HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 06-23 - (338 and 400 Pier)1
2
4
5
6
7
8
.9
1a
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
P.C. RESOLUTION 06-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR TWO COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS
CONTAINING 14,580 SQUARE FOOT TO BE OCCUPIED BY A MIX OF
OFFICE, RETAIL AND SNACK SHOP USES, AND A PARKING PLAN TO
ALLOW REDUCED PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SHARED PARKING
AND A MITIGATED ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT
338 AND 400 PIER AVENUE LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 AND 2
TRACT 1851 AND LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, HISS' SECOND ADDITION TO
HERMOSA BEACH
The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as
follows:
Section 1. An application was filed by Al Marco owner of property at 338 and 400 Pier
Avenue seeking approval of a Precise Development Plan to construct two commercial buildings
with shared parking, and a Parking Plan for reduced parking requirements based on the peak
shared parking demand of the proposed uses.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider
the subject application on June 20, and August 15, 2006, and considered testimony and evidence
both written and oral. Based on the testimony and evidence received the Planning Commission
makes the following factual findings:
1. The subject sites are located on the south side of Pier Avenue at the east and west
corners of its intersection with Loma Drive. The property slopes up from Pier Avenue with a
grade change of approximately 6-10 feet from front to back. The property historically has been
used a mortuary/funeral home, with 338 Pier Avenue containing the building and 400 Pier
Avenue containing a surface parking lot and garage.
2. The project involves the demolition of all existing improvements and the
construction of two story buildings on each site, containing retail uses on the ground floor of the
building at 33.8 Pier Avenue and a snack shop on the ground floor at 400 Pier Avenue, and offices
on the second floor of each building, and includes a two level parking garage to the rear of the
building at 400 Pier Avenue with 38 parking spaces. Each level of the garage will be accessed
directly from Loma Drive using the slope condition of Loma Drive to access each level. The total
allocation of uses for the project include approximately 5,692 square feet for retail use, 1,791 for
snack shop, and 6,092 square of second floor offices. The proposed development requires a
Precise Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. Since the project is located in the downtown district, the retail and office uses are
subject to the parking requirements of Section 17.44.040 which require 3 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of floor area, and the snack shop use may also be considered a retail use for the
calculation of parking requirements subject to approval of a Parking Plan. This results in a total
off-street parking requirement of 41 spaces. 37 spaces plus one tandem space are provided in the
proposed parking structure. .........
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2s
29
4. The applicant is requesting consideration of a Parking Plan, pursuant to Section 17.44.
for a reduced parking requirement, based on the shared peak parking demand of the proposed
combination of uses.
Section 3. Based on the foregoing factual findings the Planning Commission makes the
following findings pertaining to the application for a Precise Development Plan, and Parking Plan:
1. The project is consistent with applicable general and specific plans and is in compliance
with the use and development requirements of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. The site is zoned C-2 and is physically suitable for the type and density of proposed
development and the project and the proposed use complies with the development standards
contained therein;
3. The project, as conditioned, will conform to all zoning laws and criteria and will be
compatible with neighboring commercial and residential properties in the downtown district;
4. Pursuant to Section 17.44.210 of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows a reduction
in parking spaces required based on factors including shared parking (i.e. consideration of the
differing peak hours of the proposed uses in multi -tenant buildings) the applicant has provided, all
the information necessary to show that adequate off-street parking will be provided, based on the
shared parking analysis submitted by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, which shows a peak parking
demand for 2:00 P.M. on weekdays, of 36 spaces, and 37 spaces are provided in the parking
structure.
5. The general criteria of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 17.58.030 for granting
or conditionally granting a Precise Development Plan have been considered. In making this
finding, the Planning Commission has determined that:
a. The proximity of the project to existing commercial and residential uses in the
downtown area will not result in negative effects with incorporation of the conditions
below.
b. The project is designed to minimize impact on ocean views from residential areas, as
the building will be constructed in compliance with the 30-foot height limit of the C-
2 zone and its maximum height will be lower than or comparable to the existing
building.
c. The amount of proposed off-street parking is sufficient for actual need and consistent
with the parking requirements for the downtown district. Further, the closure of an
existing curb cut and other off -site improvements will result in up to 3 additional on -
street parking spaces.
d. The uses proposed are compatible with each other and with the area.
e. The capacity. and safety of the streets serving the area is adequate for the traffic
volume estimated to be generated by the project as shown by the traffic impact
analysis prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, which demonstrates that traffic
2
z
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
generation will not significantly increase as compared to the existing uses on the site,
and the increase will not result in significant impacts on nearby intersections.
f The proposed exterior signs and decor are sufficiently compatible with existing
establishments in the area with incorporation of the conditions below.
g. Building and driveway orientation is appropriate to minimize noise and traffic
impacts on nearby residential areas.
h. The project will not result in adverse noise, odor, dust or vibration environmental
impacts.
i. The proposed use will not result in an adverse impact on the City's infrastructure
and/or services.
