Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 11-07 - (1429 Hermosa)P.C. RESOLUTION 11-7 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A SURFACE PUBLIC PARKING LOT WITH A MAXIMUM OF 35 SPACES AT 1429 HERMOSA AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 15 THROUGH 18, HERMOSA TRACT, 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 Hermosa Beach Parking Company, LLC seeking approval for a Precise Development Plan to improve an 11,516 square foot lot located at the intersections of Hermosa Avenue with 15th Street and 15th Court with a surface parking lot with 35 spaces. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application for a Precise Development Plan (PDP 10-11) on December 1, 2010 and January 18 and February 15, 2011, at which time testimony and evidence, both oral and written, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. Section 3. Based on the Staff Report, testimony and evidence received, both written and verbal, the Planning Commission makes the following factual findings: The site is zoned C-2, General Commercial, which permits parking lots by right pursuant to H.B.M.C. Section 17.26.030 and 17.26.050(B). Pursuant to Section 17.58.020 the project requires a Precise Development Plan compliant with Section 17.26.050 (standards in C-2 zone), Chapter 17.44 (parking lot design), Chapter 8.44 (SUSMP) and Chapters 8.56 and 8.60 (water efficient and conserving landscaping). The proposed parking lot exceeds 25 spaces and therefore a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) per Municipal Code Chapter 8.44 is required. While a parking lot in the commercial zones is a permitted land use to provide customers of commercial establishments parking opportunities, the development and operation of the parcel as a commercially operated parking lot that is not associated with any particular business requires a Precise Development Plan (PDP). PDPs are required to achieve a reasonable level of quality, compatibility, and harmony with the community's social, economic and environmental objectives, and to protect existing and potential developments and uses on adjacent and surrounding property. Section 17.58.030(A) also provides that all development shall be in compliance with minimum standards of the zoning ordinance. On a case by case basis, the planning commission may impose standards above the minimums designated by the zoning ordinance to improve the quality of development and to mitigate any environmental impacts. 2. The site is bounded by Hermosa Avenue, 15th Street and 15th Court. The site is adjacent to C-2 and R-3 zoning. A two-story apartment building is located immediately adjacent to the rear of the site, and other multi -family units are located across 15th Street and 15th Court (alley) proximate to the two one-way driveways accessing the parking lot. 3. The applicant proposes landscaping, pay points or meters, drainage improvements, surfacing, and signage. 4. The project record includes multiple letters and petition opposing the project on the basis of increased noise and disturbances particularly in the late evening/early morning hours, increased traffic and queuing on the adjoining streets and within the neighborhood, headlights and lighting, and aesthetics and litter; and multiple letters and petition in support of the project expressing the need for more parking. 5. The January 18, 2011 Staff Report recommended closing the lot between 12:00 midnight and 7:00 a.m. together with installation of a barrier as methods for reducing impacts and improving compatibility with the surroundings. The applicant objected to these proposals as being financially infeasible and inconsistent with the manner in which the city operates its public parking lots, among other reasons. 6. On January 18, 2011, the Commission expressed concern over the lack of a parking management plan as a basis for evaluating and controlling the impacts of a parking lot on the surroundings and environment. The applicant supplied a parking management plan, set forth in the February 15, 2011 Staff Report, providing an open, non -attended parking lot offering 24-hour parking on an hourly, daily, overnight and monthly basis as determined by the management; valet parking may be provided only if the lot is rented for events; no onsite attendant or management will be provided; litter control will be provided monthly or as needed; and other details. The applicant's revised site plan provided a masonry wall along the rear property line per Section 17.26.050(B), nine evergreen trees along the rear wall to increase privacy, a tree in the planter along Hermosa Avenue, the westerly row of parking spaces to be limited to `permit parking' only, central light standards to be eliminated in favor of low level lighting, and other minor changes. Section 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pertaining to the application for a Precise Development Plan to construct a parking lot pursuant to Subsections C of Section 17.58.030 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: 1. The proposed development would interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in such area, because of inappropriateness of design in relation to the surrounding vicinity, and there are no known conditions of approval which can be imposed that could resolve such problems. The project as designed is not harmonious with adjoining high density residential development and is inconsistent with the intent of the commercial zones. The project will create a concentration of parking spaces adjacent to high density residential uses and will result in adverse impacts to residents of those