ITEM 12-B
Council Mtg: September 26, 1989 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of CUP 512, DR
446, ZA 5345-Y, EIA 872, Located at 2900 Wilshire
Boulevard and 1217 Yale Street; Appellant: Zealund
Corporation
INTRODUCTION
Before the Council is an appeal of a Planning Commission denial
of a Conditional Use Permit, Site Review Permit, Variance and
Certification of an Environmental Impact Report to permit the
construction of a six-story, 76,483 square-foot office building
with three levels of subterranean parking and a two-story, 11-
unit apartment building with one level of subterranean parking.
This application is subject to review under the provisions of the
previous zoning ordinance. This matter was originally scheduled
for Council review in July 1989, but was continued at the request
of the applicant. Staff recommendation is to uphold the Planning
Commission and deny the appeal.
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The subject property is a 42,500 sq. ft. parcel located on the
southeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street having a
frontage of 170 feet on Wilshire Boulevard and 250 feet on Yale
Street. The site is currently developed with Madame Wong's res-
taurant/club, which would be demolished to permit the proposed
development. Surrounding uses consist of a four-story, medical
office building (C6) to the north; a one story, low-density
residential structure (R2) to the south; a two-story commercial
building and one and two-story low-density residential buildings
(C6, R2A and R2) to the east and a single-story commercial center
and low-density residential buildings (C6, R2A and R2) to the
west.
Zoning Districts: C4, R2A and R2
Land Use Districts: Wilshire Corridor Commercial and
Low-Density Residential
Parcel Area: C4: 170' X 150' = 25,500 square feet
R2A and R2: 170' X 100' = 17,000 square feet
Total Parcel Area: 170' X 250' = 42,500 square feet
PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project entails the construction of a six-story,
76,483 square-foot commercial office building on the C4 zoned
property and a two-story, 11-unit apartment complex on the adja-
cent R2A and R2 zoned properties. A Site Review Permit is re-
quired to permit the commercial development to exceed a height of
4 stories/56' and a Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 2.5. The Site
Review process permits consideration of development up to a
height of 6 stories/84' and an F.A.R. of 3.0. The office build-
ing is proposed to be six stories with a height of 83' and an
F.A.R. of 3.0.
A Conditional Use Permit is required to permit the subterranean,
commercial parking garage to extend beneath the residentially
zoned property, as provided for by previous Code, Section 9148A.
A Variance is proposed to permit encroachment of the subterranean
garage into the required four-foot unexcavated side yard of the
residentially zoned property, to permit 30% compact spaces and to
permit 39 surplus commercial spaces to be tandem.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The project is subject to the previous zoning code due to the
date the application was deemed complete (prior to April 29,
1988). The proposed project is consistent with the Municipal
Code and conforms with the quantitative standards of the General
Plan as shown in Attachment A, with the following exceptions: a
variance is requested to permit the 39 surplus, commercial park-
ing spaces to be tandem spaces; 30% of the commercial parking
spaces to be compact spaces; and to allow encroachment of the
subterranean parking garage into the required 4' unexcavated side
yard setbacks on the residentially zoned property.
CEQA STATUS
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was been prepared for this
project. A 30-day public review period was conducted. Comments
were received and the responses to the comments are incorporated
into the Final EIR.
FEES
The commercial portion of this project is subject to the Housing
and Parks Project Mitigation Measures of the Land Use and Cir-
culation Elements of the General Plan. The project mitigation
measures may be satisfied by payment of an in-lieu fee to the
City as established by Ordinance 1367 (CCS).
The residential portion of this project is subject to a Parks and
Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per unit.
ANALYSIS
Project Description
The office building features a recessed, colonnaded entrance
along Wilshire Boulevard with recessed, arched window openings at
the second level above the entrance and recessed window walls.
The third and fourth floors step back ten feet along portions of
the front facade. The fifth and sixth floors step back at ten-
foot increments on all four corners of the structure. Landscaped
terraces are proposed on each corner of the two uppermost levels.
Arched windows are repeated centrally on the sixth floor of the
Wilshire Boulevard elevation. Proposed exterior materials in-
clude warm-tone granite and lightly tinted glazing with clear
glazing on the ground level.
