Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 98-03 - (509 - 511 Pier) - ParkingP.C. RESOLUTION 98-3 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PARKING PLAN TO ALLOW A LAUNDROMAT & COFFEE HOUSE BUSINESS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL OFF-STREET PARKING ALLOWING THE CHANGE OF USE OF A 900 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF AN EXISTING LAUNDROMAT TO INCLUDE A COFFEE HOUSE /SNACK SHOP) AT 511 PIER AVENUE LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 29 HISS' ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH TRACT Section 1. An application was filed by Peter Buccoleri, seeking approval for alterations to an existing 2320 square foot building containing a coin-operated Laundromat. The applicant is proposing to add a 900 square foot coffee house/snack shop within the building, requiring a Parking Plan pursuant to Section 17.44.210 to allow the change to a more intense use without providing additional off-street parking. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed de novo public hearing to consider the application for a Parking Plan on January 20, 1998, at which testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission Section 3. Based on evidence received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission makes the following factual findings: 1. The existing 2320 square foot coin operated Laundromat is in poor condition and in need of maintenance and new equipment. Space for 4 parking spaces is available behind the building, although it is currently not clearly delineated. 2. The applicant proposes to maintain the laundry facilities on the easterly side of the existing building, with new equipment and plumbing and electrical upgrades, and to use the westerly side of the building for a coffee bar, with the two functions connected to allow joint use. Also, the parking area will be clearly marked for four parking spaces, included one handicapped accessible space. 3. The coffee house portion will occupy approximately 900 square feet, and is considered a more intense use requiring additional parking pursuant to Section 17.44.030 of the Zoning Ordinance Section 17.44.030 states that snack bars/snack shops shall provide parking at the same ratio as restaurants, but allows the Planning Commission to consider a lesser parking requirement based on the characteristics of the building, the proposed specific snack shop use, and its location. 4. Calculating the increased parking requirement pursuant 17.44.140 (E) when the use of an existing building is changed to a more intense use, and based on the maximum requirement O of a restaurant use, the proposed 900 square feet of coffee house results in an additional off- street parking requirement of 5 spaces. 5. Given the existing lot size and building coverage it is not feasible to provide addition off-street parking on site without a complete redevelopment ofthe site. Section 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pertaining to the application for the Parking Plan: 1. The site is zoned C-2, and is suitable for the proposed use with the proposed amendment; 2. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding commercial and residential uses; 3. The imposition of conditions as required by this resolution will mitigate any negative impacts on nearby residential or commercial properties; 4. The parking demand resulting from change of use of a portion of the existing building from general retail to a coffee house in this case is actually a change from laundry machines to a coffee bar with limited seating and, therefore, may actually reduce potential parking demand at peak times of use since a lower proportion of coffee house customers would be likely drive to this destination and need parking than typical Laundromat customers who usually carry heavy loads of clothes. 5. If the coffee house use, however, results in more intensive use and parking demand said demand can be absorbed, negating the need for adding parking, because of the following: a) The location of the business is within the pedestrian oriented downtown, accessible to public on -street parking, and public parking facilities; b) The peak business hours will likely be morning and mid-day while peak parking in the downtown is typically in the evening. Also, any added demand in the evening will be off -set by shared use with the neighboring law office parking located offthe alley, which typically has 4 spaces available after office hours. c) Shared parking due to shared use ofthe two functions of the business, meaning that the seating/occupant area will often be used by Laundromat customers waiting for their wash loads to be completed; d) A significant number of any anticipated customers ofthe coffee house will be walkers, or will be sharing a trip to this destination with other trips in the area whether for shopping, or business, or nearby employment 6. This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303c of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Parking Plan, subject to the following Conditions ofApproval: 1. The proposed alterations shall be substantially consistent with submitted plans. Modifications to any of the plans shall be reviewed and may be approved by the Community Development Director. 2. A minimum of 4 parking spaces shall be provided and striped to the rear of the subject business, as shown plans. 3. An agreement for use of the available parking spaces from the adjacent office use to the east shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director 4. Bicycle racks shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director Section 6. This grant shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the owners of the property involved have filed a 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. 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. Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, it agents, officers, and employees 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 brought within the applicable time period of Government Code Section 65907. 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 no thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 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 ofthe 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. aeaftsei-;:-/ The Planning Commission may review this Permit and may amend the subject conditions or impose any new conditions if deemed necessary to mitigate detrimental effects on the neighborhood resulting from the subject use. VOTE: AYES: Comms. Perrotti, Merl, Schwartz, Pizer, Chairman Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. 98-3 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, at their regular meeti 1 anuary 20, 1 C 8. Pete Tucker, Ch.. rman Date —17 — 98 rs511 3