6. The criteria of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 17.58.030(C) for denial of
a Precise Development Plan are not applicable. In making this finding, the Planning Commission
has determined that:
a. The project will not substantially depreciate property values in the vicinity, or
interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in such area, because of excessive
dissimilarity or inappropriateness of design in relation to the surrounding vicinity.
a. The project will not have significant environmental adverse impacts
Section 4. Environmental Review.
1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA') and the City's
local CEQA Guidelines, the Staff Environmental Review Committee prepared an Initial Study of
the potential environmental effects of the proposed project as originally submitted, which included
restaurant uses, and a greater deficiency in parking. Based upon the Initial Study, the Committee
determined that there was no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City, that
the project would have a significant effect on the environment with mitigation measures
incorporated, and this finding applies to the project as revised since it was reduced in intensity by
the elimination of a proposed restaurant. City staff thereafter prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the project and duly provided public notice of the public comment period and of
the intent to adopt a mitigated Negative Declaration. A copy of the Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
2. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Negative Declaration and mitigation
measures and all comments received regarding the. Negative Declaration. Based on the whole
record, and in recognition that the potential parking impacts have been substantially reduced by the
elimination of the restaurant use, the Planning Commission finds that: (i) the Negative Declaration
was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) there is no substantial evidence that the proposed
project will have a significant effect on the environment. Based on these findings, the Planning
Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the proposed project
as modified to incorporate the following mitigation measure:
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
1s
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Parking shall be proved for customers and employees free of charge and on a first come
first serve basis (i.e. no assigned parking) to maximize the efficient use of the parking
structure.
Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the subject
Precise Development Plan, and Parking Plan subject to the following Conditions of Approval:
1. The development and continued use of the property shall be substantially consistent
with submitted plans as reviewed by the Planning Commission at their meeting of
August 15, 2006, incorporating all revisions as required by the conditions below. Any
major modification, including changes in the allocation of uses within the buildings,
shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission. Minor
modifications may be approved by the Community Development Director but shall not
be final until confirmed by the Planning Commission as a consent calendar item on the
Commission agenda.
2. Final plans for building permit issuance shall be revised.to incorporate the following.
a. A five-foot setback, clear from ground to sky shall be provided along the south
property Iine of both properties.
b. The plan shall clearly depict parking lot Iighting, and all light fixtures shall be
located such that property line walls or building walls shield the light source
from residences to the south, with light directed downward to minimize off :site
glare in all directions.
C. A decorative block wall (minimum 6-feet, maximum 8 feet) shall be provided
along the southerly property line.
d. Pervious paving shall be provided in the paved areas at the southerly portion of
the site.
3. A revised detailed landscape plan for on -site, and off -site landscaping, consistent with
the conceptual plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community
Development Director prior to issuance of building permits incorporating the revisions
below:
a. Decorative paving surfaces shall be provided at driveway entry areas and at the
pedestrian entry areas on Pier Avenue.
b. Street trees shall be provided as per the conceptual landscape plan with final
tree Iocation, type, and tree grates to be reviewed and approved by the Public
Works Director.
C. Bicycle parking shall be provided in a convenient location, to the satisfaction of
the Community Development Director.
4. All parking shall be available for free to customers and employees of the two buildings
on site, and no parking spaces shall be assigned for exclusive use by any owner,
.occupant, or tenant.
a) A right turn only restriction shall be posted at the exit of the parking garage
on Loma Drive
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
30
1i
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
b) The applicant shall coordinate with. the Public Works Department regarding
the appropriate location for a loading zone to accommodate the retail
businesses on the two sites.