The front setback of the proposed office building varies between
six feet and twenty-eight feet with a predominant setback of fif-
teen feet on the third through sixth floors. The setback on Yale
Street varies between six feet and eight feet. A twenty foot to
twenty-two foot landscaped setback on the eastern side of the
development is adjacent to an existing, two-story commercial com-
plex. The predominant setback between the proposed commercial
and residential structures is approximately 45 feet. A wall and
landscaping will separate the two uses.
The 11-unit apartment complex is designed as a U-shaped building
with an open courtyard on the south side of the structure. The
Mediterranean style building features a stucco exterior, arched
windows, balconies with metal railings on three elevations and a
clay tile roof. Unit plans include ten flats, ranging in size
from 1,050 to 1,300 square feet, and one two-story unit with an
area of 2,150 square feet. All units have two bedrooms, 2 baths,
kitchen and a living/dining area. Proposed setbacks for the
apartment building are 20' on the front, 15' on the rear and 9'
to 48' on the sides. Building height is proposed to be 21 feet.
Parking and Circulation Design
Access to the commercial parking garage is provided via a 30'-
wide driveway located on Yale Street approximately 130' south of
Wilshire Boulevard. A vehicle stacking distance of 115' is pro-
vided on-site prior to the ramp entrance. Two tuck-under loading
spaces are provided on the south side of the building, midway
along the drive aisle. The trash enclosure will be located on
the first level of the subterranean garage.
The location of the commercial driveway on Yale Street, rather
than Wilshire Boulevard, is supported by the Land Use and Cir-
culation Element, Policy No. 4.3.7, which states that "new drive-
ways and mid-block access points shall be limited, especially
along major roads." However, the Circulation Element also calls
for minimization of impacts on residential side streets. These
policies are weighed on a case-by-case basis, since the Circula-
tion Element does not provide strict standards for location of
commercial access points.
Required parking for the office structure is 255 spaces, based on
the code parking requirement of one parking space for every 300
square feet of floor area. The three-level, subterranean garage
provides a total of 295 parking spaces, which exceeds the code
requirement by 40 spaces. Thirty-nine of the total spaces are
proposed to be tandem parking spaces and 89 spaces (30% of total)
are proposed to be compact parking stalls. Current code permits,
by right, a maximum of 40% of the total number of parking spaces
to be compact. The proposed tandem spaces represent surplus,
rather than code-required, parking spaces.
The residential parking is separated from the commercial parking
within the first level of the subterranean garage. A separate
driveway for use of the apartment residents is provided on Yale
Street approximately 80' south of the commercial driveway. The
code requires two parking spaces per unit for a total requirement
of 22 spaces. The previous code did not have a guest parking
requirement for residential units. For purposes of comparison,
current code would require two guest spaces for a total of 24
spaces. Twenty-seven standard parking spaces are provided within
the residential parking garage, which exceeds the code require-
ment by 5 spaces. This equates to the provision of approximately
2.5 spaces for every unit.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzed various areas of
potential project-related impacts, including: traffic, circula-
tion and parking; aesthetics, shadows, light and glare; water and
sewer service; business displacement and neighborhood effects.
The EIR concluded that the project would not generate significant
environmental impacts which could not be mitigated. Some of the
major areas addressed in the EIR are discussed below.
Traffic and Circulation Analysis
Six critical, signalized intersections were analyzed in the EIR
to determine volume/capacity ratios (V/C) and levels of service
(LOS) during the morning and evening peak hours. These six
intersections are:
- Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street;
- Santa Monica Boulevard and Yale Street;
- Wilshire Boulevard and Berkeley Street;
- Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street;
- Colorado Avenue and Stewart Street; and
- Olympic Boulevard and Stewart Street.
The traffic impact analysis determined that prior to mitigation,
the project would create significant traffic impacts during the
evening peak hour at the following three critical intersections:
- Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street;
- Santa Monica Boulevard and Yale Street; and
- Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street.
The EIR proposed mitigation measures not only reduce the project-
related, significant traffic impacts, but also reduce the V/C
ratios below the projected cumulative base conditions by amounts
ranging between 2% and 18% (Please refer to Table 6 in Appendix B
of the EIR. [A correction should be noted that the similar Table
4, on page 4-14 of the EIR, contains typographical errors. Table
6 is the correct source.]). These mitigation measures are
detailed in section 4.1.3.1 of the EIR and outlined below:
Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street
Restripe both approaches of Yale Street to accommodate a
10' exclusive left-turn lane and a 15' through lane. This
would require prohibition of parking during p.m. peak
hours on both sides of Yale Street for a distance of ap-
proximately 120' north and south of Wilshire Boulevard.
