4. The 83 residential units shall not be used for “Corporate Housing” as defined in
SMMC Section 9.51.020(A)(2), or successor thereto, nor as “Lodging” as defined
in SMMC Section 9.51.020(B)(15).
5. The garage vent on the rooftop shall be located at least 50 feet from the northern
property line and the exhaust from that vent shall be directed towards the south.
6. Except as to the relief granted by the Major Modification (18ENT-0226) and Waiver
(18ENT-0227), the project shall comply with SMMC Sections 9.11.030(A-C)
regulating the Active Commercial Design, Active Use, Pedestrian -Oriented
Design, and Build-to Line design requirements for the ground floor street frontage
of new buildings on commercial boulevards.
7. Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.23.030(D) the project shall provide the following
community benefits:
a. Affordable Housing: Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC)
Chapter 9.64, the project is subject to the City's Affordable Housing
Production Program which requires the proposed 83-unit housing project to
provide one of the following: 1) five percent of the total units of the project
for 30% income households, 2) ten percent of the total units of the project
for 50% income households, or 3) twenty percen t of the total units of the
project for 80% income households. Pursuant to SMMC Section
9.23.030(A)(1), the applicant is required to provide at least 50% more
affordable housing units than would be required pursuant to Section
9.64.050. The applicant has elected to provide ten percent of the total units
of the project for 50% income households. Additionally, in a Tier 2 project,
the applicant will be providing a community benefit for 50% over the amount
required.
b. Unit Mix: Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.23.030(A)(2), the project is required
to have a varied unit mix of at least 15% three-bedroom units, at least 20%
two-bedroom units, and no more than 15% studio units with the average
number of bedrooms greater than 1.2. The average number of bedrooms of
the affordable units shall be equal to or greater than the market rate units.
c. Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee: Pursuant to SMMC Section
9.23.030(A)(3), no building permit shall be issued for the project until the
21
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
applicant pays an Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee of 14
percent above the base fee applicable at the time of issuance of the building
permit for that portion of the commercial floor area above the maximum Tier
1 floor area allowed by the Zoning Ordinance.
d. Transportation Impact Fee: Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.23.030(B), no
building permit shall be issued for the project until the applicant pays a
Transportation Impact Fee of 14 percent above the base fee applicable at
the time of issuance of the building permit for that portion o f the floor area
above the maximum Tier 1 floor area allowed by the Zoning Ordinance.
e. Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee: Pursuant to SMMC
Section 9.23.030(C), no building permit shall be issued for the project until
the applicant pays a Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee of 14
percent above the base fee applicable at the time of issuance of the building
permit for that portion of the floor area above the maximum Tier 1 floor area
allowed by the Zoning Ordinance.
f. Transportation Demand Management: The applicant shall include the TDM
measures required by SMMC Section 9.23.030(D) in the project’s TDM
Plan.
g. Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.64.090, the Parks and Recreation
Development Impact Fee described in SMMC Chapter 9.67, the
Transportation Impact Fee described in SMMC Chapter 9.66, and the Child
Care Linkage Fee described in SMMC Chapter 9.65 shall be waived for
required affordable housing units. Prioritization of potential occupants of the
on-site affordable housing unit(s) shall be in accordance with the Affordable
Housing Production Program Ordinance Guidelines. Developer hereby
acknowledges that in approving a Development Review Permit for the
Project, the City is waiving fees and modifying development standards
otherwise applicable to the Project such as increasing the Floor Area Ratio
and Building Height, and other property development standards. In
exchange for such forms of assistance from the City, which constitute direct
financial contributions to the Developer, Developer will en ter into a contract
with the City prior to issuance of a building permit which among other
conditions will require Developer to provide and maintain twelve units on
site for this project and four units as off -site for the market-rate project at
1921 Ocean Front Walk, all sixteen of which shall be available to and
occupied by Fifty Percent Income Households at Affordable Rent, as
defined by Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.64. The Developer
agrees and acknowledges that this contract will provide forms of assistance
to the Developer within the meaning of Civil Code Section 1954.52(b) and
Chapter 4.3 of the State Planning and Zoning Laws, Government Code
Section 65915 et seq.
22
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Administrative
8. The approval of this permit shall expire if the rights granted are not exercised within
three and a half years (for projects in the Coastal Zone) from the permit’s effective
date. Exercise of rights shall mean issuance of a building permit to commence
construction.
9. Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.37.110(D), if the Building Official determines that
another building permit has been issued less than fifteen months prior to the date
on which the building permit for this project has received all plan check approvals
and none of the relevant exceptions specified in Sections 9.37.110(C) and (E)
apply, the Building Official shall place the project on a waiting list in order of the
date and time of day that the permit application received all plan check approvals,
and the term of this approval and other City approvals or permits nece ssary to
commence the project shall be automatically extended by the amount of time that
a project remains on the waiting list. However, the permit shall also expire if the
building permit expires, if final inspection is not completed or a Certificate of
Occupancy is not issued within the time periods specified in SMMC Section
8.08.060. One 1-year extension for projects with residential components may be
permitted if approved by the Director of Planning. Applicant is on notice that time
extensions shall not be granted if development standards or the development
process relevant to the project have changed since project approval. Extension
requests to a subdivision map must be approved by the Planning Commission.
10. 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.
11. Within ten days of City Planning Division transmittal of the Statement of Official
Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official
Action prepared by the City Planning Division, agreeing to the conditions of
approval and acknowledging that failure to comply with such conditions shall
constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. By signing same,
applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights applicant may possess regarding
said conditions. The signed Statement shall be returned to the City Planning
Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds for potential
permit revocation.
12. Within thirty (30) days after final approval of the project, a sign shall be posted on
site stating the date and nature of the approval. The sign shall be posted in
accordance with the Zoning Administrator guidelines and shall remain in place until
a building permit is issued for the project. The sign shall be removed promptly
when a building permit is issued for the project or upon expiration of the Design
Review Permit.
Indemnity
23
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
13. Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its boards,
commissions, agents, officers, and employees (collectively, "City") from any
claims, actions, or proceedings (individually referenced as "Claim" and collectively
referenced as "Claims") against the City to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the
approval of this Development Review Permit concerning the Applicant's proposed
project, or any Claims brought against the City due to the acts or omissions in any
connected to the Applicant's project. City shall promptly notify the applicant of any
Claim and shall cooperate fully in the defense. Nothing contained in this paragraph
prohibits the City from participating in the defense of any Claims, if both of the
following occur:
(1) The City bears its own attorney's fees and costs.
(2) The City defends the action in good faith.
Applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the
settlement is approved by the Applicant.
In the event any such action is commenced to attack, set aside, void or annul all,
or any, provisions of any approvals granted for the Project, or is commenced for
any other reason against the City for the act or omissions relating to the Applicant's
project, within fourteen (14) days following notice of such action from the City, the
Applicant shall file with the City a performance bond or irrevocable letter of credit,
or other form of security satisfactory to the City ("the Security") in a form
satisfactory to the City, and in the amount of $100,000 to ensure applicant's
performance of its defense, indemnity and hold harmless obligations to City. The
Security amount shall not limit the Applicant's obligations to the City hereunder.
The failure of the Applicant to provide the Security shall be deemed an express
acknowledgment and agreement by the Applicant that the City shall have the
authority and right, without consent of the Applicant, to revoke the approvals
granted hereunder.
Conformance with Approved Plans
14. This approval is for those plans dated March 8, 2019, a copy of which shall be
maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be
consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of
approval.
15. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of
Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to Planning
Commission Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the plans
submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review
Board, or Director of Planning.
16. 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
24
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
and General Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica prior to building permit
issuance.
Fees
17. As required by California Government Code Section 66020, the project applicant
is hereby notified that the 90-day period has begun as of the date of the approval
of this application, in which the applicant may protest any fees, dedications,
reservations, or other exactions imposed by the City as part of the approval or as
a condition of approval of this development. The fees, dedications, reservations,
or other exactions are described in the approved plans, conditions of approval,
and/or adopted city fee schedule.
18. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with
the requirements of Chapter 9.30 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Private
Developer Cultural Arts Requirement.
19. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with
the requirements of Chapter 9.65 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, the Child
Care Linkage Program.
20. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with
the requirements of Chapter 9.66 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, the
Transportation Impact Fee Program.
21. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with
the requirements of Chapter 9.53, the Transportation Demand Management Fee.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
22. 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 project 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 Departmen t, the
Planning and Community Development Department and the Finance 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
responsibilities. 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.
25
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
Cultural Resources
23. If any archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation or construction,
work in the affected area shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be
contacted to conduct a survey of the affected area at project's owner's expense. A
determination shall then be made by the Director of Planning to determine the
significance of the survey findings and appropriate act ions and requirements, if
any, to address such findings.
Rent Control
24. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary
to demolish, convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental units 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 units pursuant
to the provisions of the Ellis Act.
Project Operations
25. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to
surrounding properties or residents by reason of lights, noise, activities, parking or
other actions.
26. No exterior activity such as trash disposal, disposal of bottles or noise generating
trash, deliveries or other maintenance activity generating noise audible from the
exterior of the building shall occur during the hours of 11:00pm to 7:00am daily. In
addition, there shall be no outdoor cleaning of the propert y with pressurized or
mechanical equipment during the hours of 9:00pm to 7:00am daily. Trash
containers shall be secured with locks.
Final Design
27. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash enclosures, and signage shall
be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Board.
28. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 9.26.040 (Landscaping
Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance including use of water -conserving
landscaping materials, landscape maintenance and other standards contained in
the Subchapter.
29. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in
accordance with SMMC Sections 9.21.100, 9.21.130 and 9.21.140. Refuse areas
shall be of a size adequate to meet on -site need, including recycling. The
Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the
screening of such areas and equipment. Any rooftop mechanical equipment shall
be minimized in height and area, and shall be located in such a way as to minimize
26
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
noise and visual impacts to surrounding properties. Unless otherwise approved by
the Architectural Review Board, rooftop mechanical equipment shall be located at
least five feet from the edge of the roof. Except for solar hot water heaters, no
residential water heaters shall be located on the roof.
30. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the required front or street side
yard setback areas. The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay
particular attention to the location and screening of such meters.
31. Prior to consideration of the project by the Architectural Review Board, the
applicant shall review disabled access requirements with the Building and Safety
Division and make any necessary changes in the project design to achieve
compliance with such requirements. The Architectural Review Board, in its review,
shall pay particular attention to the aesthetic, landscaping, and setback impacts of
any ramps or other features necessitated by accessibility requirements.
32. As appropriate, the Architectural Review Board shall require the use of anti-graffiti
materials on surfaces likely to attract graffiti.
Construction Plan Requirements
33. During demolition, excavation, and construction, this project shall comply with
SCAQMD Rule 403 to minimize fugitive dust and associated particulate emission,
including but not limited to the following:
All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent
excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least three times daily with
complete coverage, preferably at the start of the day, in the late morning, and
after work is done for the day.
All grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of
high winds (i.e., greater than 20 mph measured as instantaneous wind gusts)
so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
All material transported on and off -site shall be securely covered to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
Soils stockpiles shall be covered.
Onsite vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph.
Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles enter and exit the construction
site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site
each trip.
34. 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.
35. Kitchen facilities including, but not limited to, restaurants, caterers, school
cafeterias, hotels, hospitals, and other commercial cooking facilities must conduct
operations in a manner which avoids causing grease blockages to the City sewer.
27
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
a. A grease interceptor must be installed for all projects with kitchen facilities
as described above unless a variance is granted through City of Santa
Monica Water Resources Protection. The minimum capacity of the
interceptor will be determined using Chapter 10 of the latest California
Plumbing Code. Contributory sources shall include wastewater from kitchen
area including pot sinks, pre-rinse sinks, dishwashers, floor drains, and mat
washing areas. Show the location of the grease interceptor on the plumbing
plans that clearly indicates what drain fixtures will connect to the interceptor.
b. All grease interceptors, regardless of size, shall be equipped with a
standard final- stage sample box.
Construction Period
36. 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.
37. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the site shall cover any open
load with a tarpaulin or other secure covering to minimize dust emissions.
Immediately after commencing dirt removal from the site, the general contractor
shall provide the City of Santa Monica with written certification that all trucks
leaving the site are covered in accordance with this condition of approval.
38. Developer shall prepare a notice, subject to the review by the Director of Planning
and Community Development, that lists all construction mitigation requirements,
permitted hours of construction, and 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 o wners and residents within a 200-foot
radius from the subject site at least five (5) days prior to the start of construction.
39. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consistent with the public
hearing sign requirements which shall identify the address and phone number of
the owner and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and
complaints during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours
of permissible construction work.
40. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily visible and accessible
location at all times during construction at the project site. The pages shall be
laminated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy.
Standard Conditions
41. Lofts or mezzanines shall not exceed 33.3% of the room below unless compliance
with the district's limits on number of stories can be maintained.
28
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
42. Mechanical equipment shall not be located on the side of any building which is
adjacent to a residential building on the adjoining lot, unless otherwise pe rmitted
by applicable regulations. Roof locations may be used when the mechanical
equipment is installed within a sound-rated parapet enclosure.
43. Final approval of any mechanical equipment installation will require a noise test in
compliance with SMMC Section 4.12.040. Equipment for the test shall be provided
by the owner or contractor and the test shall be conducted by the owner or
contractor. A copy of the noise test results on mechanical equipment shall be
submitted to the Community Noise Officer for review to ensure that noise levels do
not exceed maximum allowable levels for the applicable noise zone.
44. Construction period signage shall be subject to the approval of the Architectural
Review Board.
45. The property owner shall insure any graffiti on the site is promptly removed through
compliance with the City’s graffiti removal program.
MOBILITY DIVISION
46. Developer shall comply with SMMC Chapter 9.53, Transportation Demand
Management, including payment of the Developer Annual TDM Fee pursuant to
Section 9.53.110.
47. Final auto parking, bicycle parking and loading layouts specifications shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Mobility Division:
48. Where a driveway, garage, 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 9.21.180.
49. 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 Mobility
Manager but shall not exceed a twenty percent slope.
50. Bicycle parking provided in the Project shall meet the requirements of SMMC
Section 9.28.140.
PUBLIC LANDSCAPE
51. Street trees shall be maintained, relocated 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 trees shall be removed
without the approval of the Public Landscape Division.