dwellings and nearby residences, including but not limited to noise and disturbances generated by vehicles accessing and leaving the site and car doors closing, patrons returning to the lot alone or in groups, typically from downtown entertainment venues late at night, and to a 2 lesser degree vehicle emissions and headlights, and litter. Operation and design of the lot as proposed will be inconsistent with the City's Noise Ordinance which prohibits continuous, repeated or sustained noise from commercial establishments between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. that is plainly audible from a residential dwelling unit's property line. Written comment and testimony at the public hearing indicated that the parking lot would cause adverse impacts relating to: people walking late at night to and from downtown bars, restaurants and nightclubs to their vehicles thereby causing disturbances related to congregating, loud talking and socializing; the proposed concentration of parking spaces would exacerbate problems already caused by vehicles parked on the street along Hermosa Avenue and side streets; increase noise and disturbances associated with starting car engines and vehicle security systems; light from head lamps shining into windows may disturb residents; egressing vehicles would drive through the residential areas to avoid queuing, there would be increased traffic and noise on 15th Court; the single exit (rather than two-way drive aisles) means all egressing vehicles would utilize 15th Court which is a narrow alley; intoxicated drivers from the bars using the lot increases risk of accidents; increased traffic poses a safety hazard for children living nearby; a parking lot attracts loiterers and behavior associated with over - intoxication (public urination, etc.); property values near the parking lot may decrease; and more parking attracts more traffic to the area. While the applicant proposes to plant a row of evergreen trees in the landscape planter at the rear of the lot and to restrict the westerly row of parking spaces to `permit parking' only, the Commission finds that vegetation and limiting the westerly row of spaces to permit parking (undefined) are not adequate to control noise and disturbances, light from headlamps, vehicle emissions, and impacts relating to traffic and queuing. Leasing the spaces to particular individuals will not mitigate potential noise after midnight because the lessees will be permitted to come and go at any hour without restriction. Further, the applicant opposes any conditions that limit hours of operation, require onsite management, or require any type of physical gate or barrier as a means of reducing space turnover or controlling activity and behavior on the lot, which would assist in reducing the secondary impacts identified above, particularly in the late evening/early morning hours. The proposed project is inconsistent with the intent of the commercial zone as set forth in subsection A.4 of Section 17.26.020 because the project cannot be modified in a manner acceptable to the applicant that will "minimize the impact of commercial development on adjacent residential districts" as stated above. The proposed project is inconsistent with subsection A.5 because the effects of the proposed use are not harmonious with the character of the area in which it is located as stated above due to adverse effects of an unattended parking lot lacking controls in this particular location adjacent to residential uses. 2. The proposed development would have significant environmental adverse impacts that are not mitigable and a finding of overriding considerations cannot be made. The proposed parking lot will create a concentration of parking spaces in a location that is currently vacant due to demolition of a small retail business. Noise and disturbance impacts, and other impacts identified under paragraph 1 above, cannot be adequately mitigated without restricting and controlling hours, operations and project design. Such controls as necessary to reduce noise and disturbances could secondarily assist in reducing impacts relating to queuing, traffic congestion and circulation issues, idling and emissions, headlamps, loitering and litter. The applicant opposes and states that limits on hours of operation, controls to limit space turnover, physical barriers or gates, onsitelactive oversight, and similar measures that would control noise and disturbance are unacceptable, beyond limiting one row of parking to `permit parking' (undefined). Therefore impacts cannot be mitigated. While the demand for parking spaces serving locals, tourists and persons visiting the entertainment venues in the downtown area is high especially during the summer months and in the evenings year around, the advantages of a net increase of 33 parking spaces in this location does not outweigh the adverse impacts to neighboring residents from potential noise and disturbances. Section 5. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the 'Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the project is not subject to CEQA because CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves. Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby denies the Precise Development Plan (PDP 10-11). 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: Comms.Hoffman,Pizer,Chmn.Allen NOES: Comms.Darcy,Perrotti ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. No. 11-7 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at its regular meeting of February 15, 2011 and memorialized on March 15, 201. Kent Allen, Chairman ;:"` n R ,e son, Secretary March 15 2011 Date 4