This would require a no-parking restriction on approxi-
mately 14 on-street, parking spaces during p.m. peak
hours.
Santa Monica Boulevard and Yale Street
Restripe both approaches of Yale Street to accommodate a
10' exclusive left-turn lane and a 15' through lane. This
would require prohibition of parking during p.m. peak
hours on both sides of Yale Street for a distance of ap-
proximately 110' north and south of Santa Monica
Boulevard. This would require a no-parking restriction on
ten, on-street parking spaces during p.m. peak hours.
Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street
Restripe Wilshire Boulevard to accommodate a 12' exclusive
right-turn lane in the westbound direction. No loss of
parking will occur, as parking is prohibited on the north
side of Wilshire Boulevard, east of 26th Street, due to
the existing bus stop.
The EIR states that the above mitigation measures would create
the unavoidable significant impact of eliminating 14 on-street
parking spaces on Yale Street near Wilshire Boulevard and ten on-
street parking spaces on Yale Street near Santa Monica Boulevard.
However, staff does not believe this poses a significant impact
for several reasons. The 24 on-street parking spaces are pro-
posed to be prohibited only during the p.m. peak hours. By
limiting parking, the overall cumulative traffic conditions with
the proposed project would be improved over what is projected to
be the cumulative base traffic conditions without the proposed
project. This improvement goes beyond mitigating the project-
related impacts and would improve the actual operation of area
traffic, thus providing a beneficial tradeoff. Furthermore, the
project provides 40 surplus parking spaces above code require-
ment. Therefore, the loss of 14 on-street parking spaces during
the p.m. peak hours on Yale Street near Wilshire Boulevard could
potentially be regained within the subterranean garage of the
proposed project. Due to these factors, staff did not consider
the restriction of a limited number of on-street parking spaces
during certain hours to be a significant impact and, therefore, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations would not be required
should the Council wish to approve the project.
Wastewater Generation
The EIR estimates that the office project and 11-unit apartment
complex would generate 6,019 gallons per day (gpd) of wastewater.
Current wastewater generation for this site is 1,343 gpd,
resulting in a net increase of 4,676 gpd. The net increase
represents approximately seven percent of the City's six-month
wastewater allocation. The applicant could be required to
attempt to achieve a zero-net flow through a City-approved
program should the Council wish to approve the project.
SITE REVIEW CONSIDERATION
The Site Review Permit is required to permit the project to ex-
ceed a height of 4 stories/56' and an F.A.R. of 2.5 and to be
considered for a maximum height of 6 stories/84' and an F.A.R. of
3.0. The proposed project is at the maximum requested F.A.R. and
is one foot less than the maximum permitted height. The EIR
determined that, with appropriate mitigation measures, the sig-
nificant project-related impacts could be eliminated.
One of these mitigation measures is that the height and bulk of
the project be considered in detail to ensure that the office
building steps down or otherwise relates to the adjacent
residential zone. Compliance with this mitigation could require
reduction in number of stories of the development, redesign to
provide additional architectural stepbacks or reduction in floor
area.
A reduction imposed solely on the floor area or floor area ratio
of the project would not directly affect the pertinent issues of
height and bulk of the project, as a reduction in floor area
could potentially be accommodated by decreasing the building
footprint without reducing the building's height or perceived
bulk. Therefore, a more direct control of height and bulk could
be accomplished by restricting the number of stories and es-
tablishing setback requirements for the project.
A redesign of the project would be required to satisfy the design
related EIR mitigation measures, as well as to comply with Land
Use Element, Policy 3.2.1, which states that "allowable height
limits for commercial and industrial uses should step down or
otherwise relate to the height limit of the adjacent residential
zone, to reduce visual intrusion, shading and scale incongruity."
Staff recommended to the Planning Commission that the project be
redesigned to a maximum of five stories, not to exceed a height
of 70 feet, with the building footprint and setbacks to be main-
tained as proposed. Any additional refinement to the building
facade which may be necessitated by the loss of the sixth floor
to ensure the proportion and rhythm of the structure may be
presented to the Architectural Review Board. Assuming no
additional stepbacks are required on the upper levels, the
reduction of the building to five stories per the staff
recommendation to the Planning Commission would have resulted in
a total floor area of 64,178 (a reduction of 12,305 sq. ft.) and
an F.A.R. of 2.52 (a reduction of 0.48).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
On April 5, 1989 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing regarding the proposed project. The Planning Commission
had been presented with a staff recommendation for approval of
the project subject to a reduction of one story in height,
accompanied by the reduction in square footage discussed above,
as well as a variety of other conditions (see attached Planning
Commission staff report). The applicant indicated to the
Commission a preference to develop the project at the originally-
proposed six stories.