52. 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
29
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
zones established in accordance with the Urban Forest Master Plan. All tree
protection zones shall remain in place until demolition and/or construction has
been completed.
53. Replace or plant new street trees in accordance with Urban Forest Master Plan
and in consultation with City Arborist.
OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
54. 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 elects to enroll in the program, enrollment shall occur prior to submittal
of plans for Architectural Review and an incentive agreement shall be executed
with Southern California Edison prior to issuance of a building permit.
55. 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, the
project shall meet the landscape water conservation and construction and
demolition waste diversion requirements specified in Section 8.108 of the Santa
Monica Municipal Code.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PWD)
General Conditions
56. Developer shall be responsible for the payment of the following Public Works
Department (PWD) permit 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 Waste 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 demolition 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
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
$30,000. All demolition only permits require a $1,000 deposit or $1.00 per
square 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.
57. Any construction related work or use of the public right-of-way will be required to
obtain the approval 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.
58. 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.
59. 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.
60. Upon commencement of construction, a sign shall be posted on the property in a
manner consistent with the public hearing sign requirements, which shall identify
the address and phone number of the owner, developer and contractor for the
purposes of responding to questions and complaints during the construction
period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours of permissible construction work.
61. 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
asbestos survey shall be performed by a state Certified Asbestos Consultant
(CAC). The report shall include a section on lead, which shall be performed by a
state Certified Lead Inspector/Assessor. Additional hazardous materials to be
considered by the industrial hygienist shall include: mercury (in thermostats,
switches, fluorescent light), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (including light
Ballast), and fuels, pesticides, and batteries.
Water Resources
62. 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.
31
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
63. 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.
64. If the project involves dewatering, developer/cont ractor shall contact 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 sear ch for
Order # R4-2003- 0111.
65. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit a sewer
study that shows that the City’s sewer system can accommodate the entire
development. If the study does not show to the satisfaction of the City that the
City’s sewer system can accommodate the entire development, prior to issuance
of the first building permit, the Developer shall be responsible to upgrade any
downstream deficiencies, to the satisfaction of the Water Resources Manager, if
calculations show that the project will cause such mains to receive greater demand
than can be accommodated. Improvement plans shall be submitted to the
Engineering Division. All reports and plans shall also be approved by the Water
Resources Engineer.
66. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit a water
study that shows that the City’s water system can accommodate the entire
development for fire flows and all potable needs. Developer shall be responsible
to upgrade any water flow/pressure deficiencies, to the satisfaction of the Water
Resources Manager, if calculations show that the project will cause such mains to
receive greater demand than can be accommodated. Improvement plans shall be
submitted to the Engineering Division. All reports and plans shall also be approved
by the Water Resources Engineer.
67. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit a
hydrology study of all drainage to and from the site to demonstrate adequacy of
the existing storm drain system for the entire development. Developer shall be
responsible to upgrade any system deficiencies, to the satisfaction of City
Engineer, if calculations show that the project will cause such facilities to receive
greater demand than can be accommodated. All reports and improvement plans
shall be submitted to Engineering Division for review and approval. The study shall
be performed by a Registered Civil Engineer licensed in the State of California.
68. 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 individual water meter or a master meter with sub-meters.
69. All existing sanitary sewer “house connections” to be abandoned, shall be removed
and capped at the “Y” connections.
32
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
70. The fire services and domestic services 3-inches or greater must be above ground,
on the applicant’s site, readily accessible for testing.
71. 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.
72. Ultra-low flow plumbing fixtures are required on all new development and
remodeling where plumbing is to be added, including dual flush toilets, 1.0 gallon
urinals and low flow shower heads.
Urban Water Runoff Mitigation
73. 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 Architectural Review Board
approval, the applicant shall contact PWD to determine applicable requirements,
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 areas 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 exte nt of
grading and topography of the site.
g. Development 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 Septembe r 2,
2011, only individuals who have been certified 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.
33
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
74. Prior to implementing any temporary construction dewate ring 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 & Rights-of-Way
75. 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
designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and
Public Landscape Division.
76. 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.
77. Unless otherwise approved by the PWD, all sidewalks shall be kept clear and
passable during the grading and construction phase of the project.
78. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveways 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 including
architectural concrete, pavers, tree wells, art elements, special landscaping, etc.
79. 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
alley in accordance with City of Santa Monica standards for the full adjacent length
of the property.
Utilities
80. 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 r ight
of way enhancements. Developer shall 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 Telecommunications Room to
Telecommunications Vaults in street, alley and/or sidewalk. Developer will be
34
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
responsible for paying for the connection of each Telecommunications Vault to the
existing City of Santa Monica fiber optic network, or the extension of conduit 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
Santa Monica Information Systems Department prior to approval of project.
a. Project shall comply with any City of Santa Monica issued 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
81. Prior to submittal of plan check application, make arrangements with all affected
utility companies and indicate points of connection 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.
82. Location of Southern California Edison 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 right-of-way.
Resource Recovery and Recycling
83. 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 connected to sewer will be
required. Section 9.21.130 of the SMMC 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 their property for the bins to be
placed for collection.
84. Contact Resource Recovery and Recycling RRR division to obtain dimensions of
the refuse recycling enclosure.
85. Prior to issuance of a building permit, submit a Waste Management Plan, a map
of the enclosure 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) website or contact the
RRR Division for requirements of the Waste Management Plan and to obtain the
35
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
minimum dimensions of the refuse recycling enclosure. The recycling plan shall
include:
List of materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans, and
glass to be recycled;
Location of recycling bins;
Designated recycling coordinator;
Nature and extent of internal and external pick-up service;
Pick-up schedule; and
Plan to inform tenants/ occupants of service.
86. 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.
87. 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, Fire Code, or any other provision of the SMMC.
Construction Period Mitigation
88. A construction 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 shall 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 dewatering 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;
36
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
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;
p. Provide a construction materials 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.
89. Construction Phasing: If the projects at 1828 Ocean Avenue (15ENT -0300) and
1921 Ocean Front Walk (15ENT -0297) are constructed concurrently, the
excavation of one project site shall be completed before the excavation of the other
project site shall be allowed to commence.
90. Construction Equipment: The following requirements applicable to construction
equipment shall included in applicable bid documents and successful contractor(s)
must demonstrate the ability to supply such equipment:
The Project shall utilize off -road diesel-powered construction equipment
that meets or exceeds the CARB and USEPA Tier 4 interim off-road
emissions standards for equipment rated at 50 hp or greater during Project
construction. All equipment rated at 50 hp or greater will be outfitted with
Best Available Control Technology (BACT) devices including a CARB
certified Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filter or equivalent. Implementation of
this feature will minimize diesel particulate matter and NOX emissions
during construction activities. A copy of each unit’s certified tier specification
or model year specification and CARB or SCAQMD operating permit (if
applicable) shall be available upon request at the time of mobilization of
each applicable unit of equipment.
Equipment such as tower cranes and welders shall be electric or alternative
fueled (i.e., non-diesel). To the extent possible, pole power will be made
available for use with electric tools, equipment, lighting, etc.
Alternative-fueled generators shall be used when commercial models that
have the power supply requirements to meet the construction needs o f the
Project are readily available from local suppliers/vendors.
The projects at 1828 Ocean Avenue (15ENT -0300) and 1921 Ocean Front
Walk (15ENT-0297) shall not simultaneously engage in on-road heavy-duty
haul truck or concrete truck activities on any given day of construction
throughout the entire duration of construction. During each day of
37
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
demolition, excavation, or concrete pouring activities, when on-road heavy-
duty demolition or soil haul trucks or concrete trucks are operating for one
of the project sites, no on-road heavy-duty demolition or soil haul trucks or
concrete trucks may be used to transport demolition debris, excavated soil,
or concrete to or from the other project site.
91. Control of VOCs: The Project shall utilize low-emitting materials pursuant to the
requirements of the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code. Indoor
coatings will be limited to 50 grams per liter of VOCs or less.
VOTE: Appeal 18ENT-0390
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
VOTE: Appeal 18ENT-0391
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
VOTE: Appeal 18ENT-0392
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
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.
38
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391, and 18ENT-0392
Statement of Official Action
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final
determination of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Monica.
_____________________________ _____________________________
Denise Anderson-Warren 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
(310) 451-3669
April 19, 2019
VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Appeals from Planning Commission Approval of
83 Unit Mixed-Use Housing Project
Appellants: Unite Here Local 11 et al., SOAR, and William Johnson
Hearing Date: April 23, 2019
Agenda Item 6.A
Applications: DRP 15ENT-0297; Mod. 18ENT-0226; and Waiv. 18ENT-0227
Appeals: 18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391 & 18ENT-0392
Property Address: 1828 Ocean Avenue
Our Client: NXT2 Shutters, LLC
Our File No. 2095.3
Dear Councilmembers:
This letter is submitted on behalf of NXT2 Shutters, LLC, the owner of the
property at 1828 Ocean Avenue. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the
above-referenced mixed-use housing project on December 5, 2018 (by a vote of 5-0,
with two Commissioners absent). Now on appeal, City Staff is recommending its re-
approval by the City Council.
The project site is currently in use as a paved surface parking lot. This project
will provide 83 apartments, including 16 affordable units, without the loss of any existing
housing. The existing parking will be replaced in the project’s subterranean parking
garage.
The project is a Tier 2 project with community benefits as specified by the Zoning
Code. The project was approved by the Planning Commission after two lengthy public
hearings on October 3 and December 5, 2018. The Planning Commission thoroughly
considered and addressed the issues raised yet again in the appeals. The project has
been pending since September 1, 2015.
The project has 16 affordable (1, 2 & 3-bedroom) units, plus 67 market-rate (1, 2,
& 3-bedroom) apartments. There are no studio units. The project also has a small
kutcher@hlkklaw.com
Item 6A
04/23/19
1 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 2
corner café. This project epitomizes the LUCE’s vision, objectives and policies for new
housing in Santa Monica.
Accordingly, this letter asks the City Council to deny the three appeals from the
Planning Commission’s unanimous decision and re-approve this project as
recommended by City Staff. The project can be approved with or without the waiver
and modification that were granted by the Planning Commission.
Under the State Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”) and the City’s Zoning
Ordinance, it would be unlawful for the City Council to deny this project or reduce its
density. The applicant believes the HAA protects both versions of the project that are
being presented to the City Council on appeal--with and without the waiver and
modification; the City Attorney agrees that the HAA protects the version without the
waiver and modification.
I.
BACKGROUND
A. The Property.
1828 Ocean Avenue (“Property”) is located at the northwest corner of Ocean
Avenue and Pico Boulevard (adjacent to Shutters Hotel) and has three street frontages:
Vicente Terrace (north), Ocean Avenue (east) and Pico Boulevard (west). The Property
slopes substantially downward from Ocean Avenue to the west along both Pico
Boulevard and Vicente Terrace. There is a more than 13-foot differential in grade from
Ocean Avenue to the westerly property line.1
The Property consists of a little more than one acre of land. It is improved by a
paved surface parking lot that is utilized for valet parking by the nearby Casa del Mar
Hotel. This parking use of the Property for the Casa del Mar building has continued for
about 30 years.
The Property has 127 parking spaces that will be replaced underground in the
new project. The existing surface parking lot is a poor use of land on a prominent
corner in a transit-rich and pedestrian-friendly urban environment.
Our client has owned the Property for more than 20 years. In 2012, our client
began considering development of a mixed-use (predominantly housing) project at this
1 The property slopes slightly (1’-4”) upward from Pico Boulevard (i.e., the front
parcel line) to Vicente Terrace (i.e., the rear parcel line).
Item 6A
04/23/19
2 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 3
site. In deference to the Zoning Ordinance Update that was then underway, our client
agreed to delay pursuing City entitlements for this site until after the City completed its
Zoning Ordinance Update process. Our client’s objective in waiting was to pursue a
project in compliance with the new Zoning Ordinance.
B. The Project.
The project had two lengthy hearings at the Planning Commission. In deference
to the neighbors on Vicente Terrace, the project was setback an additional five feet from
Vicente Terrace per the Planning Commission’s direction at the conclusion of the first
hearing.2 With that increased setback and other changes to the porches, yards, upper
level stepbacks, planters, landscaping, gates and stoops facing Vicente Terrace--as
well as added glazing on the ground floor facing Ocean Avenue to augment “eyes on
the street”--the project was then approved at the Planning Commission’s second
hearing by a 5-0 vote.
The project will provide 83 new rental housing units, including 16 deed-restricted
affordable units for very low-income households (i.e., households with no more than
50% of the area median income). Twelve of the affordable units satisfy this project’s
affordable housing obligations under the City’s Affordable Housing Production Program
(“AHPP”); the other four affordable units satisfy the affordable housing obligations for
the nearby project at 1921 Ocean Front Walk.
Notably, this project’s affordable housing differs from nearly all recent housing
projects, which take advantage of the AHPP’s extremely low-income unit option (which
allows applicants to provide half the number of units provided in this project). This
project does not do that, instead providing very low income units at double the number
of extremely low units that would have been required.
Additionally, this project has a number of family-sized affordable and market-rate
units, consistent with outcomes preferred by the City.
2 The Commission asked the applicant to consider a supplemental setback of
between 2 and 5 feet. In response, the applicant agreed to pull the project back by an
additional five feet from Vicente Terrace. As a result, the project is now set back 15 feet
from Vicente Terrace, whereas the Zoning Ordinance only requires a five foot setback.
Together with the street and the front yard setbacks of the residences along the north
side of Vicente Terrace, the distance between the buildings on the north side of Vicente
Terrace and the proposed project ranges from approximately 52½’ to 59½’.
Item 6A
04/23/19
3 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 4
The project also includes a ground floor commercial space intended for a corner
café (1,170 square feet of interior space and 830 square feet of outdoor space). A café
of that size is consistent with Proposition S (which limits restaurants to no more than
2000 sf) and is consistent with the Coastal Commission’s preference for a visitor-
serving use within the project. (Pub. Res. Code § 30222.)
The project will replace the existing 127 surface parking spaces for use by Hotel
Casa Del Mar underground, together with 146 parking spaces for the project itself.
This is a Tier 2 housing project designed by Santa Monica-based architects
Koning Eizenberg Associates (“KEA”). As approved by the Planning Commission, the
project complies with the City’s development standards as to height, density, uses, unit
mix, setbacks, outdoor living area and parking. (Staff Report at pp. 8, 12-14.)