5. A parking management plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission, regarding parking operations parking efficiency and security
and control of access, and setting forth a program to ensure free parking for the
employees/customers of the building through the use of validation, or passes, or other
method, and said plan shall include how the Parking Plan will be enforced including
the signage to be posted in the parking facilities. The plan shall be implemented when
the building(s) are occupied. The Commission shall review the parking management
plan and the operation and efficiency of parking facility 6 months after occupancy of
the building, and at that time evaluate if any surplus parking may be available for
other downtown users.
6. ArchitecturaI treatment of the building shall be as shown on building elevations and
site and floor plans. Any modification shall require approval by the Community
Development Director.
7. A detailed comprehensive sign plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Community Development Director incorporating the. following revisions:
a. One free-standing sign is permitted, and shall be limited to a monument sign
with a maximum height of ten (10) feet.
b. A comprehensive sign program shall be submitted for review and all individual
tenant or owner signs shall be consistent with that plan.
C. Directional signs shall be provided in the parking structure to direct pedestrians
to the crosswalk:"
8. The uses of the building shall be as shown on the plan, with the following approximate
allocation of uses and shall be limited to office and retail commercial uses (including
snack shops) allowed in the C-2 zone, and shall not include any other uses subject to
greater parking requirements.
Retail
5,692 SF
Office
6,097 SF
Snack Shop
.1,791 SF
Storage
1,000 SF
Total SF
14,580
Any material change in the allocation of uses shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission
9. The reduced parking requirement as applied to the snack shop is subject to approval by
the Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 17,44,030(0) of the Zoning Ordinance,
based on tenant improvement plans submitted for a Parking Plan review prior to
issuance of permits for interior improvements.
s.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2s
29
10. An affidavit shall be filed to preserve common ownership of two separate properties
involved in this project.
11. The lots that make up each site shall be merged.
12. Final verification of compliance with the height limit requires submittal of revised roof
plan with property corner elevations and finished roof heights, and maximum heights
identified at the critical points.
13. A detailed drainage and (SUSMP) Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation PIan is
required for approval by the Public Works Department, prior to the issuance of
building permits and implemented on site, demonstrating best management practices
for stormwater pollution control, and for sediment control and erosion control during
construction.
14. The applicant is responsible for all off -site right-of-way construction required by
the Public Works Department, or alternatively, may deposit funds in amount to
cover the cost for future right-of-way construction for the Pier Avenue frontage.
15. The applicant shall submit all required plans and reports to comply with the. City's
construction debris recycling program including manifests from both the recycler and
County landfill.
16. The project shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Department.
17. Final building plans/construction drawings including site, elevation, floor plan,
sections, details, signage, landscaping and irrigation, submitted for building permit
issuance shall be reviewed for consistency with the plans approved by the Planning
Commission and the conditions of this resolution, and approved by the Community
Development Director prior to the issuance of any Building Permit.
18. All roof equipment shall be located and designed to be screened from public view and
any portion that exceeds the height limit shall not cover more than 5% of the roof
area.
19. The project and operation of the business shall comply with all applicable
requirements of the Municipal Code.
20. The Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan shall be recorded, and proof of
recordation shall be submitted to the Community Development Department.
21. Each of the above Conditions of Approval is separately enforced, and if one of. the
Conditions of Approval is found to be invalid by a court of Iaw, all the other
conditions shall remain valid and enforceable.
22. Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, it agents, officers, and
cmployees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers,
or employee to attack, set aside, void or annul this permit approval, which action is
6
1
z
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
brought within the applicable time period of the State Government Code. The City
shall promptly notify the permittee of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City
shall cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of
any claim, action or proceeding, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense,
the permittee shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold
harmless the City.
23. The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the
City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City
because of this grant. Although the permittee is the real party in interest in an action,
the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the
action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under
this condition.
24. The subject property shall be developed, maintained and operated in full compliance
with the conditions of this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or other regulation
applicable to any development or activity on the subject property. Failure of the
permittee to cease any development or activity not in full compliance shall be a
violation of these conditions.
Section 6. This grant shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the
owners of the property involved have filed at the office of the Planning Division of the
Community Development Department their affidavits stating that they are aware of, and agrec.to
accept, all of the conditions of this grant.
Section 7. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to
the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made
within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council.
VOTE: AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Hoffinan
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. No. 06-23 is a true and complete record of the
action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at their
re Jar meeting of August 15, 2006.
�.
Kent Allen, Vice Chairman Sol Blumenfqld, Secretary
F:1B951CD1PC12006108-15-061PDPR338pier.doc
7