Concerns raised by the Planning Commission included the com-
patibility of the proposed six-story development with the sur-
rounding neighborhood, lack of project elements justifying the
provision of a site review bonus, the use of Yale Street instead
of Wilshire for access to the commercial development, the removal
of on-street parking as a traffic mitigation measure, inadequate
provision of open space, the lack of study of the intersection of
Arizona and Yale and Colorado and Yale, and several other issues.
A motion was made for project approval at an FAR of 2.0 with a
four-story height limit and three stories on the residential side
of the project, that the design be modified to reflect greater
pedestrian orientation on the ground level, that the building
incorporate an upper level setback as called for by the Land Use
Element and Zoning Ordinance, that the ground floor retail space
be limited to low-intensity retail, that vehicle access be from
Wilshire instead of Yale, and that the traffic study for the
project be revised. There was general discussion and expressions
of support for this motion among the Commissioners present. The
Planning Commission Chairperson asked the developer if he would
be willing to grant a Permit Streamlining Act extension to allow
time for redesign. The developer indicated he would not be will-
ing to grant such an extension.
Since the Permit Streamlining Act deadline for action on the
project was April 12, 1989, and the developer was unwilling to
grant an extension allowing the Commission to review a revised
design, a motion for denial was made based on lack of compliance
with site review criteria including a lack of provisions which
would justify a site review bonus, lack of pedestrian orienta-
tion, inadequate open space, and significant environmental im-
pacts. This motion was approved unanimously by the six Commis-
sioners present.
APPEAL
On April 19, 1989 Tamar C. Stein, on behalf of Zealund Corpora-
tion, appealed the Planning Commission's action. The appeal
letter cited three grounds for appeal: 1) That the Commission's
action was not supported by adequate findings or facts in the
record; 2) that the Commission denied the project based on the
developer's refusal to comply with conditions for which the
developer maintains compliance was not required, thereby violat-
ing substantive and due process and constituting a taking; and 3)
that the project has met all requirements of the Municipal Code
and therefore approval is warranted.
Under the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, the Planning Commis-
sion has broad discretion to act on projects, including the
ability to impose conditions to protect the public health, safety
and welfare. The Commission's concerns about the height of the
project were originally identified in the Environmental Impact
Report for the project. Other concerns, such as pedestrian
orientation and a desire to change the commercial vehicular ac-
cess point from Yale to Wilshire, are clearly within the Commis-
sion's authority.
The Commission's role in reviewing Development Review applica-
tions and other discretionary projects clearly extends beyond
measuring simple compliance with maximum General Plan height and
FAR standards. Under Ordinance Number 1321 (CCS), this review
extends to an examination of whether the size and placement of
structures is appropriate and relates harmoniously to surrounding
neighborhoods, review of the adequacy of circulation facilities
to serve the project, and inclusion of mitigation measures to
address impacts identified in the environmental review process.
The Commission's actions on this project are within its authority
and consistent with its mission of assuring that development en-
hances the quality of life in the community.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendations of this staff report have no budget/financial
impact.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Com-
mission's denial of Conditional Use Permit 512, Development Re-
view 446 and Variance 5345-Y subject to the following findings.
FINDINGS
1. The physical location, size, massing, and placement of the
proposed commercial structure on the site and the location
of proposed uses within the project are not compatible
with and do not relate harmoniously to surrounding sites
and neighborhoods, in that the proposed six-story commer-
cial building is of a larger scale than and will appear
incongruous with existing, surrounding residential and
commercial uses.
2. The granting of a Site Review bonus to permit additional
height and density bonuses above the zone's base develop-
ment standards is not warranted in that the project fails
to provide associated amenities such as neighborhood-
serving commercial uses; usable open space which is
accessible to the public; public art; substantial tiering,
stepping back and lowering of the structure to blend with
surrounding lower-scale development; adequate articula-
tion of the building design and an interactive design
promoting pedestrian orientation to the street.