Indeed, unlike most projects, the project does not seek to maximize the site’s
development potential. The project’s lot coverage is 62%; the Zoning Ordinance allows
70%. The project’s FAR is 1.81; the Zoning Ordinance allows a 2.0 FAR. The project’s
private outdoor living area is 9,190 sf, whereas the Zoning Ordinance requires 4,980 sf;
the project’s common outdoor living area is 9,290 sf, whereas the Zoning Ordinance
requires 3,300 sf.
Much of this project’s FAR and lot coverage reductions are directed towards
reducing the perceived impact of the project on the Vicente Terrace neighbors. In this
regard, the project has a setback of at least 15 feet along Vicente Terrace, and an
average setback of 21 feet, whereas a setback of only 5 feet is required. Moreover, the
project will include mature trees in the unexcavated side yard along Vicente Terrace,
where there is no room for street trees in the public sidewalk.
In approving this project, the Planning Commission granted, and strongly
endorsed, a waiver and modification of two Zoning Ordinance ground floor design
standards to address the positioning of the corner café, given challenges presented by
this site’s slope along Pico Boulevard (which is defined by the Zoning Code as the front
yard). The approved waiver and modification have not been controversial and are
addressed in the next section.
II.
THE WAIVER AND MODIFICATION
The project applications and architectural drawings (and hence the administrative
record) include the applicant’s request for a waiver and modification related to the
ground floor café. The waiver and modification are appropriate to achieve two design
objectives shared by the applicant and City Staff: (1) to have the ground floor café
Item 6A
04/23/19
4 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 5
space at the corner of Ocean Avenue/Pico Boulevard level with the Ocean Avenue
sidewalk, with no ramping or steps from Ocean Avenue; and (2) to have the corner
apartment unit immediately above the café be level with the rest of the second floor
(with no steps, ramping or lifts).
The Planning Commission unanimously approved the waiver and modification
when it approved this project on December 5th. (Indeed, at the Commission’s prior
project hearing on October 3rd, the Commission admonished the applicant not to
abandon the waiver and modification on the basis that they facilitate an improved
project with better pedestrian-orientation and better accessibility for the disabled and
others.)
The waiver and modification are specifically authorized by the Zoning Ordinance,
which provides discretion to waive or modify the otherwise applicable design standards
in appropriate circumstances such as those presented here. Specifically:
The Waiver: The requested waiver would waive one of the four Zoning
Ordinance Active Commercial Design (“ACD”) standards--the standard
that the project’s commercial space should be placed at a height that is
within 18” of the finished grade of the Pico Boulevard sidewalk. Given this
project’s location at Pico and Ocean, and also given the significant slope
of Pico adjacent to the site, it is better for the café to be on grade with
Ocean Avenue than with Pico Boulevard (even though by Code, Pico is
deemed to be the “commercial boulevard”). The waiver application would
achieve this solution of matching the café’s grade with Ocean Avenue,
and City Staff recommends approving this waiver (and the Planning
Commission has approved this waiver) because it better serves the
Zoning Ordinance’s objective with respect to pedestrian orientation and
accessibility by allowing the Ocean Avenue ground floor café/retail space
to be flush with Ocean Avenue and not require a “step-down” (and
ramping) into the ground floor space. (Absent Pico Boulevard’s slope, this
waiver would not be needed to meet this ACD standard.) The requested
waiver is specifically authorized by Zoning Ordinance Section 9.43.040.
The Modification: The requested modification would modify the Zoning
Ordinance’s maximum ground floor (floor-to-floor) height for the corner
care by 3 additional feet, permitting a floor-to-floor height of 19 feet. This
modification does not change the maximum height of the building; it only
affects the placement of floors within the building envelope. In this regard,
the Zoning Ordinance specifically authorizes modifications of this ACD
standard by up to 4 feet. (Zoning Ordinance § 9.43.030.) As does the
Item 6A
04/23/19
5 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 6
requested waiver, this modification better achieves the Zoning
Ordinance’s purpose by improving the project’s pedestrian orientation and
accessibility (including for disabled persons) by achieving the floor above
the café at a uniform level across the project on this sloping site, with no
stairs or lifts required to access the second floor unit immediately above
the corner café.
The project architect, City Staff and the Planning Commission all agree that the
project design, accessibility and functionality are much improved by the waiver and
modification. (Staff Report at p. 11 (“the proposed project, with incorporation of the
requests to modify the two active commercial design standards outlined above, provides
for a superior project design and enhanced pedestrian orientation”).) But as discussed
below, the project can be approved without the waiver and modification.
To ensure a complete administrative record, the applicant filed project plans prior
to the Planning Commission’s December 5th hearing documenting that the project can
be approved without the waiver and modification. (Staff Report at p. 11 (“As part of
staff’s review of the Major Modification and Waiver requests, the applicant provided
plans showing a project without the Major Modification and Waiver requests. This
information was also provided to Planning Commission at its December 5, 2018
hearing.”).) The project without the waiver and modification is essentially the same as
the project with the waiver and modification approved by the Planning Commission,
except for the minor deviations that result in a step-down (and ramping) into the corner
café and a step-down (and a lift) into the second-floor unit above the café. (Staff Report
at p. 11 (“Based on staff’s review of this information, both versions of the project design
would meet the DRP findings for approval.”).)
The plans with and without the waiver and modification remain a part of the
administrative record being presented to the City Council for your hearing and decision
on the pending appeals. (Staff Report, Attachment A, Sheets A55-A59.) The City
Attorney’s office has assured the applicant that the City Council will need to vote on the
HAA-protected version without the waiver and modification in the event the City Council
does not affirm the Planning Commission’s approval of the project with the waiver and
modification.
III.
PROJECT DESIGN AND REFINEMENTS
As reflected in City Staff’s recommendation and the Planning Commission’s
approval, project architects KEA have risen to the challenge and skillfully designed a
housing project that works well on this unique and complicated site. The project’s three
Item 6A
04/23/19
6 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 7
street-facing façades respond well to their different contexts while working together as
one cohesive project.
In response to input from City Staff, the City’s EIR consultant, the ARB,
neighboring residents and the Planning Commission, the project’s design has changed
substantially since the project application was originally filed more than three and a half
years ago. Project refinements made since the initial submittal include:
The floor area has been reduced by approximately 8,100 square feet, with
a corresponding reduction in FAR from 1.99 to 1.81.
The setbacks along Pico Boulevard and Vicente Terrace have been
increased, which provides a more pedestrian-friendly environment, more
opportunities for exterior landscaping, and an opportunity to create “front”
yards along Vicente Terrace, favorably reflecting the front yards that exist
across Vicente Terrace--all at an anticipated loss of future rental revenue
due to corresponding floor area reductions in the apartments.
The street-facing facades along Pico Boulevard and Vicente Terrace have
been undulated (i.e., “pleated”) so that the residential character resembles
the feeling of townhomes, which serves to break up the mass of the
buildings and better reflect the rhythm of homes across Vicente Terrace.
The Vicente Terrace patios have been further refined with the addition of
landscaping between the patios and the sidewalks as a pedestrian-friendly
buffer.
To improve the appeal of Vicente Terrace and benefit the neighbors of the
four properties across the street, the revised plans have tripled the
required setback along Vicente Terrace – no less than 15’ (and greater)
compared to the 5’ required by Code.3
To reduce the perception of height adjacent to Shutters along Vicente
Terrace, the corner R4 level was further setback and redesigned to match
3 The approximate mid-point dimension from the project’s typical balcony face to
the residential buildings across the street will be 59 feet, causing a corresponding
reduction of the project’s courtyard width by 5’ to approximately 43.5’ at the building
face – or 35’ from balcony face to balcony face. The project residents living in the 35
courtyard units will be 15’ closer to their neighbors across the courtyard than will the
Vicente Terrace neighbors to the project units that they face.
Item 6A
04/23/19
7 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 8
the lighter transparent design elsewhere at this level. This change enables
the project to emulate R3 upperstory setbacks – establishing a 45°
daylight plane, 35’ above A.N.G. positioned at the required setback line.
The lighter top floor also lowers the pleated wood façade by one level in
this location.4
To further relax the design along Vicente Terrace, an exterior arbor with
wood screen panels has been refined at the R4 level.
To further respond to the change in grade down Vicente Terrace from
Ocean Avenue, common rooftop trellises along Vicente Terrace have
been relocated further east, reducing height projections nearest the
residential neighbors.
As a result of the expanded setback from Vicente Terrace, the landscape
is now more robust. Terraces facing Vicente Terrace have been
redesigned to provide additional setbacks to planter walls. Intermediate
planter heights and street-facing pedestrian steps to the units soften the
grade change from the adjacent sloping sidewalk.
The opening into the western courtyard has been expanded on the
Vicente Terrace side to 22’-6.” This opening (wider than Vicente Terrace
itself) creates a private pedestrian alleyway through the project for project
tenants and guests for the entire length of the project between Vicente
Terrace and Pico Boulevard. This opening further benefits the project
design by breaking up the project massing.
The balconies and elevations have been redesigned with a series of
modulating building facades which direct tenant views toward the ocean
rather than directly across the street to the residences across Vicente
Terrace.
The northern and southern openings into the western courtyard line up to
provide a 22’-6” opening through the entire project to allow for more light,
4 The loss of floor area on the top floor (i.e., one of the best units with ocean
views) is recovered by adding less valuable floor area near Ocean Avenue; as a result,
the 1033 sf 2-bedroom corner westernmost unit along Vicente Terrace has become an
833 sf 1-bedroom unit and one of the courtyard units has become an 809 sf 2-bedroom
unit.
Item 6A
04/23/19
8 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 9
air and ventilation. This opening exceeds the dimensional code
requirement for a typical courtyard on large parcels.
In addition to the western courtyard that is approximately 22’-6” and spans
the entire north-south length of the site, there is also a generous interior
courtyard that has dimensions of approximately 44’-48’ x 134’-139’ (i.e.,
nearly a whole standard lot) depending on the floor.
The units that are located on the three street facades (i.e., Ocean Avenue,
Pico Boulevard and Vicente Terrace) have street-facing balconies/patios.
The Ocean Avenue elevation has been refined to provide a stronger street
presence and improve the overall architecture per guidance from the ARB.
The materials palette has been revised to be more compatible with the
beachside residential context of the project site.
The residential fitness room has been redesigned to include additional
glazing facing Ocean Avenue to achieve more “eyes on the street.”
A resident meeting room has been established to facilitate supportive
services by the affordable housing provider for tenants of the affordable
units.
The common outdoor living area has increased substantially.
In addition to the 6 proposed EV charging stations, EV stubouts will be
performed for 9 other parking stalls.
Additionally, the Planning Commission directed the ARB to pay particular
attention to the following:
The relationship of the building along Vicente Terrace and Pico Boulevard
and the connectivity to the public sidewalk,
The ground floor commercial tenant space and the connectivity to the
sidewalk along Ocean Avenue and Pico Boulevard,
The building design on Vicente Terrace and compatibility to the adjacent
low density neighborhood,
The planting design details throughout the project,
Item 6A
04/23/19
9 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 10
The landscaped and open space area on the corner of Ocean Avenue and
Vicente Terrace,
The terraced landscaping on Vicente Terrace should not be dominated by
concrete planter boxes and should create a more natural, soft-planted
area,
The pedestrian experience on Pico Boulevard by establishing a visual
sense of arrival at the project site that can be anticipated from up the
block, and
On the Pico Boulevard side of the project, consider providing an
interactive feature, work of public art, or other element that would be of
interest to pedestrians on route to the beach.
The project architects look forward to working with the ARB on these
refinements.
IV.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
The project is located in close proximity to the potential Seaview Terrace-Vicente
Terrace Residential Historic District and the Ye Olde Mucky Duck Building. Accordingly,
KEA’s design of this project has been guided by preservation architect Robert Chattel of
Chattel, Inc.
As part of the design process, Mr. Chattel has prepared three conformance
review reports for the project (one for the ARB float-up, the second for the Planning
Commission and a third for the City Council). The reports document that Mr. Chattel
has been “collaborating with project architects KEA to avoid and mitigate potentially
significant impacts to both historical resources.” Mr. Chattel’s “[d]esign collaboration
included improving the aesthetic relationship between the proposed project and the
potential historic district through contemporary yet compatible architectural elements, as
well as increased setbacks and reduced massing to strengthen the pedestrian
experience.” For the ARB hearing, Mr. Chattel concluded that the “proposed project [as
studied in the DEIR] was found to conform with the Secretary’s Standards.”
In light of project refinements undertaken after release of DEIR, Mr. Chattel
prepared his second report addressing the refinements. He confirmed that the
“refinements collectively strengthen the compatibility of the proposed project with the
adjacent historical resources along Vicente Terrace … Contemporary interpretations of
Item 6A
04/23/19
10 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 11
key architectural elements from the potential historic district, as well as more articulated
material and façade relief better respond to and integrate its design into the
neighborhood beachside character, and remain compatible with the historical
resources.” Mr. Chattel’s second report concludes:
The current refined design continues to skillfully address
compatibility concerns and avoids adverse impacts to
historical resources, and is in accordance with the Secretary
of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.”
Similarly, Mr. Chattel’s third report concludes:
Review of project plans . . . as approved by the Planning
Commission identifies refinements of the massing break,
street-level setbacks, and open space landscaping, as well
as of architectural elements including façade relief and
materials. These refinements continue to improve
compatibility and better integrate the project within its
neighborhood context.
* * *
The described refinements collectively strengthen the
compatibility of the proposed project with the adjacent
historical resources along Vicente Terrace. In accordance
with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings, the refined proposed project continues to conform
to the Secretary’s Standards, as refinements further
enhance the size, scale and massing of the proposed project
for sensitive compatibility within its neighborhood context.
