Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 11-11 - (737 3rd St)P.C. RESOLUTION 11-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PARKING PLAN TO ALLOW CONVERSION OF APPROXIMATELY 2,987 SQUARE FEET OF DESIGNATED STORAGE AREA WITHIN AN EXISTING 7,033 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH 20 PARKING SPACES, TO OFFICES, EMPLOYEE LOUNGE AND FITNESS AREA AND/OR SIMILAR ANCILLARY USES, WITH NO ADDITIONAL PARKING, AT 737 3" STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE SOUTHWEST 20 FEET OF LOTS 26, 27, 28 AND ALL OF LOTS 56 AND 57, WALTER RANSOM CO'S VENABLE PLACE, 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 Creators Syndicate on property owned by Slaven-Ralls, Inc. at 737 3R" Street seeking approval of a Parking Plan to allow conversion of 2,200 square feet of designated storage area within an existing 7,033 square foot commercial building with 20 parking spaces, to offices, employee lounge and fitness area and/or similar ancillary uses, with no additional parking (PARK 1 I -5). Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the subject application on June 21 and July 19, 2011, 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 site is zoned Specific Plan Area No. 7 (SPA-7) and is located on the north side of 3rd Street, west of a commercial building occupied by automotive services at 303 Pacific Coast Highway. Multi -unit residential uses are located to the west with single family residences and commercial uses to the east and south. A public parking lot with 24 spaces is located south of the property. 2. City records indicate the subject 10,025 square foot building (Assessor's data, June 13, 2011) and parking lot with 17 spaces was most recently used for auto parts storage under a 1990 conditional use permit in conjunction with an automobile dealership located on Pacific Coast Highway. In September 2007, a building permit was issued to renovate the building for office use. The renovation complied with parking requirements by providing 20 parking spaces while 19 spaces were required for 4,046 square feet allocated to office use (1 space per 250 square feet), 2,987 square feet allocated to storage (1 space per 1,000 square feet), and 2,992 square feet converted to open corridors, open balconies and open mechanical room (thereby reducing gross floor area. The renovation project was initiated and most of the work completed but the building permit expired in October 2009 and the building remained vacant. 3. The applicant proposes to occupy the building as the sole occupant. The applicant intends to modify the interior layout in order to create office space together with employee -serving amenities. 4. The project as constructed provides 20 parking spaces, while the new use would result in a parking requirement of 28 spaces based on gross floor area of 7,033 square feet. The applicant requests to utilize the entire 7,033 square foot building as office space with employee related amenities such as a fitness room and/or an employee lounge (Unit A, 1,270+ square feet). The applicant indicates the firm will occupy the building as the sole occupant, the company currently 1 employs 13 full-time staff, does not anticipate significant expansion, has very limited visitors, and maintains office hours Monday to Friday, generally 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. excluding major holidays. The applicant anticipates only 13 spaces are necessary to meet parking demand due to the limitations and some employees may walk or bike to work; however, should parking became an issue for any reason, then stacked valet parking accommodating eight additional vehicles is proposed as a viable solution since the firm will be the sole occupant and can effectively manage parking by employees and limited visitors. Section 3. Based on the foregoing factual findings the Planning Commission makes the following findings pursuant to H.B.M.C. Section 17.44.210 supporting the application for a Parking Plan with a reduction in parking requirement from 28 spaces to 20 spaces and finding the facility will be adequately parked per Sections 17.44.210(A) and (B) for the following reasons: 1. The single user occupancy allows efficient parking management and ease of implementing a valet parking program that can accommodate an additional 8 vehicles (total 28) if necessary. 2. The firm currently has 13 employees, does not anticipate a substantial increase, and few clients come to the premises. A cap of 20 full-time employees that drive to work will ensure that parking is adequate. Should the number of essentially full-time employees that drive to work or operations change materially increasing parking demand, a valet parking program to increase parking from 20 spaces to parking accommodations for 28 vehicles can be employed, and a parking management plan will provide program specifics. 3. The building floor plan exhibits four individual office units, and each unit contains an individual restroom and direct entry access. To avoid the potential for multiple tenants with differing parking demands and lack of unified control over a valet parking arrangement, the project is conditioned upon a single -occupant and a covenant to disallow subleasing of any portion of the building. 4. The site is proximate to a public parking lot containing 24 spaces with a 2-hour time limit that could supply parking for clients if parking is not available onsite. 5. To accommodate and encourage bicycling, onsite bicycle parking for three bicycles is required, such as near the southwest corner of the building: Section 4. The project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") per Guidelines, Section 15332 because the project involves infill development consisting of interior tenant improvements converting an existing structure to office use, consistent with the General Plan and zoning, the project is located on a developed lot with a building and parking lot within an urbanized area, all necessary public services, facilities, access and parking are available, and no significant effects relating to noise, parking, traffic, air or water quality will occur. Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Parking Plan subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. The floor plan and uses of the building shall be substantially consistent with submitted plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 21, 2011. Minor modifications to the plans required for compliance with project conditions or codes may be approved by the Community Development Director provided that changes in allocation of space that potentially increases intensity of use and parking demand shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 0 2. Occupancy of the building shall be restricted to a single occupant user (i.e. business) for office use with predominately weekday operations. A covenant shall be recorded on the property, in a form approved by the City Attorney and with the City made a party thereto, to prohibit subleasing of any portion of the building to another business or entity, unless this Parking Plan is amended. 3. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy a parking management plan shall be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director to address the parking deficiencies and to describe parking measures that will ensure that off-street parking supply will be sufficient to meet demand. A. The number of essentially full-time employees that drive to work shall be limited to 20 unless parking measures are instituted pursuant to the approved parking management plan, including but not limited to the use of tandem or "stacked" parking with an attendant. B. The plan shall include the specifics of the use of tandem or stacked parking with the provision for an onsite attendant when its needed, free onsite parking for employees and visitors, and monitoring to ensure the program will be instituted when documented parking problems occur or when the limit of 20 essentially full-time employees that drive to work will be exceeded. 4. Should the intensity of the use or parking characteristics change, thereby resulting in documented parking problems such as spillover demand onto neighborhood streets or other commercial lots, then the parking measures in the parking management plan shall be instituted to resolve such problems to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 5. All parking shall be shared among all employees and visitors to the building, and shall be available on a first come, first served basis (i.e., no assigned or reserved spaces for any person). 6. Bicycle facilities to accommodate three bicycles, approved by the Community Development Director, shall be provided onsite. 7. The parking lot and improvements to the building shall comply with all requirements of the Municipal Code, and all requirements of the Building, Public Works and Fire Departments. 8. If a review of this Parking Plan occurs, the Planning Commission may amend the above conditions and/or impose any new conditions deemed necessary to mitigate detrimental impacts on the environment or neighborhood arising from use of the premises, or to ensure that the facility is adequately parked. 9. The Parking Plan shall not be effective unless and until the building conforms to all codes and Conditions of Approval have been complied with. Approval of this permit shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of adoption of this resolution, unless significant construction or improvements or the use authorized hereby has commenced. One or more extensions of time may be requested. No extension shall be considered unless requested, in writing to the Community Development Director including the reason therefore, at least 60 days prior to the expiration date. No additional notice of expiration will be provided. Section 6. This grant shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the owner 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 agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. The Parking Plan shall be recorded, and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if one of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. To the extent permitted by law, Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Hermosa Beach, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indemnified parties") from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. 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. 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 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,Perrotti,Pizer,Chmn.Darcy NOES: Comm.Allen ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. No. 11-11 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at its regular meetings of June n my 19, 2011. S awn Darcy, ChairmanT o ecretary July 19, 2011 Date 4