3. That the Planning Commission's actions were appropriate to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the community,
and within its powers under the laws of the City and the
State of California in that the Commission's desire for a
revised traffic study was appropriate under the require-
ments of the California Environmental Quality Act, which
requires that decisionmakers be provided with adequate
information on potential environmental impacts of proj-
ects, and that the Commission felt that several intersec-
tions should be studied in relation to traffic impacts of
the project; that Ordinance 1321, to which this project
was subject, clearly contemplates a discretionary review
process for Development Review projects, including condi-
tional approvals; that Ordinance 1321 also requires com-
pliance with the General Plan and the developer was un-
willing to grant a processing extension to allow redesign
so as to comply with reasonable design changes desired by
the Planning Commission to ensure compliance with the
General Plan, which changes included revised height, step-
backs, FAR, ground floor orientation and vehicle access to
the project. That under the Zoning Ordinance and
General Plan, the Planning Commission has broad discretion
to act on projects, including the ability to impose condi-
tions to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
The Commission's concerns about the height, relation to
surrounding properties, and pedestrian orientation of the
project were originally identified in the Environmental
Impact Report for the project as potential adverse im-
pacts. Other concerns, such as pedestrian orientation and
a desire to change the commercial access point from Yale
to Wilshire, are clearly within the Commission's purview
in its exercise of good planning principles and inter-
pretation of General Plan policy and Municipal Code re-
quirements and form the basis for the Planning Commis-
sion's denial of the project.
4. Under Ordinance 1321 and site review criteria of the Land
Use and Circulation Elements, the Planning Commission
properly found that the size and placement of structures
in the proposed project is not appropriate and would not
relate harmoniously to surrounding neighborhoods, and that
circulation facilities to serve the project would be in-
adequate. The Commission's actions on this project are
within its authority and consistent with its mission of
assuring that development enhances the quality of life in
the community.
Prepared by: Shari Laham, Associate Planner
D. Kenyon Webster, Principal Planner
Attachments: A. Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance
B. Radius and Location Map
C. Project Description, Submitted by Applicant
D. Summary of Project
E. Letter from Applicant, dated 2/16/89
F. Protest Letter, dated 3/9/89
G. Final EIR
H. Plot Plan, Floor Plans, Elevations and Section
I. Planning Commission Staff Report
I. Planning Commission Statement of Official
Action
J. Letter of Appeal
NOTE: Attachments B through H, and attachment J are not
available on PEN, but may be obtained from the City Clerk's
office.
ATTACHMENT A
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Land Use
Category Municipal Code Element Project
Permitted Use C4: General General General
Commercial Commercial Office
R2 & R2A:
Low-Density Low-Density Low-Density
Residential Residential Residential
Commercial 6 stories/90' 4 stories/56;
Height
With Site Review: Site Review:
6 stories/84' 6 stories/83'
Residential 2 stories/30' Same as 2 stories/21'
Height Municipal Code
Commercial
Setbacks
Frontyard 0' Same as Code 6' - 28'
Sideyard 0' Same as Code 20'- 22'(east)
6' - 8' (west)
Rearyard 23' Same as Code 35'-6"
Residential
Setbacks
Frontyard 20' Same as Code 20'
Sideyard 9' Same as Code 9' - 50'
Rearyard 15' Same as Code 15'
Commercial 3.3 2.5;
F.A.R. With Site With Site
Review: 3.0 Review: 3.0
Parking 255 commercial 295 commercial
spaces; Same as Code spaces;
22 residential 27 residential
spaces spaces
ATTACHMENT I
CITY PLANNING DIVISION
Community and Economic Development Department
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: April 5, 1989
TO: The Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: CUP 512, DR 446, ZA 5345-Y, EIA 872
Address: 2900 Wilshire Boulevard and 1217 Yale
Street
Applicant: Zealund Corporation
SUMMARY
Action: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Site Review Per-
mit, Variance and Certification of an Environmental Impact Report
to permit the construction of a six-story, 76,483 square-foot
office building with three levels of subterranean parking and a
two-story, 11-unit apartment building with one level of subter-
ranean parking. This application is subject to review under the
provisions of the previous zoning ordinance.