Contemporary interpretations of key architectural elements
from the potential historic district, as well as more articulated
material and façade relief better respond to and integrate its
design into the neighborhood beachside character, and
remain compatible with the historical resources
The Final EIR (at page 4.4-12) also confirms that the project, as refined in
response to comments by City Staff and others, satisfies the relevant design guidelines
Item 6A
04/23/19
11 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 12
applying to proposed projects in close proximity to existing (and potential) historic
resources. The Final EIR addresses this point at length in Appendix M:
The refinements to the Ocean Avenue Project would include
a reduction in building area, increased average setbacks to
Pico Boulevard and Vicente Terrace, widened lower
courtyard ‘gap’ for greater physical and visual porosity and
further reduction of mass along Vicente Terrace. In addition,
the design has been modified to better respond to the Pico
Boulevard context including redesign of the building so that
the individual units would be visually identifiable along the
Pico Boulevard and Vicente Terrace facades. The material
palette has been revised to respond to the beachside
residential context. Furthermore, the Ocean Avenue Project
would provide increased widths of both upper and lower
courtyards and improved connection between them. Overall,
the pedestrian experience along Vicente Terrace would be
improved. These refinements would better integrate the
buildings into the character of the neighborhood.
Along Ocean Avenue, a view into an interior courtyard
beyond, a glass ground floor wall with a floating perforated
mass above, and modeled corners with integrated
landscaping would create more visual interest, reduce
perceptible mass and further integrate the new building into
the urban setting. At the corner at Pico Boulevard, the
Ocean Avenue Project would take on a more domestic scale
through differentiation of the units, setbacks at ground level,
lush landscaping, pedestrian bridges and views through the
site to create improved visual interest. The fenestration
pattern, use of materials and contrasting vertical and
horizontal lines of the design would also add to its visual
interest. Along Vicente Terrace, across from the District,
increased setbacks with additional landscaping would
provide for improved compatibility with the scale, massing
and character of the historic streetscape. The increased
transparency and modulation of the Vicente Terrace façade
would visually appear to reduce the mass and scale of the
building in relation to the District, thereby improving the
compatibility of the Project with the nearby District. (Final
EIR Appendix M at p. M-7.)
Item 6A
04/23/19
12 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 13
V.
THE STATE HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT AND
THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRE THE CITY TO APROVE
THIS PROJECT WITHOUT REDUCING ITS DENSITY
A. The Housing Accountability Act Requires The City Council To Approve
This Project Without Any Density Reduction.
1. The Housing Accountability Act, Generally.
The State Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”) provides in relevant part:
[W]hen a proposed housing development project complies
with applicable objective general plan, zoning, and
subdivision standards and criteria, including design review
standards, in effect at the time that the housing development
project’s application is determined to be complete, but the
local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose
a condition that the project be developed at a lower density,
the local agency shall base its decision regarding the
proposed housing development project upon written findings
supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record
that both of the following conditions exist:
(A) The housing development project would have a
specific, adverse impact upon the public health or
safety unless the project is disapproved or approved
upon the condition that the project be developed at a
lower density. As used in this paragraph, a ‘specific,
adverse impact’ means a significant, quantifiable,
direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective,
identified written public health or safety standards,
policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the
application was deemed complete.
(B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate
or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to
[the] paragraph [first quoted above] other than the
disapproval of the housing development project or the
Item 6A
04/23/19
13 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 14
approval of the project upon the condition that it be
developed at a lower density.
(Gov’t Code § 65589.5 (j)(1).)
As used above, the term “lower density” includes “any conditions that have the
same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing.” Gov’t Code
§ 65589.5(j)(4). The City cannot impose conditions that would affect the viability of such
a housing project.
2. The City Attorney’s Changed Position Concerning the HAA.
Prior to September 2018, the City Attorney’s office interpreted the HAA such that
if deviations from the City’s “objective general plan, zoning and subdivision standards
and criteria” were granted by the City for a housing project via a modification or waiver,
then such standards and criteria were no longer “applicable” to that particular project
and thus the City’s discretion to deny or reduce the density of the project would be
constrained by the HAA. (See August 10, 2018 City Council Information Item Figure 1,
p. 9.)5 Accordingly, any denial or reduction in density by the City for such a project was
required to be supported by the written findings specified in the HAA. This project was
scheduled for a hearing on September 5, but that hearing was postponed at the request
of the neighbors.
Less than 30 days after issuance of the August 10 City Council Information Item,
on September 5, 2018, the City Planning Division presented a short written
Supplemental Staff Report (“Supplemental Staff Report”) to the Planning Commission
which differed from the August 10 City Council Information Item in that the
Supplemental Staff Report concluded that “State law does not require the City to apply
the HAA to [housing projects] that … request and are granted approvals that authorize
deviations from the City’s objective standards.” Since release of the Supplemental Staff
Report, we have learned that it reflects the current position of the City Attorney’s office.
As explained in a legal memorandum prepared by our office, our firm and the
applicant believe that the legal opinion expressed in the August 10 City Council
Information was correct and we disagree with the Supplemental Staff Report to the
extent it differs from the August 10 City Council Information Item. 6
5 A copy of that City Council Information Item is enclosed.
6 The applicant’s legal position is set forth in a legal memorandum prepared by
our firm dated December 28, 2018, which was then submitted to the City Attorney’s
Item 6A
04/23/19
14 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 15
Fortunately, because this project can be approved with or without the waiver and
modification, that legal issue can be avoided in this instance. (Staff Report at p. 16
(“a fully code compliant project was also reviewed in the context of the Major
Modification and Waiver requests and staff believes such a project would also meet all
the findings for approval.”).)
3. The Housing Accountability Act and the Project.
As noted above, the hearing record for this project includes both: (1) the plans
reflecting the waiver and modification as preferred by and approved by the Planning
Commission (and as preferred by City Staff), and (2) plans that do not involve a waiver
and modification. This same housing project can be approved with or without the
waiver and modification. There is no legal disagreement that without the waiver and
modification, the project is protected by the HAA against denial or a reduction of density
(or conditions of approval that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the
project to provide housing). (Staff Report at pp. 15-16.)
The applicant agrees with City Staff and the Planning Commission that the
wavier and modification provide for a superior design and better accessibility. But under
no circumstances is the applicant willing to give up its HAA protection. Thus, in the
event the City Council is not willing to affirm the Planning Commission’s decision to
approve this project with the density shown on the project plans, then per our
discussions with the City Attorney’s office and Planning Staff, the record requires that
the City Council render a decision on this same project without the waiver and
modification and this version of the project is protected by the HAA.
4. The Housing Accountability Act Requires Project Approval Without a Density
Reduction of a Condition of Approval That Would Have the Same or Similar
Effect on the Viability of this Project.
The HAA requires the City Council to approve this project without reducing its
density because, as confirmed in the Final EIR (see FEIR Executive Summary at pages
office. We request that the memorandum be made part of the official hearing record on
this project. In that memorandum, we document our position that the new interpretation
expressed in the Supplemental Staff Report should not be followed for three reasons:
(1) it conflicts with the plain language of the HAA and the relevant case law; (2) it is
inconsistent with the legislative purpose of the HAA, including the HAA’s stated purpose
that it is to be interpreted and implemented to afford the fullest possible protection for
housing; and (3) it leads to a result that, in the terminology of the case law, results in
mischief and absurdity rather than a practical result that comports with common sense.
Item 6A
04/23/19
15 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 16
ES-1 to ES-31), this project does not pose any “specific, adverse impact on public
health or safety.” In this regard, the California Legislature recently strengthened the
HAA’s protections for housing projects that comply with a municipality’s applicable
development and design standards. Commencing January 1, 2018, a municipality’s
finding of a significant, adverse impact on public health or safety must be supported by
a preponderance of the evidence, not merely substantial evidence. (Gov’t Code
§ 65589.5(j), as amended in 2017 by SB167/AB678/AB1515.) Here, there is no
evidence (let alone “substantial evidence” or “a preponderance of the evidence”)
supporting the required findings for project denial or a reduction in density. Accordingly,
the City Council is legally obliged by the HAA to approve this project without reducing its
density.7
B. Furthermore, Denying This Project Or Reducing Its Density Would be
Unlawful Under the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
The LUCE and Zoning Ordinance establish a predictable project review process
for Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects based upon established development and design
standards. The project review process is intended to facilitate an expansion of the
City’s housing supply including its supply of affordable housing.8
The Zoning Ordinance is the City’s primary means for implementing the LUCE.
Under the Zoning Ordinance, any project that exceeds the Zoning Ordinance’s Tier 1
standards or 10,000 square feet of new floor area must obtain a development review
permit (“DRP”). (SMMC § 9.40.020 (A).) Because this project exceeds the Tier 1
standards and also exceeds 10,000 square feet of floor area, it requires a DRP.
Under the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council “shall approve” a DRP when the
required findings “can be made.” (Zoning Ordinance § 9.40.050.) Here, the Planning
Commission Statement of Official Action and City Council Staff Report both confirm that
7 Moreover, there are potential fines for violation of the HAA “in a minimum
amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per housing units in the housing development
project.” Gov’t Code § 65589.5(k)(1)(B)(i).
8 Under the heading “Review of Proposed Projects,” the LUCE provides:
“Development proposals that confirm with stated goals and policies of the LUCE are the
implementation tools that have the most direct influence on the City’s ability to achieve
complete communities, housing opportunities, and integrated transportation and land
use. Exacting review is the primary method by which the City ensures that individual
projects achieve the vision, goals, and standards of the community.” (LUCE at p. 5.0-
12.)
Item 6A
04/23/19
16 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 17
all of the required findings can be made. Staff Report at p. 11 (“Based on staff’s
review . . . both versions of the project design would meet the DRP findings for
approval.”.) Accordingly, the City Council is legally obliged by its own local laws to
approve this project.
Indeed, the evidence in the record supporting such findings is uncontradicted.
This evidence includes the Final EIR, which confirms that this project will not have any
significant adverse impacts on the environment. Moreover, this evidence includes the
extensive project design refinements made in response to input from the ARB, City
Staff, the Planning Commission and others.
In sum, It would be an abuse of discretion for the City Council to deny this
project’s DRP.9
VI.
PROJECT AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS
As confirmed by the Staff Report, this project includes all of the requisite
community benefits codified in the Zoning Ordinance, including those related to
affordable housing. (Staff Report at p. 12 (“The project provides the required
community benefits identified in Chapter 9.23 (Community Benefits) of the Zoning
Ordinance for Tier 2 projects.”).)
A. Affordable Housing.
As noted above, the project includes 16 very low income (50% AMI) units on
site--12 units to satisfy the AHPP and Zoning Ordinance requirement for the project,
9 Furthermore, on March 20, 2019, the Planning Commission approved Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 74447 for an air space subdivision of this project. (16ENT-
0158.) Pursuant to both State and local law, “When a local agency approves or
conditionally approves a vesting tentative map, that approval shall confer a vested right
to proceed with development” (Gov’t Code § 66498.1(b) and Subdivision Ordinance
§ 9.54.030(F)(5)) and the project is to be reviewed in accordance with the ordinances,
policies, and standards that were in effect at the time the vesting tentative map was
deemed complete. (Gov’t Code § 66474.2 & 66498.1(b) and Subdivision Ordinance
§ 9.54.030(F)(5).) The approval of the vesting tentative map is now final. (See
Subdivision Ordinance § 9.54.070.) Accordingly, the applicant has a vested right to
proceed with this project, and this project must be reviewed pursuant to the ordinances,
standards and policies that were in effect on the date the vesting map application was
deemed complete.
Item 6A
04/23/19
17 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 18
and four units to satisfy the AHPP and the Zoning Ordinance requirement for the nearby
project at 1921 Ocean Front Walk.
This project’s affordable housing component is unique compared to nearly all
recent projects in three respects:
1. The Number of Affordable Units.
Nearly all applicants for two tier housing projects have chosen to provide 7.5%
extremely low income (30% AMI) units. Here, the applicant for this project (and the
nearby project at 1921 Ocean Front Walk) is providing 15% very low income (50% AMI)
units, or double the number of affordable units.
2. Non-Profit Management and Services.
All 16 of the affordable units will be operated by a non-profit affordable housing
provider which will also have an ownership interest. This unique feature of the project
will allow residents of the affordable units access to support and services that would not
otherwise be available from a typical landlord, including programs designed to assist
tenants with staying in place whenever challenges arise.
3. Common Area Amenities.
This project has a swimming pool, fitness facility, barbeques, pet salon, surf
board locker, and short walk to the Pacific Ocean and sandy beach.
B. Family-Sized Units.
Consistent with the LUCE’s goals for a range of new housing, including
apartments for families, the project includes family-sized units for both affordable and
market-rate dwellings.10 More than 30% of the market-rate units are two-bedroom and
three-bedroom units. And 50% of the deed-restricted affordable apartments are two-
bedroom and three-bedroom units.
The Code requires Tier 2 projects to have an average number of bedrooms for
the market rate units of at least 1.2; the average number of bedrooms in the market rate
units is 1.49. The Code requires Tier 2 projects to provide the average number of
10 LUCE Goal H4 states: “Provide increased opportunities to stimulate a variety
of housing choices.” LUCE Policy H4.1 is to “[e]ncourage the production of both rental
and ownership housing.” (LUCE at p. 3.3-12.)
Item 6A
04/23/19
18 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 19
bedrooms in the affordable units to be no less than the average number of bedrooms in
the market-rate units. Here, the average number of bedrooms in the affordable units is
1.58 (i.e., higher than the 1.49 average number of bedrooms in the market-rate units).
C. Development Fees.
The project is also paying substantial development fees to the City. These
include a Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee ($385,305.81), a
Transportation Impact Fee ($334,161.51), a Cultural Arts Fee ($169,053.84), a Child
Care Linkage Fee ($21,390.20), and an Affordable Housing/Commercial Linkage Fee
($22,206.07).
D. Other Community Benefits.
The project also includes other meaningful project and community benefits
including solar panels, EV charging stations, EV stubouts, abundant and user-friendly
bicycle facilities, a pedestrian-oriented/visitor-oriented cafe, sustainable design features,
and massing/design with sensitivity to adjacent historic resources.
VII.
NONE OF THE APPEALS HAS ANY MERIT
The Staff Report explains why all three appeals lack merit and should be denied.
(Staff Report at pp. 17-25.) Below this letter addresses the key arguments made in
each of the appeals.
A. The SOAR Appeal.
The essence of SOAR’s appeal is that “the project is too massive, dense and
high.” In making this claim, SOAR ignores that the project complies with all of the City’s
development standards. Indeed, the project is considerably smaller than the Zoning
Ordinance would allow--lower in density, less massing, greater setbacks (especially
Vicente Terrace), and more open space. Thus, the SOAR appeal essentially invites the
City Council to second-guess and essentially rewrite the City’s Zoning Ordinance in the
guise of rendering a decision on this project-specific, quasi-judicial application where
the City Council’s decision is governed by both State and local law. As noted in
Section V above, the Housing Accountability Act and the City’s own Zoning Ordinance
require the City Council to approve this project without reducing its density.
