Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso 10-18 (338-400 Pier Ave)P.C. RESOLUTION 10-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ALLOCATION OF USES FROM A MIX OF RETAIL, STORAGE, OFFICE AND SNACK SHOP TO ALL OFFICE WITH LESS THAN REQUIRED PARKING, AND PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES 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, 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 Blake Holdings, LLC, owner of property at 338 and 400 Pier Avenue seeking approval of a Parking Plan and Precise Development Plan Amendments to change the allocation of uses from a mix of retail, storage, office and snack shop to all office with less than required parking, and modifications to exterior architectural features. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the subject application on December 1, 2010, 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. 11 which is intended to provide pedestrian-oriented uses and streetscape emphasizing local community serving uses. 2. On August 15, 2006 the Planning Commission approved the subject commercial buildings at 338-400 Pier Avenue per Resolution 06-23, consisting of 14,580 square feet of mixed commercial retail, office and snack shop uses with reduced parking requirements based on shared parking, peak hour usage, and restriction of 1,000 square feet for basement storage which was excluded from calculation of gross floor area. 3. As constructed and confirmed by Planning Commission at its June 15, 2010 meeting, the commercial buildings as-built consist of 14,110 square feet with 37 parking spaces. The Commission also confirmed other changes to architectural and site details as in substantial compliance with approved plans and conditions. 4. The applicant proposes to occupy both commercial buildings for administrative office use as sole user. The applicant intends to rearrange the interior layout in order to create office space sufficient for 25 staff members and perform exterior architectural upgrades. 5. A parking analysis submitted by Linscott, Law and Greenspan (Trip Generation and Parking Demand Assessment for the Playa Hermosa Plaza Renovation, November 22, 2010) indicates traffic generation is less than for the mixed uses previously approved. 6. The project as constructed provides 37 parking spaces, while the new use would result in parking requirement of 42 spaces based on gross floor area. The applicant proposes two approaches to meeting parking demand: (1) to base parking demand on net floor area excluding 2,612 square feet (atrium stair, reception, restrooms, and mechanical/elevator that are not functional area of the buildings), thereby resulting in net floor area of 11,498 square feet, which equates to 35 spaces; or (2) if calculation based on net floor area is not acceptable, then 7 tandem spaces with an attendant would be provided, in addition to 1 the 37 onsite spaces, for a total of 44 spaces. Since the as-built plans indicate the building is only 14,110 square feet, only 42 spaces are required, and therefore only 5 tandem spaces are needed. The applicant further offers the following conditions: a. The allocation of uses cannot be modified unless approved by the Commission. b. The reduced parking requirement and Parking Plan are conditioned upon the premises being operated by a single user (and its affiliates (if any); in the event that the premises are operated by multiple tenants a new parking plan must be submitted and approved to justify any deviation from city code parking requirements. c. All available parking shall be free to customers and employees. d. Bicycle parking shall be provided onsite. e. Pursuant to the recommendations of the applicant’s traffic engineer, provide directional signs at the pedestrian exit locations of the parking structure to encourage use of the crosswalk at the Loma Drive/Pier Avenue intersections rather than crossing Loma Drive mid-block. 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 Amendment with a reduction in parking requirement from 42 spaces to 37 spaces and finding the facility will be adequately parked per Sections 17.44.210(A) and (B): 1. The parking plan will be revised to provide additional parking spaces in tandem, with an attendant as required. 2. The applicant proposes to restrict the use to a single user and its affiliates which allows increased control over parking functions. 3. The development approved per Planning Commission Resolution 06-23 is conditioned upon provision of bicycle parking and a parking management plan provide for the future evaluation of the parking arrangement, free parking, and the potential need to provide attendant parking. Section 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings the Planning Commission makes the following findings pursuant to H.B.M.C. Section 17.58.030 pertaining to the application for a Precise Development Plan Amendment: 1. The proposed replacement the French doors with operable windows with stone/stucco trim to frame windows and replacement of light fixtures located next to the windows on the second level will not have a material effect on the architecture of the building or the streetscape. 2. The cumulative effect of proposed and previously confirmed modifications has produced a building that is fairly ‘flat’ and monochromatic in nature. Since the original project exhibited pedestrian- oriented retail and snack shop uses on the ground floor, which were consistent with objectives of the SPA-11 zone, and the modified building together with the requested elimination of pedestrian-oriented use is inconsistent with the intent of the SPA-11 zone, and it is appropriate to add variable paint colors, belly band, or other pronounced features which provide interest, reduce the effect of building mass, and provide visual breaks on the buildings, and these minor enhancements will be compatible with the surroundings. 3. To reduce the impacts to residents, lighting shall be modified to fully conform to SPA-11 requirements. Section 5. The project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) per Guidelines, Section 15301, Class 1 (a) interior and exterior alterations to an existing facility 2 involving negligible or no expansion of use, the project is located in an urbanized area, and all necessary public services, access and facilities are available. Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the subject Parking Plan and Precise Development Plan Amendments subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission Resolution 06-23 and all conditions therein shall remain in full force and effect, except as follows: a. Conditions of Approval No. 1 is amended to read: The development and continued use of the property shall be substantially consistent with submitted plans as reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meetings of August 15, 2006, incorporating all revisions as required by Resolution 06-23, and as further described and confirmed by the Planning Commission on June 15, 2010, and plans as reviewed by the Planning Commission on December 1, 2010. 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. b. Condition of Approval No. 8 is amended to read: The entire premises at 338 and 400 Pier Avenue consisting of 14,110 square feet of floor area shall be occupied by a single occupant user (i.e., business) (and its legally recognized business affiliates, if any) office use with the characteristics stated described in the applicant’s submittals and floor plan approved by the Commission on December 1, 2010, and any other use, multiple businesses, or modified floor plan arrangement is not allowed unless and until an amendment to this Parking Plan is approved supporting the conditions and any deviation from parking standards. 2. A deviation from parking standards is based, in part, on revision of parking plans to designate five (5) parking spaces in tandem, with provision for an attendant when use of tandem spaces is required to meet parking demand. The uses of the buildings shall be substantially consistent with submitted plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on December 1, 2010 and any change in allocation of space deducted from parking demand shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 3. Final plans for building permit issuance shall be consistent with approval from August 15, 2006 and plans as modified and confirmed by Planning Commission on June 15, 2010 and by this approval. 4. Bicycle facilities approved by the Community Development Director shall be provided onsite. If onsite provision is infeasible, the operator may pay an in-lieu fee for an approve bike rack to be located on the public right of way in the vicinity of the premises at the rate of one (1) bicycle space per seven (7) employees or 3,000 square feet of floor area, pursuant to H.B.M.C. Section 17.38.550(I)(5). 5. Directional signs shall be provided at the pedestrian exit locations of the parking structure directing use of the crosswalk at the Loma Drive/Pier Avenue intersections rather than crossing Loma Drive mid-block. 3 6. Prior to certificate of final occupancy, the applicant shall provide architectural features to add interest to the buildings, such as variable paint colors, belly band, or other pronounced features which provide interest, reduce the effect of building mass, and provide visual breaks on the buildings to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. All exterior lighting shall be modified to conform to SPA-11 requirements (H.B.M.C. Section 17.38.550(M). 7. If a review of this Precise Development Plan or Conditional Use Permit 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 premise. 8. Approval of these permits shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval by the Planning Commission, 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 8. 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 agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. The Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan Amendment 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 9. 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. 4