Recommendation: Approval with conditions
Permit Streamlining Expiration Date: April 12, 1989
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The subject property is a 42,500 sq. ft. parcel located on the
southeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street having a
frontage of 170 feet on Wilshire Boulevard and 250 feet on Yale
Street. The site is currently developed with Madame Wong's res-
taurant which would be demolished to permit the proposed develop-
ment. Surrounding uses consist of a four-story, medical office
building (C6) to the north; a one story, low-density residential
structure (R2) to the south; a two-story commercial building and
one and two-story low-density residential buildings (C6, B2A a**
R2) to the east and a single-story commercial center and low-
density residential buildings (C6, R2A and R2) to the west.
Zoning Districts: C4, R2A and R2
Land Use Districts: Wilshire Corridor Commercial and
Low-Density Residential
Parcel Area: C4: 170' X 150' = 25,500 square feet
R2A and R2: 170' X 100' = 17,000 square feet
Total Parcel Area: 170' X 250' = 42,500 square feet
PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project entails the construction of a six-story,
76,483 square-foot commercial office building on the C4 zoned
property and a two-story, 11-unit apartment complex on the adja-
cent R2A and R2 zoned properties. A Site Review Permit is re-
quired to permit the commercial development to exceed a height of
4 stories/56' and a Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 2.5. The Site
Review process permits consideration of development up to a
height of 6 stories/84' and an F.A.R. of 3.0. The office build-
ing is proposed to be six stories with a height of 83' and an
F.A.R. of 3.0.
A Conditional Use Permit is proposed to permit the subterranean,
commercial parking garage to extend beneath the residentially
zoned property, as established by previous Code, Section 9148A.
A Variance is proposed to permit encroachment of the subterranean
garage into the required four-foot unexcavated side yards of the
residentially zoned property, to permit 30% compact spaces and to
permit 39 surplus commercial spaces to be tandem.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The project is being considered under the previous zoning code
due to the date the application was deemed complete (prior to
April 29, 1988). The proposed project is consistent with the
Municipal Code and in conformity with the General Plan as shown
in Attachment A, with the following exceptions: a variance is
requested to permit 39 surplus, commercial parking spaces to be
tandem spaces and 30% of the commercial parking spaces to be
compact spaces and to allow encroachment of the subterranean
parking garage into the required 4' unexcavated side yard
setbacks on both sides of the residentially zoned property.
CEQA STATUS
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for this
project and approval of a resolution certifying the adequacy of
the EIR is recommended. Copies of the Draft EIR were distributed
to the Planning Commission at the beginning of the 30-day public
review period. Comments were received and the responses to the
comments are incorporated into the Final EIR.
FEES
The commercial portion of this project is subject to the Housing
and Parks Project Mitigation Measures of the Land Use and Cir-
culation Elements of the General Plan. The project mitigation
measures may be satisfied by payment of an in-lieu fee to the
City as established by Ordinance 1367 (CCS) and outlined in the
conditions of approval for this project.
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT
NUMBER: CUP 512, DR 446, ZA 5345-Y, EIA 870
LOCATION: 2900 Wilshire Boulevard and 1217 Yale Street
APPLICANT: Zealund Corporation
REQUEST: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Site Review
Permit, Variance and Certification of an
Environmental Impact Report to permit the
construction of a six-story, 76,483 square-foot
office building with three levels of
subterranean parking and a two-story, 11-unit
apartment building with one level of subterranean
parking.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
4/5/89 Date.
Approved project based on the following findings
and subject to the conditions below.
X Denied.
Other.
FINDINGS
1. The physical location, size, massing, and placement of the
proposed commercial structure on the site and the location of
proposed uses within the project are not compatible with and
do not relate harmoniously to surrounding sites and
neighborhoods, in that the proposed six-story commercial
building is of a larger scale than and will appear
incongruous with existing, surrounding residential and
commercial uses.
2. The proposed development of a six-story, 76,483 square-foot
office building with three levels of subterranean parking
will create potentially significant traffic impacts in the
surrounding area, as documented in the Environmental Impact
Report, EIA 872. The proposed traffic mitigation measures of
imposing on-street parking restrictions during peak hours on
portions of nearby residential streets is not determined to
be acceptable in that the burden of traffic mitigation mea-
sures should be borne solely by the project and not by the
surrounding community.
3. The granting of a Site Review to permit additional height and
density bonuses above the zone's base development standards
is not warranted in that the project fails to provide
associated amenities such as neighborhood-serving commercial
uses; usable open space which is accessible to the public;
public art; substantial tiering, stepping back and lowering
of the structure to blend with surrounding lower-scale
development; adequate articulation of the building design
and an interactive design promoting pedestrian orientation
to the street.