Item 6A
04/23/19
19 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 20
SOAR’s appeal makes other claims that are equally unfounded. Specifically:
1. SOAR’s claim that it was denied a fair hearing because two
Commissioners were absent when the Commission voted 5-0 to approve this project on
December 3rd lacks any legal basis. Parties to Planning Commission hearings are not
entitled to 100% Commissioner attendance at their hearings. Moreover, applicants
must obtain four Commissioner positive votes in order to obtain approval--in this case,
that meant the applicant needed favorable votes from four of the five Commissioners
present. (Planning Commission Rules of Order, Rule 2.) In no way was SOAR
prejudiced by the absence of two Commissioners on December 3rd.
2. SOAR’s professed concern about short-term rentals is unfounded. Many
of these units are larger family-sized units, and there are no studio units. Ironically, it is
SOAR that wants to reduce the size of the units, making them more susceptible to
short-term rentals.
3. SOAR’s concern about the project’s environmental impacts are
contradicted by the City’s very thorough EIR for this project (and the nearby project at
1921 Ocean Front Walk), which concluded that the project will not have any significant
adverse environmental affects including in the subject areas raised by SOAR in its
appeal.
4. SOAR’s concerns about the project’s impacts on Vicente Terrace as a
potential historic district were fully addressed in the EIR and in the reports prepared by
Robert Chattel of Chattel, Inc., who collaborated with project architects at KEA for the
specific purpose of ensuring that the project is compatible with Vicente Terrace. (For a
full discussion of this issue, see Section IV herein.)
Local Santa Monica-based architects KEA have designed this project, working in
consultation with historic preservation architect and consultant Robert Chattel of Chattel
Inc. given the project’s proximity to the potential Seaview Terrace-Vicente Terrace
Residential Historic District and the Ye Olde Mucky Duck Building. The project
experienced numerous design iterations to arrive at the massing and design approved
by the Planning Commission. Per the certified EIR: “The changes that have been
made address design issues and neighborhood context, including increased setbacks,
stepbacks and open space, while also reducing building massing and residential floor
area.” (FEIR at p. ii.)
Item 6A
04/23/19
20 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 21
The project’s frontage on Vicente Terrace began as follows:
September 2015 DRP Submittal
July 2017 ARB Float-up
Item 6A
04/23/19
21 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 22
The view down Vicente Terrace further evolved as follows:
August 2018 Planning Commission Submittal
December 2018 Planning Commission Approval
Item 6A
04/23/19
22 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 23
The view up Vicente Terrace also underwent major changes:
July 2017 ARB Float-up
August 2018 Planning Commission Submittal
Item 6A
04/23/19
23 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 24
December 2018 Planning Commission Approval
And the view of the project from across Vicente Terrace has been resolved as
follows:
December 2018 Planning Commission Approval
Item 6A
04/23/19
24 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 25
B. The Unite Here Appeal.
The Staff Report addresses each of the issues raised by the Unite Here appeal
and explains why they lack merit. Briefly:
1. As the Staff Report confirms, the public clearly received sufficient notice
concerning this project prior to the Planning Commission’s two hearings. Neither Unite
Here nor anyone else can plausibly claim otherwise. (Staff Report at p. 17.) See also
Kennedy v. South Coast Reg’l Coastal Community, 68 Cal. App. 3d 660, 667-71, 137
Cal. Rptr. 396 (1977). And in any event and without waiving the foregoing, there is no
disputing that the City Council hearing has been properly noticed with further details of
the project specifics.
2. The Union’s claim that the City’s Zoning Ordinance contains a purported
“major loophole” in its regulations concerning multi-family housing is a policy argument
that is irrelevant in this quasi-judicial hearing on this particular project. We do not agree
with that contention. The definitions of the terms multi-family use, corporate rental
housing, and lodging are thorough and complete; they are a paragraph of more each,
with examples of such uses provided in each of the definitions. (See Zoning Ordinance
§§ 9.51.020(A)(1)(d), 9.51.020(A)(2) & 9.51.030(B)(15).)
Moreover, even if the City Council agrees with the hotel workers’ union’s policy
argument that the Code’s definitions should be amended, the City Council cannot
essentially amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance by way of a project condition.
The applicant is not seeking any discretionary permit as to use of the property.
The development review permit challenged in this appeal is a quasi-judicial permit
relating to building mass (see Zoning Ordinance § 9.40.010); the City Council cannot
use the quasi-judicial processing of a development review appeal to change existing law
(i.e., legislate) by imposing a project condition as to an allowed use. Put simply, multi-
family housing as defined in the Code is allowed by right in the Oceanfront Zoning
District. (See Zoning Ordinance Table 9.14.020.) This DRP appeal is not the proper
forum to debate whether to amend the Zoning Code’s definition of multi-family housing.
3. The Union asks for a condition that “runs with the land” banning lodging
and corporate housing uses in the project. The Union ignores that Staff’s proposed
STOA bans lodging uses and corporate housing uses (see Condition No. 4) and that all
of the project conditions run with the land as a matter of law (and thus are binding on all
future owners of the property). (See Zoning Ordinance § 9.48.010(B).)
4. The Union’s claim that the project is an extension of the Casa del
Mar/Shutters hotels is specious. This is a separate and distinct apartment building with
Item 6A
04/23/19
25 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 26
no lodging uses and no linkage to the nearby Casa del Mar or Shutters hotels. The
applicant has not applied for any permits to expand the hotels, nor would that be
possible in light of Proposition S. Moreover, as a show of good faith, the applicant has
agreed on the record that: “Consistent with Proposition S, this project is not an
expansion of any hotel use and there shall be no hotel amenities from the adjacent hotel
(e.g., housekeeping, valet, food/room service) provided at the Project.” This agreement
is documented in the STOA’s project description.
5. The Union’s criticism of the Final EIR also lacks merit. Consistent with
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, the Final EIR responded to each of Union’s
arguments and explained why they are unfounded. Appellants’ disagreement with the
Final EIR’s conclusions does not render it inadequate legally. (See State CEQA
Guidelines § 15151.) Furthermore, the time to appeal the EIR certification has passed
(see Zoning Ordinance §§ 9.37.040 & 9.62.020), and the time to file suit challenging the
certified EIR has also passed. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15112.)
6. The Union wrongly claims that the Coastal Act requires the project’s
ground floor commercial/restaurant space to be limited to community uses only. The
Coastal Act does not compel such uses in this project’s ground floor commercial space.
In fact, it was staff for the Coastal Commission that urged the applicant to include the
corner café in this project. Moreover, to the extent the Coastal Commission has a basis
for regulating use of this project’s ground floor space, the Commission will do so when it
considers the project’s coastal development permit application. (Such a coastal
development application cannot be filed with the Coastal Commission until after ARB
approval of the design.) The City Council’s role is to enforce the Zoning Ordinance,
which allows as permitted uses all of the applicant’s proposed ground floor uses.
C. The William Johnson Appeal.
In his appeal, Mr. Johnson asserts that because Proposition S prohibits the
construction of new hotels in the Beach Overlay District, the existing surface parking at
1828 Ocean Avenue, used for many years as parking for Casa del Mar (and, previously,
the Pritikin Longevity Center), cannot be replaced in the subterranean parking garage
beneath 83 units of new rental housing--including 16 units of deed-restricted affordable
housing--as was approved by the Planning Commission on December 5th.
Mr. Johnson’s arguments are plainly wrong, both legally and factually; neither
Proposition S nor the Zoning Ordinance prevents the existing 127 parking spaces from
being replaced in the project’s subterranean garage.
Item 6A
04/23/19
26 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 27
1. Proposition S.
Proposition S was a ballot measure adopted by Santa Monica’s voters in 1990
and subsequently incorporated in the City’s Zoning Ordinance as required by
Proposition S. It is currently codified as Chapter 9.20 in the Zoning Ordinance as the
Beach Overlay District.
Proposition S’s purpose is “limiting the proposed proliferation of excessive hotel,
motel and large restaurant development within the Beach Overlay District.” (Proposition
S, § I.) The Beach Overlay District includes the subject property within its boundaries.
Proposition S advances its purpose by prohibiting new hotels, motels and large
restaurants. (See Proposition S, § IV.) Nothing in Proposition S addresses parking,
either generally or in relation to existing hotels.
The City Attorney had occasion to address Proposition S in relation to existing
hotels in an Information Item dated February 2, 2012. In doing so, the City Attorney
stated in relevant part:
Proposition S prohibits building new hotels and new sizeable
restaurants in the Beach Overlay District. By doing so, it
effectively reclassifies existing hotels within the Beach
Overlay District into the category of legal nonconforming.
See Municipal Code Section 9.04.18.030 (defining and
regulating legal nonconforming uses). However, Proposition
S does not expressly prohibit the reconstruction of a pre-
existing hotel damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster.
Nor do we interpret it to do so. The measure’s stated
purpose was to preserve the oceanfront status quo, by
prohibiting certain types of new projects within the zone; the
stated purpose was not to eliminate existing hotels.
(City Council Information Item (February 2, 2012), pp. 1-2 (emphasis added).)
As approved by the Planning Commission, the project includes 127 replacement
parking spaces for the existing parking used by Casa del Mar. Consistent with
Proposition S, no hotel, motel or large restaurant uses are proposed. The number of
parking spaces for use by Casa del Mar in this location will remain the same--127--
without any expansion. The hotel remains the same in all respects, including the
number of hotel rooms, size of hotel dining and bar area, size of hotel
meeting/banquet/event space, hours of alcohol service, display area of alcohol, etc.
Item 6A
04/23/19
27 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 28
Even the ingress and egress to this off-site hotel parking will continue to be from Pico
Boulevard.
The only change is that the parking spaces will now be located below grade as
part of a housing project instead of on an at-grade surface parking lot.
2. The Zoning Ordinance.
The Zoning Ordinance specifically allows for the replacement of existing surface
parking that is either code-required or permit-required. In this regard, Zoning Ordinance
Section 9.28.040(A)(5)(c) expressly states:
Replacement of Existing Parking. If a site contains existing
surface parking that serves as Code or permit-required
parking for an off-site as part of any redevelopment of the
site, and such replacement parking shall not be considered
parking that exceeds the quantities specified in Section
9.28.060 for purposes of subsection (A)(5)(b).
Here, the Project’s 127 replacement spaces are permit-required (i.e., required by
the alcohol CUP for Hotel Casa del Mar, CUP 97-003). Accordingly, the Zoning
Ordinance expressly allows for their replacement in the project.
In his appeal, Mr. Johnson also argues that moving the parking from at-grade to
subterranean constitutes a substantial change in the mode or character of operation of
the nonconforming use. This argument is simply wrong.
In addressing nonconforming uses, the Zoning Ordinance uses the term
“substantial change of mode or character of operation” in a Section with the heading
“Intensification of Uses.” (Zoning Ordinance § 9.27.050(E).) The examples contained
in this Section all relate to expansions of floor area, the expansion of the hours of
operation, or an increase in seating in the case of a restaurant. Here, no such
intensification is occurring.
The existing full-service hotel will, in all respects, remain the same; no physical or
operational changes are proposed or will result. The hotel will continue to have the
same number of guest rooms, the same size of restaurant and bar floor areas, the same
number of restaurant and bar seats, the same size of conference/banquet/meeting
rooms, the same hours of service, etc. In short, the project’s replacement parking does
not constitute a change in Casa del Mar’s mode or character of operation within the
meaning of the Zoning Ordinance’s nonconforming use regulations.
Item 6A
04/23/19
28 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Santa Monica City Council
April 19, 2019
Page 29
Finally, replacing the existing surface parking with subterranean parking as part
of a housing project is a positive step as a matter of public policy. Moving the parking
underground facilitates new housing (including affordable housing) and new
retail/restaurant uses without the removal of any existing housing.
VIII.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the foregoing, the applicant respectfully requests that the City
Council affirm the Planning Commission’s approval of this project and deny the three
appeals.
Sincerely,
Kenneth L. Kutcher
Enclosure
cc: David Martin (w/ encl.)
Roxanne Tanemori (w/ encl.)
Russell Bunim (w/ encl.)
Lane Dilg (w/ encl.)
Heidi von Tongeln (w/ encl.)
NXT2 Shutters, LLC (w/ encl.)
Hank Koning (w/ encl.)
Robert Chattel (w/ encl.)
F:\WPDATA\2095\2095.3\Cor\CC.3003f.KLK v2.docx
Item 6A
04/23/19
29 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:zinajosephs@aol.com
Sent:Friday, April 19, 2019 9:19 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Greg Morena; Sue Himmelrich; Ana Maria Jara; Councilmember Kevin
McKeown; Ted Winterer; Terry O’Day
Cc:zinajosephs@aol.com
Subject:City Council 4/23/19 item 6-A: Appeal of 1828 Ocean Avenue DR Permit -- SUPPORT
April 19, 2019
To: City Council
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 4/23/19 agenda item 6-A -- Appeal of DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Avenue
The FOSP Board supports the appeal by nearby residents of the Development Review Permit for 1828 Ocean
Avenue (NW corner of Ocean Avenue and Pico Blvd.). This 52-foot tall project will be directly across narrow
Vicente Terrace from one-story homes to the north.
We feel this project is important to all neighborhoods as we watch the current tsunami of development that
ignores the impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
We ask that the City of Santa Monica uphold it its own Land Use and Circulation Element. This project does
not comply with the LUCE. Residents are asking for the following modifications in the design, not for a
reduction in the number of units.
1) Increase setbacks on the north side (minimum of 15 feet).
2) Reduce height by 10 feet on the Vicente Terrace side of the project.
3) Break up the massive north-facing elevation, to avoid the “canyon” effect.
The objectives are to meet these LUCE goals and policies:
a) Preserve the low scale character and appearance of the Beach and Oceanfront District.
b) New buildings should transition in size, height and scale toward adjacent residential
Item 6A
04/23/19
30 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
structures (such as the one-story homes on the north side of the project).
c) Respect the scale and character of the oceanfront district’s existing residential areas in the
design and construction of new buildings.
In addition:
4) Require that these are “real” rental units, not short-term rentals or corporate housing.
5) Require that paid parking for the project tenants cost the same or less than street parking
and nearby beach lot parking.
6) Prevent project residents from buying preferential parking permits on Vicente Terrace --
75 permits have already been issued for only 25 spaces.
This is not a “housing vs. neighborhood” argument. The argument is that developers should be required to
adhere to the LUCE. Further examples:
LUCE Executive Summary
Page 3 – “The highest priority of the community was the preservation of the existing character and scale of
Santa Monica’s neighborhoods.”
Page 5 – “The community’s greatest concerns are the loss of neighborhood character…and the construction of
larger-scale, insensitive infill building.”
LUCE Chapter 2.1 – Land Use Policies and Designations
GOAL LU1: Conserving and Enhancing Neighborhoods: Neighborhood Conservation – Protect, conserve
and enhance the City’s diverse residential neighborhood to promote and maintain a high quality of life for all
residents….”
Policy LU 1.3 -- Quality of Life. Preserve neighborhood quality of life and protect neighborhoods against
potential impact related to development.”
Item 6A
04/23/19
31 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
3
Policy LU 1.5 -- Design Compatibility. Require that new infill development be compatible with the existing
scale, mass and character of the residential neighborhood. New buildings
should transition in size, height and scale toward adjacent residential structures.
LUCE Chapter 2.6 -- Beach and Oceanfront District (including the area south of the Pier along the seaward
side of Ocean Avenue)
GOAL D18: Preserve the low scale character and appearance of the Beach and Oceanfront District….
Policy D18.1 – Preserve the existing residential uses to maintain the existing land use diversity and
character.
Policy D18.2 -- Respect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas in the design and
construction of new buildings.
Again, the FOSP Board supports the appeal and thanks you for your consideration.
Item 6A
04/23/19
32 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Tricia Crane <1triciacrane@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, April 21, 2019 10:06 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Ted Winterer; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day; Greg Morena; Sue
Himmelrich; Ana Maria Jara; Clerk Mailbox; Rick Cole; Denise Anderson-Warren
Subject:SUPPORT Appeal - Council Agenda 4/23/19 agenda item 6-A
April 21, 2019
To: City Council
RE: 4/23/19 agenda item 6-A -- Appeal of DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Avenue
Dear Council:
The Board of Northeast Neighbors supports the Appeal of the Development Review Permit for 1828
Ocean Avenue.
The scale disparity between this proposed massive development and adjacent homes to the north is
disturbing and fails to comply with the LUCE.
We remind the City Council of the relevant LUCE goals and policies that require new buildings to
transition in size, height and scale to the adjacent neighborhoods.
We ask the Council to approve the appeal and deny the Development Review Permit, major
Modification and Waiver.
This development should be redesigned so that it is reduced in height and increased in setbacks that
respect the existing neighborhood.
Thank you.
The Board of Northeast Neighbors
City Clerk – Please include a copy of this letter in the record for City Council Agenda item 6-A, April
23, 2019
Item 6A
04/23/19
33 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Diane Citron <d.m.citron@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, April 21, 2019 6:01 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Ted Winterer; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day; Greg Morena; Sue
Himmelrich; Ana Maria Jara; Clerk Mailbox; Rick Cole; Denise Anderson-Warren
Subject:4/23/19 Agenda item 6-A, appeal of DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Ave
Dear City Council
The Board of MidCity Neighbors supports the Appeal of the Development Review permit for 1828 Ocean Ave. The size
and character of this are not consistent with LUCE as it does not respect the scale and character of the residential
neighborhood.
The development should be redesigned so that it is reduced in height and increased in setbacks that are consistent with
LUCE and does not dwarf the neighborhood.
On behalf of the Board of MidCity Neighbors,
Sincerely,
Diane M. Citron
President
Item 6A
04/23/19
34 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Taffy Patton <taffypatton1@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 8:06 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Ted Winterer; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day; Greg Morena; Sue
Himmelrich; Ana Maria Jara; Clerk Mailbox; Rick Cole; Denise Anderson-Warren
Cc:Home; David Martin
Subject:SUPPORT Appeal. Council Agenda Item 6-A. 4/23/19
RE: 4/23/19 Agenda Item 6-A. Appeal DR Permit 1828 Ocean Avenue
Dear Council, City Manager and Staff:
On behalf of the Residents Coalition, I urge you to approve the appeal and deny the DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Ave.
It seems that Council and Staff refer to the LUCE only when it is convenient to your agendas, not when the
document protects existing Santa Monica neighborhoods.
This project exemplifies a vastly over-scale development that utterly fails to transition in mass and height to the
adjacent neighborhood to the north.
Will you follow the LUCE and require a redesign that includes reduced height, mass and increased setbacks
to protect the adjacent neighborhood?
Or is the LUCE just a PR document to wave when it’s convenient for your agenda?
Residents in each district are watching your votes.
Approve the appeal. Deny the DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Ave.
Thank you.
Taffy Patton
Chair, Residents Coalition
District 4
City Clerk: Please include this letter in the records for City Council Agenda Item 6-A. 4/23/19
Item 6A
04/23/19
35 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SUPPORT Appeal - Council Agenda 4/23/19 agenda item 6-A
From: Tricia Crane <1triciacrane@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2019 10:06 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown
Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Greg
Morena <Greg.Morena@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <suehimmelrich@gmail.com>; Ana Maria Jara
<AnaMaria.Jara@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>;
Denise Anderson‐Warren <Denise.Anderson‐Warren@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SUPPORT Appeal ‐ Council Agenda 4/23/19 agenda item 6‐A
April 21, 2019
To: City Council
RE: 4/23/19 agenda item 6-A -- Appeal of DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Avenue
Dear Council:
The Board of Northeast Neighbors supports the Appeal of the Development Review Permit for 1828
Ocean Avenue.
The scale disparity between this proposed massive development and adjacent homes to the north is
disturbing and fails to comply with the LUCE.
We remind the City Council of the relevant LUCE goals and policies that require new buildings to
transition in size, height and scale to the adjacent neighborhoods.
We ask the Council to approve the appeal and deny the Development Review Permit, major
Modification and Waiver.
This development should be redesigned so that it is reduced in height and increased in setbacks that
respect the existing neighborhood.
Thank you.
The Board of Northeast Neighbors
City Clerk – Please include a copy of this letter in the record for City Council Agenda item 6-A, April
23, 2019
Item 6A
04/23/19
36 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 8:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 1828 Ocean Avenue
From: Sally Reinman [mailto:sallyreinman@icloud.com]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 8:37 AM
To: Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ana Maria Jara
<AnaMaria.Jara@SMGOV.NET>; Greg Morena <Greg.Morena@SMGOV.NET>; Councilmember Kevin McKeown
<Kevin.McKeown@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>;
Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: 1828 Ocean Avenue
Dear Council Member:
We love the city of Santa Monica and imagine you do, too. Why else would you give your time serving on the
City Council? We appreciate the work you are doing to make our city a desirable place to live.
It isn’t easy. Times change and cities must too. We recognize that part of your responsibility as a council
member is to preserve the old and incorporate the new; move forward without losing Santa Monica’s past;
balance neighborhood and development interests. We appreciate that your decisions are often difficult.
The appeal of 1828 Ocean Avenue isn’t one of those tough decisions. This is an easier one.
The project in question is across the street from the terrace neighborhood and zoned differently. We aren’t
objecting to the project; we’re merely asking for small modifications on one side of this large development. Our
neighborhood group has offered proof that these modifications can be made without costing the developer
rental units or rental space.
It’s a small ask that will have a big impact. It’s possible to provide housing with this project and preserve the
neighborhood. It’s possible to protect the terrace streets zoned to maintain their scale while retaining the
historic Santa Monica beachfront that people come to visit.
A new development can merge with the community in a positive way. The terrace can remain inviting and
walkable. The neighborhood can reach across the terrace and grow.
Please support the appeal by SOAR for the changes on the Vicente Terrace side of this project.
Respectfully,
Sally Reinman and Marcel Geloen
11 Vicente Terrace
Item 6A
04/23/19
37 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Board Members, Cont.
Kiersten Elliott
Santa Monica College
Sara Escobar
HULU
Jeffrey Fritz
Coldwell Banker
Annie Goeke
Earth Rights Institute
Stephanie Harris
Carlthorp School
Jeff Jarow
PAR Commercial Real Estate
Kevin Kozal
Harding Larmore Kutcher &
Kozal
Robert Kull
The Lobster
Julia Ladd
Macerich/Santa Monica Place
Marcel Loh
Providence St John’s Health
Center
John Loyacono
Bank of America
Brian MacMahon
Expert Dojo
Jennifer McElyea
Watt Investment Partners
Susan Gabriel Potter
Bob Gabriel Insurance
Evan Pozarny
Muselli Commercial Realtors
Julie Reback Spencer
Cedars Sinai
Ali Sahabi
Optimum Seismic
Heather Somaini
Lionsgate
John Warfel
Metropolitan Pacific
David Woodbury
Arthur Murray Dance Center
Chair
Jeff Klocke
Pacific Park on the Santa
Monica Pier
Past Chair
West Hooker-Poletti
Caffe Bella
Chair Elect
Laura McIver
Shutters Hotel on the
Beach
Treasurer
Len Lanzi
Los Angeles Venture
Association
Vice Chairman
Colby Goff
Rustic Canyon Family of
Restaurants
Vice Chairman
Richard Chacker
Perry’s Café and Bike
Rentals
Vice Chairman
Dave Rand
Armbruster Goldsmith &
Delvac
Vice Chairman
Ellis O’Connor
MSD Hospitality LLC
Vice Chairman
Peter Trinh
Avery, Craftsman Bar &
Kitchen
Board Members
Daniel Abramson
RAND Corporation
Alisha Auringer
LAcarGuy
Judy Barker
Barker Hangar
Josh Bradburn
Charles Schwab & Co.
Ted Braun
UCLA Health
Gauri Brienda
Gauri Brienda
Consultancy
Bettina Duval
BRDBND
April 23, 2019
Santa Monica City Council
1686 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Appeals 18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391 and 18ENT-0392 - DENY
Dear Mayor Davis and Council Members,
The Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce expresses our strong
support for the two mixed-use housing projects proposed for 1921
Ocean Front Walk and 1828 Ocean Avenue. As such, we urge you to
deny the aforementioned appeals and uphold the Planning
Commission’s decisions on these projects.
These projects will help provide the housing that we need in Santa
Monica by creating 105 new rental units within walking distance of
the Downtown Santa Monica Expo Line station. Importantly, 16 of the
new units would be deed-restricted, very-low income affordable units
and managed by a nonprofit affordable housing provider. Half of these
units would be family-sized units (i.e. two- and three-bedroom units)
with access to a plethora of amenities. These are exactly the kind of
housing projects that the LUCE envisions, and that this Commission
has prioritized.
In addition to providing a variety of housing opportunities, the
projects would provide ground-floor restaurant/retail space, enhancing
the pedestrian activity in this area. The 1921 Ocean Front Walk
project proposes to include two ground-floor restaurants with indoor
and outdoor seating along the boardwalk. The 1828 Ocean Avenue
project would include a ground-floor corner café. In addition to
creating employment opportunities, this provides walkable dining and
refreshment options to area workers and visitors, the projects’ tenants
and surrounding neighbors.
Finally, the projects are sustainably designed to use 10% less energy
than California’s Energy Code requires and will include solar panels.
The projects will also have electric vehicle charging stations and
bicycle parking spaces to encourage sustainable modes of
transportation.
In summary, the proposed projects provide vital housing, affordable
housing, pedestrian oriented ground-floor uses, and are sustainably
designed. For these reasons, we urge you to approve the 1921 Ocean
Front Walk and 1828 Ocean Avenue projects.
On behalf of the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce, we thank you
for considering our comments.
Sincerely,
Laurel Rosen
President/CEO
Item 6A
04/23/19
38 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
SUMMARY OF 1828 OCEAN AVENUE APPEAL
Who we are
We are a group of neighbors who live on the terrace streets between the Pier and north of the
1828 Ocean Avenue Project. Our small but densely populated neighborhood is one of the
remnants of the historic Santa Monica beach community that abuts the 1828 Ocean Avenue
Project.
We are appealing this development project, not opposing it. And we are not trying to change
the entire project, just the buildings that front on Vicente Terrace. We support the city’s need to
provide affordable housing, and we welcome new neighbors. We believe it’s possible to
provide new housing and maintain the character of our neighborhood.
Our ask
We are asking for design modifications that make the project more compatible with the scale,
residential character and historic nature of our neighborhood as required by the City’s General
Plan, the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE).
We are asking you to send this project back for revision with the following instructions:
1.Reduce the height on Vicente Terrace by 10 feet.
2.Increase the setback of the buildings on Vicente Terrace to at least 15 feet.
3.Amend the design on the Vicente Terrace side to break up the canyon-like effect
currently proposed.
4.Ensure that 1828 Ocean Avenue housing is residential and not short-term rentals or
corporate short-term rentals.
5.Ensure that 1828 Ocean Avenue residential paid parking costs no more than 1750 beach lot
parking, or restrict 1828 Ocean Avenue residents from purchasing in said lot.
6.Restrict 1828 Ocean Avenue residents from buying Vicente Terrace parking permits (already
75 have been sold for 20 spaces).
Why it’s important
The current plan for 1828 Ocean Avenue Project does not comply with the LUCE policies:
The LUCE’s policy for the Beach and Oceanfront District, where 1828 Ocean Avenue Project is
located, dictates:
LU18.2. Respect the scale and character of the districts existing residential areas in the
design and construction of new buildings. 2.6-28
Item 6A
04/23/19
39 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
The LUCE’s policy for new development in the city of Santa Monica requires:
LU 1.5 Design Compatibility. Require that new infill development be compatible with the
existing scale, mass and character of the residential neighborhood. New buildings
should transition in size, height and scale toward adjacent residential structures. 2.1-11
LU1.3 Quality of Life. Preserve neighborhood quality of life and protect neighborhoods
against potential impact related to development....2.1-11
Specific areas of non-compliance
Respect for Scale, Character and Design Comparability (LU 18.2, LU 1.5*)
The scale for the residential neighborhood, terrace streets north of the 1828 Ocean Avenue
Project including Vicente Terrace, is defined by Municipal Code, 9.08.030. They are zoned R3,
requiring a 20 ft. front set-back, height of 20 ft., 30 ft with community benefits, 40 ft if 100%
affordable housing.