VOTE
Ayes: Hecht, Kaufman, Lambert, Mechur, Pyne and Nelson
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent: Farivar
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under
the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Or-
dinance, the time within which judicial review of this decision
must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section
1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to
Municipal Code Section 1400.
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurate-
ly reflects the final determination of the Planning Commission of
the City of Santa Monica.
signature date
print name and title
The residential portion of this project is subject to a Parks and
Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per unit.
ANALYSIS
Project Description
The office building features a recessed, colonnaded entrance
along Wilshire Boulevard with recessed, arched window openings at
the second level above the entrance and recessed window walls.
The third and fourth floors step back ten feet along portions of
the front facade. The fifth and sixth floors step back at ten-
foot increments on all four corners of the structure. Landscaped
terraces are proposed on each corner of the two uppermost levels.
Arched windows are repeated centrally on the sixth floor of the
Wilshire Boulevard elevation. Proposed exterior materials in-
clude warm-tone granite and lightly tinted glazing with clear
glazing on the ground level.
The front setback of the proposed office building varies between
6' and 28' with a predominant setback of 15' on the third through
sixth floors. The setback on Yale Street varies between 6' and
8'. A 20' to 22' landscaped setback on the eastern side of the
development which is adjacent to an existing, two-story commer-
cial complex. The predominant setback between the proposed com-
mercial and residential structures is approximately 45 feet. A
wall and landscaping will separate the two uses.
The 11-unit, apartment complex is designed as a U-shaped building
with an open courtyard on the south side of the structure. The
Mediterranean style building features a stucco exterior, arched
windows, balconies with metal railings on three elevations and a
clay tile roof. Unit plans include ten flats, ranging in size
from 1,050 to 1,300 square feet, and one two-story unit with an
area of 2,150 square feet. All units have two bedrooms, 2 baths,
kitchen and a living/dining area. Proposed setbacks for the
apartment building are 20' on the front, 15' on the rear and 9'
to 48' on the sides. Building height is proposed to be 21 feet.
Parking and Circulation Design
Access to the commercial parking garage is provided via a 30'-
wide driveway located on Yale Street approximately 130' south of
Wilshire Boulevard. A vehicle stacking distance of 115' is pro-
vided on-site prior to the ramp entrance. Two, tuck-under load-
ing spaces are provided on the south side of the building, midway
along the drive aisle. The trash enclosure will be located on
the first level of the subterranean garage.
The location of the commercial driveway on Yale Street, rather
than Wilshire Boulevard, is supported by the Land Use and Cir-
culation Element, Policy No. 4.3.7, which states that "new
driveways and mid-block access points shall be limited,
especially along major roads."
Required parking for the office structure is 255 spaces, based on
the code parking requirement of one parking space for every 300
square feet of floor area. The three-level, subterranean garage
provides a total of 295 parking spaces, which exceeds the code
requirement by 40 spaces. Thirty-nine of the total spaces are
proposed to be tandem parking spaces and 89 spaces (30% of total)
are proposed to be compact parking stalls. Current code permits,
by right, a maximum of 40% of the total number of parking spaces
to be compact. The proposed tandem spaces represent surplus,
rather than code-required, parking spaces. For these reasons,
staff recommends approval of the variance to allow compact and
tandem parking spaces.
As established by the Land Use and Circulation Element, Policy
No. 4.7.10, staff is recommending as a condition of approval that
parking be provided free of charge to employees of and visitors
to the commercial complex in order to mitigate potential parking
impacts on the surrounding neighborhood, unless and until such
time as a preferential parking zone is established in the immedi-
ate area.
The residential parking is separated from the commercial parking
within the first level of the subterranean garage. A separate
driveway for use of the apartment residents is provided on Yale
Street approximately 80' south of the commercial driveway. Code
requires two parking spaces per unit for a total requirement of
22 spaces. The previous code did not have a guest parking re-
quirement for residential units. For purposes of comparison,
current code would require two guest spaces for a total of 24
spaces. Twenty-seven standard parking spaces are provided within
the residential parking garage, which exceeds the code require-
ment by 5 spaces. This equates to the provision of approximately
2.5 spaces for every unit.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzed various areas of
potential project-related impacts, including: traffic, circula-
tion and parking; aesthetics, shadows, light and glare; water and
sewer service; business displacement and neighborhood effects.