When compared to these requirements, the size, height, scale and design incompatibility of
1828 Ocean Avenue Project to adjacent residential structures becomes clear.
•Its setback is 13 feet (sidewalk to chevrons).
•The height goes from 42 to 52 feet.
•The building extends for 140 feet. After a 22-foot opening there is another 175 feet of
buildings, abutting and including Shutters Hotel, to Appian Way. A canyon-like effect is
created. The flat roof furthers that effect*.
•The step-backs on the four and fifth stories, at 31 to 41 feet, are too high to offer relief for
pedestrians or residents across the narrow street, which is 30 feet R.O.W. from property
line to property line*.
•The building design is modern, facing a potential historic neighborhood*.
*Attachment 1
Quality of Life (LU 1.3)
If 1828 Ocean Avenue Project must preserve the neighborhood’s quality of life and protect the
neighborhood from the impact related to its development, then the implications of the rental
and parking arrangements for the residents need to be addressed.
•Short-term rentals. The neighborhood will be greatly altered if 1828 Ocean Avenue Project
allows short and/or corporate rentals. This has happened before, especially in our beach
neighborhoods. The project promises housing and enjoys all the benefits and support the
city is offering developers who provide it. It must be subject to strong, enforceable
measures to keep it from becoming short-term vacation housing or corporate housing.
•Parking. Compared to most Santa Monica neighborhoods, parking is insufficient to meet
demand in our beach-side community. Currently 75 permits are sold for 20 spaces on
Vicente Terrace with 122 spaces at Beach Lot 1750 serving the terrace streets and Sea
Castle Apartments. The 1828 Ocean Avenue Project offers renters paid parking but at an
unknown cost. Its residents should be restricted from purchasing Vicente Terrace parking
permits. Further, if the cost of the project’s parking is greater than parking for Beach Lot
1750, then its residents should be restricted from purchasing spaces at that location.
Item 6A
04/23/19
40 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Proof of a workable alternative
With the help of an architect, we present proof of a workable alternative as a middle-ground
solution tending to be more compliant with the LUCE. Our alternative provides no loss in the
number of units nor change of configuration (Attachment 2 and 3).
We don’t assume that our alternative is the one and only possibility; we offer it merely as proof
that alternatives can be found within the design constraints that can include and address our
objections to the current design. We request that the architects of 1828 Ocean Avenue Project
be given a clear objective — to find a solution that ensures a smooth transition between the
project and the neighborhood as the LUCE requires.
Problems exacerbated by the projects
The EIR states there will be no significant impact to traffic in the neighborhood with the
addition of these 105 apartments and three new eating venues at 1828 Ocean Avenue and
1921 Ocean Front Walk. Common sense and our daily experience suggest otherwise.
What we know, not reflected in the EIR, is that our neighborhood already is faced with two
unresolved traffic problems: 1) the gridlock on warm beach days and pier events; and 2) the
use of Appian Way as a 24-hour loading zone for Shutters Hotel, where delivery trucks block
one lane of a narrow, public street.
These problems will become even worse when 150+ residents of the projects are added to the
neighborhood. Gridlock conditions are more than an inconvenience. They pose a safety risk
to the entire neighborhood when fire, police and emergency vehicles are blocked from access.
The spirit of our appeal
We are one of the historic beach neighborhoods, and hundreds of visitors walk our streets
during the year. They enjoy the character and scale, as we do. We want the terrace streets to
continue to be inviting and walkable, full of light and space, and safe for residents and visitors.
In becoming part of our neighborhood, we want 1828 Ocean Avenue Project to be compatible
with it and contribute to it. We want the project to comply with the spirit and the letter of the
LUCE policy: “The highest priority of the LUCE framework is to preserve the character and the
scale of Santa Monica neighborhoods.”
April 22, 2019
Item 6A
04/23/19
41 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
ATTACHMENT 1
LUCE
Additional Articles of Non-Compliance
LU 15.2 Respect Existing Residential Scale. New commercial or mixed-use buildings adjacent
to residential districts shall be contained within a prescribed building envelope designed to
maintain access to light and air and to preserve the residential character. 2.1-20
LU 15.3 Context-Sensitive Design. Require site and building design that is context sensitive
and contributes to the City’s rich urban character. 2.1-20
LU 15.10 Roofline Variation. Buildings should be designed with a variety of heights and shapes
to create visual interest while maintaining a generally consistent street front. To achieve this
goal, development standards should provide flexibility to encourage buildings with interesting
silhouettes and skylines, and the primary facades shall not be lower than the designated
minimum street facade height.
LU15.11 Building Façades and Step Backs. Buildings should generally conform to the minimum
and maximum requirements for the street façade height established for their designated area.
Portions of a building façade higher than the street frontage, 35 feet for most mixed-use
areas, shall step back from the façade of the floor below in a manner that will minimize the
visual bulk of the overall building as viewed from the public sidewalks and roadway and ensure
maximum light, air and sense of openness for the general public. Guidelines or standards for
the building mass above the street wall shall be established in the zoning ordinance.
Item 6A
04/23/19
42 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
ATTACHMENT 2
Proof of a Workable Alternative
Item 6A
04/23/19
43 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
ATTACHMENT 3
Proof of a Workable Alternative
Address Height
ASK: Reduce the height on Vicente Terrace by 10 feet
ACTION: Remove top floor on Vicente Terrace structures, 4 apartments
Address Mass
ASK: Break-up 140 foot wall facing Vicente Terrace
ACTION: Remove 3 apartments, creating a mid-building courtyard, breaking the
building into two small structures.
RESULT: Remove 5,600 sq. ft. and relocate 7 apartments
HOW: Two possibilities
A. Reduce unit size of 2 bedroom units (average 1,025 sq. ft. to 875 sq. ft.) and 3 bedroom
units (average 1,305 sq. ft. to 1,125 sq. ft.). These reductions would provide 5,122 sq. ft.,
almost making up for the 5,600 sq. ft. deleted.
•1 bedroom apartments: Maintain the average 668 sq. ft.
•2 bedroom apartments: Reduce the average from 1,025 sq. ft. to 875 sq. ft. (4 of 19
two bedrooms are currently that size)
•3 bedroom apartments: Reduce the average from 1,305 sq. ft. to 1,125 sq. ft. (2 of 12
three bedrooms are currently that size)
B. Or, the existing unit sizes could remain with the 5,600 sq. ft. regained from the courtyard,
which exceeds code, by reducing 9 feet in width and 10 feet in length.
RESULTS
•The total number of units is not changed.
•The total number of affordable units is not changed.
•The bedroom mix has not changed.
•The rental area could remain the same by reducing the width and length of the
center courtyard.
•Importantly, the clear dictate of the LUCE, preserving neighborhood scale and
character, is recognized.
Item 6A
04/23/19
44 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Item 6A
04/23/19
45 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:58 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 1828 Ocean Avenue
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave appeal.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: Murray Gold [mailto:murraygold@mac.com]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 8:35 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: 1828 Ocean Avenue
To our City Council representatives,
As householders on Vicente Terrace in Santa Monica, we would like to place on record that we stand
with our neighbors in objecting to the current version of the building project at 1828 Ocean Avenue.
We agree with them that the proposal does not adhere to the city’s land use and circulation element
regulations (LUCE) and join them in asking that you consider the very reasonable alternate plan that
they have submitted or a similar alternative which does not reduce the number of affordable homes in
the development.
Kind regards,
Murray and Gemma Gold,
7 Vicente Terrace
Item 6A
04/23/19
46 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:58 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 1828 Ocean Avenue Project Appeal
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave appeal.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: Dayle Kerry [mailto:dayle.kerry@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 11:15 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: 1828 Ocean Avenue Project Appeal
Dear Council:
I have lived on Vicente Terrace for many years, 31 years to be precise, as have many of my neighbors. We raised our families here.
Looked after each other's children, held each other's hand as we've mourned our losses, chatted with each other over fences and in
our gardens and living rooms. Our little neighborhood has stood for over 100 years, our street is one of the last terraced streets in
Santa Monica and has been designated as historically significant. The street is only seven lots long, yet forty‐nine souls live on it. We
are a diverse neighborhood, racially and economically. We like it that way. We tend our gardens and look after 100 year old homes
(our old girl is 106 years old). We are beautiful and charming. The world walks by everyday on this lovely light‐filled street on their
way to the sea. One of the best sounds is that of families with small children skipping down our sidewalk to the beach and all it's
delights. We often act as Santa Monica's ambassadors to the world, welcoming and directing visitors to, and through, our quaint
little neighborhood.
We welcome new neighbors and are not opposed to the development. We are opposed to being walled in by a project that looms
over us, dwarfing our homes and blocking the sky. We are one of the narrowest one‐way streets in the city ‐ one lane of parking and
one lane of driving, nineteen‐and‐a‐half feet from curb to curb, with five‐foot sidewalks making it less than thirty feet from property
line to property line. Yet the Edward Thomas Group has treated their design on our street as if we are the 80‐foot‐wide Pico Blvd or
the 100‐foot‐wide Ocean Avenue. They are literally walling us in. We terrace down, they are terracing up, with a flat roof line which
reinforces the walling effect.
We have tried to work with them, and they have made slight improvements, but they haven't gone far enough. The second stories
on our two story houses are stepped back, each home respecting the light and air of our next door neighbor. This plan was a
deliberate choice by each property's designer, as it should be. Our street before Hyatt built what has become Shutters was four
lanes wide, two for traffic, two for parking. This was taken away from us as a gift to that developer. We had no say. The properties
at the bottom of the street do not get much sunlight most of the day because Shutters looms over them. Vicente Terrace has
sacrificed much in the name of progress: constant construction, traffic congestion on weekends, the inability to leave our homes
without careful planning, coping with the fear that emergency services will not be able to reach us during times of gridlock. And the
City continues to ask for more without solving already existing problems. Still, we would welcome new families, especially
if they respectfully transitioned to our little neighborhood, with decent setbacks and lowering the height from
50 plus feet to 40 and varying the roof line. We look to the LUCE, because LUCE was conceived to protect
neighborhoods like ours.
Item 6A
04/23/19
47 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
We want to support this development. We just want a better plan for Vicente Terrace. We deserve better and we cannot
understand why The Edward Thomas Group and City Staff don't think we do.
Please help us.
Sincerely,
Dayle Kerry
SOAR Member
Item 6A
04/23/19
48 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:58 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 1828 Ocean Ave.
From: Joanne Leavitt [mailto:joanneleavitt5@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 3:07 PM
To: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ana Maria Jara
<AnaMaria.Jara@SMGOV.NET>; Councilmember Kevin McKeown <Kevin.McKeown@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich
<Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Greg Morena <Greg.Morena@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer
<Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; David Martin <David.Martin@SMGOV.NET>; Russell Bunim
<Russell.Bunim@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: 1828 Ocean Ave.
Dear Mayor Davis and Councilmembers,
I am writing regarding the project at 1828 Ocean Avenue, which was approved, with its “sister” project on
Oceanfront Walk, on December 5 of last year, and subsequently appealed by three parties.
I urge you to follow Staff’s guidance and deny the three appeals that will come before you on Tuesday night:
18ENT-0390, 18ENT-0391 and 18ENT-0392.
The project site(s) lie on the boundary between Ocean Park and Pico neighborhood, an area where scores of
jobs are being created in the hospitality, service and tech sectors, as well as in the City government. These
employees, at a variety of income levels, must be housed to address the overwhelming housing crisis and help
address our dramatic jobs/housing balance problem. These are community issues, and the applicant has
obviously sought to make his projects the best that they can be for the entire community. That kind of effort
includes establishing a dialogue with neighbors.
I am aware that over several months homeowners on Vicente Terrace have actively engaged with both the
applicant and City Staff to shape the 1828 Ocean Avenue project in order to further their concept of their
neighborhood. The project team, led by one of Santa Monica’s finest, community-friendly architectural firms,
Koning Eizenberg, strove in good faith to address their concerns, including providing plans for very attractive
frontage along Vicente Terrace. It’s worth noting that the issues were addressed substantially without creating a
Item 6A
04/23/19
49 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
considerable and negative effect on critically-needed housing in the pipeline. It was a win-win on December 5,
and it will still be a win-win for the projects and neighborhood on Tuesday night.
I ask you to uphold the Planning Commission’s approval and support Staff’s position.
Sincerely,
Joanne Leavitt
Item 6A
04/23/19
50 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:59 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 1828 Ocean Avenue Project
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Heide Franke [mailto:heidefranke@verizon.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 7:47 PM
To: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Sue Himmelrich
<Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Ana Maria Jara <AnaMaria.Jara@SMGOV.NET>; Councilmember Kevin McKeown
<Kevin.McKeown@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Greg Morena
<Greg.Morena@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Re: 1828 Ocean Avenue Project
Dear Council Members,
> I have lived in Santa Monica for over 45 years. My father lived on Vicente Terrace, my son lived on Vicente Terrace
and I have lived there as well. I still own 1/2 of a duplex, live close by and feel comfortable calling it my neighborhood.
That is why I am writing to you.
>
> Needless to say, I know the neighbors, many have been there 25 years plus and I know the community, which is an
enviable mix of people and housing. This community is being squeezed off the map using EIRs, LUCE etc. to justify
development. Yesterday I took a look at google earth, which confirmed my observation. I call it a "squeeze play". It's
not hard to imagine being gobbled up. That would be a shame and unfair. A shame to lose such a vibrant little
community and unfair to all of the neighbors who have considered this home for so very long.
> I would also like to take this opportunity to tell you what we want. We want neighbors, not a wall and we don't care if
they are Russian oligarchs, Arab sheiks, occupants of affordable housing or simply people who can afford the rent. We
want neighbors that we can get to know, borrow a cup of sugar from and share a cup of coffee with. These are the
simple kinds of opportunities and situations that build community. Architecture and long term leases have the power to
make this happen.
>
> Louis Kahn, a famous architect, once said, "the street is a room by agreement". Please help us build this room by
reducing the mass and height on Vicente Terrace and encouraging a design that will be welcoming to neighbors and
provide a transition from our relatively small homes to the larger development.
Sincerely,
Heide Franke
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
Item 6A
04/23/19
51 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:59 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Comment Concerning the 2-23-19 City Council Agenda Item pertaining to the appeal of the
Development Project at 1828 Ocean Ave. From jerry Bass and Stephanie Barbanell
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave appeal.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: SGB [mailto:barbanell@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 4:32 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Comment Concerning the 2‐23‐19 City Council Agenda Item pertaining to the appeal of the Development
Project at 1828 Ocean Ave. From jerry Bass and Stephanie Barbanell
Item 6A
04/23/19
52 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
Item 6A
04/23/19
53 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:59 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Appeal for Height + Mass Reduction on Vicente Terrace
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave appeal.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: Tatum Brontë [mailto:tatum.bronte@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 12:18 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Appeal for Height + Mass Reduction on Vicente Terrace
To City Council,
I am a former resident of Vicente Terrace and long time resident of Santa Monica. My family continues to
reside on Vicente Terrace, and it is a quiet and safe place that I hope to bring my children in the coming years.
It is a neighborhood street that generations of families have called home since the early 20th century.
I support the appeal for the reduction of height and mass on the Vicente Terrace side of the project. As the
street is already narrow with increasing traffic, I am concerned that more development could drastically
transform a quaint neighborhood street into a congested and polluted space disruptive to community.
While I understand that cities evolve over time, I implore you to respectfully consider the nature of the space
of the considered development:
Vicente Terrace is only two car lanes wide with sidewalks for pedestrians, often families with small children or
young people enjoying the beach. It is so small that there is no room for a bike path. Unlike wider streets, like
Pico and Ocean Avenue, Vicente Terrace will not be able to endure the weight of what a taller, larger building
entails in addition to dominating a once open air space: parking for 105 new apartments and all of their
vehicles, in addition to beach and Pier traffic. Inevitably, this will affect the area with more carbon pollution,
space congestion, and less safety for pedestrians. It will no longer be a "walk on the beach"‐‐but an urban area
that requires caution.
Considering this, we kindly ask that your council honors our compromise of a one‐floor height reduction and
more space between buildings on the Vicente side.
Please consider the community in your plans for development. My family is one of artists, actors, musicians,
and writers. We host visitors in a beautiful portion of our property nearly every week of the year. We are part
Item 6A
04/23/19
54 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
of the creative and communal fabric of this city and no stranger to sharing its magic. As development
increases, we lose our ability to not only park easily at our own home, but contribute to our community and
what makes Santa Monica an inspiring destination and cultural gem.
In our compromise of space on the Vicente side, we ask that you honor the value of community over
development dollars, cleaner air over a boost in financial profit, and respect for the livelihood of future
generations of working‐class Santa Monica families.
Thank you for your time and consideration, and for your service as City Council members. We look forward to
meeting you in person for this discussion.
Kind regards,
Tatum Brontë
Item 6A
04/23/19
55 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 3:59 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: please
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave appeal.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: Jack Côté [mailto:jack.cotet@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 9:49 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: please
To City Council members of Santa Monica,
My name is Jack Cote and I’m a Senior Product Manager at Fender Musical Instruments, and therefore have a
daily deep appreciation for long standing California cultures and the traditions and aesthetics of my home.
I was born and raised in Santa Monica, before the Pier looked so pretty and everybody still thought Muscle
Beach from the 60s was in Venice. I’ve travelled a lot but I'm still a resident of Santa Monica today.
I’m writing to express my support for the S.O.A.R (South Ocean Avenue Residents) association’s appeal to the
development on Vicente Terrace.
Not to prevent new money, or growth, or any other natural tax-generating enterprise that helps the place that I
love to live in.
Simply, a 1 floor reduction on the height of the Vicente Terrace side and introducing more space between the
buildings on that Vicente side, to break up the solid mass that is planned. The other side is a nice wide street
with businesses that can handle the mass just fine.
Please help to prevent my home neighborhood from becoming the old man’s house in UP. It doesn’t take much
to make a giant building feel less giant and that’s all I am asking for.
Please help us to blend in this new development with the neighborhood, rather than ruining it.
Appreciative of your consideration,
Item 6A
04/23/19
56 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
Jack Côte
jack.cotet@gmail.com
Item 6A
04/23/19
57 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 4:00 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: support staff recommendation on items 6a and 6b
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave & 1921 OFW appeals.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: Judy Abdo [mailto:judyabdo@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 11:26 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: support staff recommendation on items 6a and 6b
Mayor Davis, Mayor pro tem O’Day, and Councilmembers,
I urge you to deny the appeals of the mixed‐use housing projects at 1828 Ocean Ave and 1921 Ocean Front Walk. Please
allow these projects to move forward. Our community needs the 105 new housing units including the 16 affordable
units. We need housing for our local workforce and these projects will create an important connection between Ocean
Park, Pico, and Downtown. I am especially happy that the projects include strong sustainability measures. Please follow
the staff recommendations.
Judy Abdo
Item 6A
04/23/19
58 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 22, 2019 4:01 PM
To:City Council Distribution Group
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Appeal for Height Reduction on Vicente Terrace Building
Council‐
Please see the email below re: 1828 Ocean Ave appeal.
Thank you,
Stephanie
From: Zoe Cote [mailto:zoeccote@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 2:39 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Appeal for Height Reduction on Vicente Terrace Building
Dear SM City Council,
As a former resident of Vicente Terrace in Santa Monica and SaMoHi alum, I implore you to restrict the height
of the building set to be constructed there. I fully support the appeal for less height and mass on the Vicente
Terrace side of the property. I have lived there and my family still lives there. I cannot imagine how awful it
will be for my family and other families that reside there to have a giant apartment building next to our homes.
High-rise buildings ruin the fabric of neighborhoods and Vicente Terrace in particular is too small to
accommodate this kind of building. I implore you, if you must build something there, I support the appeal to
reduce the height and mass. Please consider how this community will be affected and imagine if your home was
going to be invaded in this way. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Zoe Coté
Item 6A
04/23/19
59 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Elizabeth Van Denburgh <emvandenburgh@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 23, 2019 8:04 AM
To:Gleam Davis; Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Sue Himmelrich; Ana Maria Jara; Greg Morena; Ted
Winterer; Terry O’Day; councilmtgitems
Subject:City Council 4/23/19, Item 6-A - Appeal of 1828 Ocean Avenue DR Permit -- SUPPORT by Wilmont
Board of Directtors
April 23, 2019
To: City Council
From: Board of Directors, Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont)
RE: 4/23/19 agenda item 6-A -- Appeal of DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Avenue
The Wilmont Board supports the appeal by nearby residents and other neighborhood groups, of the
Development Review Permit for 1828 Ocean Avenue (NW corner of Ocean Avenue and Pico Blvd.).
This 52-foot tall project will be directly across narrow Vicente Terrace from one-story homes to the
north.
We feel this project is important to all neighborhoods as we watch the current tsunami of development
that ignores the impact on existing residential neighborhoods. We ask that the City of Santa Monica
uphold it its own Land Use and Circulation Element. This project does not comply with the
LUCE. Residents are asking for the following modifications in the design, not for a reduction in the
number of units. We request the following modifications:
1) Increase setbacks on the north side (minimum of 15 feet).
2) Reduce height by 10 feet on the Vicente Terrace side of the project.
3) Break up the massive north-facing elevation, to avoid the “canyon” effect.
The objectives are to meet these LUCE goals and policies:
a) Preserve the low scale character and appearance of the Beach and Oceanfront District.
b) New buildings should transition in size, height and scale toward adjacent residential
structures (such as the one-story homes on the north side of the project).
Item 6A
04/23/19
60 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
2
c) Respect the scale and character of the oceanfront district’s existing residential areas in the
design and construction of new buildings.
In addition:
4) Require that these are “real” rental units, no short-term rentals or corporate housing.
5) Require that paid parking for the project tenants cost the same or less than street parking
and nearby beach lot parking.
6) Prevent project residents from buying preferential parking permits on Vicente Terrace --
75 permits have already been issued for only 25 spaces.
This is not a “housing vs. neighborhood” argument. The argument is that developers should be
required to adhere to the LUCE. Further examples:
LUCE Executive Summary
Page 3 – “The highest priority of the community was the preservation of the existing character and
scale of Santa Monica’s neighborhoods.”
Page 5 – “The community’s greatest concerns are the loss of neighborhood character…and
the construction of larger-scale, insensitive infill building.”
LUCE Chapter 2.1 – Land Use Policies and Designations
GOAL LU1: Conserving and Enhancing Neighborhoods: Neighborhood Conservation – Protect,
conserve and enhance the City’s diverse residential neighborhood to promote and maintain a high
quality of life for all residents….”
Policy LU 1.3 -- Quality of Life. Preserve neighborhood quality of life and protect neighborhoods
against potential impact related to development.”
Item 6A
04/23/19
61 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
3
Policy LU 1.5 -- Design Compatibility. Require that new infill development be compatible with
the existing scale, mass and character of the residential neighborhood. New buildings should
transition in size, height and scale toward adjacent residential structures.
LUCE Chapter 2.6 -- Beach and Oceanfront District (including the area south of the Pier along the
seaward side of Ocean Avenue)
GOAL D18: Preserve the low scale character and appearance of the Beach and Oceanfront
District….
Policy D18.1 – Preserve the existing residential uses to maintain the existing land use diversity
and character.
Policy D18.2 -- Respect the scale and character of the district’s existing residential areas in the
design and construction of new buildings.
The Wilmont Board supports the appeal and thanks you for your consideration to support
modifications requested by nearby residents.
Wilmont Board of Directors
Item 6A
04/23/19
62 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Councilmembers,
The homeowner’s association has asked me for advice how to maintain the character and scale
on Vicente Terrace. My design suggestions come with the LUCE in mind as well as considerable
background in multi-family design.
There appears to be a very easy and realistic middle ground where there is no loss of unit count
or FAR, just a simple reworking of building massing, while most importantly adhering to the
LUCE in establishing a scale and character that is significantly more compatible with the
longstanding neighborhood of homes with a hundred year history. And residents who have
lived in these homes for 30 years or more, should not see the financial value of their property
reduced by 20% or more, which is neither necessary or fair.
1 - This shows the character and scale of the residential neighborhood and the area along
Vicente Terrace.
2 - And this is what’s proposed – it’s massive relative to the existing neighborhood. The section
is counter to LUCE 15.2 which reads new mixed-use buildings adjacent to residential districts
shall maintain access to light and air and preserve residential character.
3 - These plans and diagrams illustrate an easy fix with no loss of unit count or FAR – by
reducing a very generous center courtyard – a change that doesn’t affect the project in any
significant way but helps the neighbors immensely.
The center courtyard length is reduced from 139 ft to 124 ft. The courtyard width reduced
from 49 ft to 40 ft. And there is 32 ft clear from balcony to balcony across the courtyard while
the existing separation of existing adjacent balconies are only 10 ft, 12 ft, 16 ft, and 26 ft.
4 - And this is a very deceptive rendering the developer submitted which greatly reduced the
true massiveness by being significantly smaller in scale which is not fair or right. Just the fact
that the rendering is so out of scale should be reason alone to look seriously at these
alternatives. In this perspective, when you measure the 49 ft-10 inch distance from the r.o.w.
line on the north side to the 41 ft, 7 inch height at the building corner on the flat portion of the
Item 6A
04/23/19
63 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
building you have a more accurate and massive picture. The overlay on the lower right shows a
far more reasonable approach.
5 - And this suggests an easy solution by changing the massive size of the buildings facing
Vicente Terrace – again without reducing unit count or FAR. And notice the shaded outline of
the existing homes across the street at the bottom elevation.
And LUCE 15.11 states buildings higher than 35 ft shall step back and minimize the visual bulk
as viewed from sidewalks and roadway and ensure a sense of openness for the general public.
When there’s a very legitimate question raised by the community, the burden of this analysis
shouldn’t fall on the residents. When residents raise valid questions simple alternatives should
be proposed by the developer and his architects for staff and the Architectural Review Board
and Planning Commission to review. And if alternatives are not offered, then your planning
staff should require it.
I certainly hope Council can see that this massive scale on Vicente Terrace is not necessary to
maintain unit count & FAR, and how this can be an easy win-win-win for the developer, the
residents, and the Council - making it clear to developers that better and more sensitive design
is not only encouraged but a necessity for our city. This is the right thing to do and will help
restore our trust in the city’s planning process.
Ron Goldman
Item 6A
04/23/19
64 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Mary MARLOW <m.marlow@verizon.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 23, 2019 11:46 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Mary Marlow; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Ted Winterer; Sue Himmelrich; Greg
Morena; Ana Maria Jara
Subject:4/23/19 agenda item 6-A -- Appeal of DR Permit for 1828 Ocean Avenue
Mayor Davis and Councilmembers,
I write as a resident of Santa Monica in support of the neighbors (SOAR) appeal of the Planning Commission approval of
the apartments at 1828 Ocean Avenue. The property is located in a prime area of the city near the beach and
transportation choices. As a Tier 2 project, the Planning Commission is constrained by the Zoning Code from
disapproving a project that meets relevant zoning criteria, but the City Council may require changes to protect an
existing neighborhood as the LUCE states is a priority.
I agree with the neighbors design modifications that would make the building more compatible with the surrounding
scale and mass of existing buildings while keeping the number of apartments the same.
I urge you to approve the positive changes that protect the neighborhood proposed for the project and uphold the
appeal.
Sincerely,
Mary Marlow
Ocean Park resident
Item 6A
04/23/19
65 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
the character &scale on Vicente Terrace
Item 6A
04/23/19
66 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Vicente Terrace street section creating canyon
and obstruction of morning sunlight
design is massive relative to existing neighborhood
Item 6A
04/23/19
67 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
courtyard width 49’ → 40’
length 139’→124’
setback 10’ → 15’
10’ →
↑
4’
← 5’
courtyard –length reduced from 139’ to 124’
-width reduced from 49’to 40’
-32’ clear from balcony to balcony across
courtyard
-existing separation of adjacent balconies are
10’, 12’, 16’ & 26’
added s.f.area
Item 6A
04/23/19
68 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
sketch as presented by developer’s architect sketch with dimensions per plans
sketch with realistic building mass
at wall line (excl. triangular projections)sketch removing 4th floor units & 3 center units
(total of 5600 sq ft moved to center courtyard)
Item 6A
04/23/19
69 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19
Item 6A
04/23/19
70 of 70 Item 6A
04/23/19