The EIR concluded that the project would not generate any
significant environmental impacts which could not be mitigated.
Some of the major areas addressed in the EIR are discussed below.
Traffic and Circulation Analysis
Six critical, signalized intersections were analyzed in the EIR
to determine volume/capacity ratios (V/C) and levels of service
(LOS) during the morning and evening peak hours. These six
intersections are:
- Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street;
- Santa Monica Boulevard and Yale Street;
- Wilshire Boulevard and Berkeley Street;
- Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street;
- Colorado Avenue and Stewart Street; and
- Olympic Boulevard and Stewart Street.
The traffic impact analysis determined that prior to mitigation,
the project would create significant traffic impacts during the
evening peak hour at the following three, critical intersections:
- Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street;
- Santa Monica Boulevard and Yale Street; and
- Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street.
The EIR proposes mitigation measures which not only reduce the
project-related, significant traffic impacts, but also reduce the
V/C ratios below the projected cumulative base conditions by
amounts ranging between 2% and 18% (Please refer to Table 6 in
Appendix B of the EIR. [A correction should be noted that the
similar Table 4, on page 4-14 of the EIR, contains typographical
errors. Table 6 is the correct source.]). These mitigation mea-
sures are detailed in section 4.1.3.1 of the EIR and outlined
below.
Wilshire Boulevard and Yale Street
Restripe both approaches of Yale Street to accommodate a
10' exclusive left-turn lane and a 15' through lane. This
would require prohibition of parking during p.m. peak
hours on both sides of Yale Street for a distance of ap-
proximately 120' north and south of Wilshire Boulevard.
This would require a no-parking restriction on approxi-
mately 14 on-street, parking spaces during p.m. peak
hours.
Santa Monica Boulevard and Yale Street
Restripe both approaches of Yale Street to accommodate a
10' exclusive left-turn lane and a 15' through lane. This
would require prohibition of parking during p.m. peak
hours on both sides of Yale Street for a distance of ap-
proximately 110' north and south of Santa Monica
Boulevard. This would require a no-parking restriction on
ten, on-street parking spaces during p.m. peak hours.
Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street
Restripe Wilshire Boulevard to accommodate a 12' exclusive
right-turn lane in the westbound direction. No loss of
parking will occur, as parking is prohibited on the north
side of Wilshire Boulevard, east of 26th Street, due to
the existing bus stop.
The EIR states that the above mitigation measures would create
the unavoidable significant impact of eliminating 14 on-street
parking spaces on Yale Street near Wilshire Boulevard and ten on-
street parking spaces on Yale Street near Santa Monica Boulevard.
However, staff does not believe this poses a significant impact
for the following reasons. The 24 on-street parking spaces are
proposed to be prohibited only during the p.m. peak hours. In so
doing, the overall cumulative traffic conditions with the pro-
posed project would be improved over what is projected to be the
cumulative base traffic conditions without the proposed project.
This improvement goes beyond mitigating the project-related im-
pacts and would improve the actual operation of area traffic,
thus providing a beneficial tradeoff. Furthermore, the project
provides 40 surplus parking spaces above code requirement.
Therefore, the loss of 14 on-street parking spaces during the
p.m. peak hours on Yale Street near Wilshire Boulevard could
potentially be regained within the subterranean garage of the
proposed project. Due to these factors, staff does not consider
the restriction of a limited number of on-street parking spaces
during certain hours to be a significant impact and, therefore, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations is not required.
Wastewater Generation
The EIR estimates that the office project and 11-unit apartment
complex would generate 6,019 gallons per day (gpd) of wastewater.
Current wastewater generation for this site is 1,343 gpd,
resulting in a net increase of 4,676 gpd. The net increase
represents approximately seven percent of the City's six-month
wastewater allocation. The applicant will be required to attempt
to achieve a zero-net flow through a City-approved program.
SITE REVIEW CONSIDERATION
The Site Review Permit is required to permit the project to ex-
ceed a height of 4 stories/56' and an F.A.R. of 2.5 and to be
considered for a maximum height of 6 stories/84' and an F.A.R. of
3.0. The proposed project is at the maximum requested F.A.R. and
is one foot shorter than the maximum permitted height. The EIR
determined that, with appropriate mitigation measures, the sig-
nificant, project-related impacts could be eliminated.
One of these mitigation measures is that the height and bulk of
the project will be considered in detail to ensure that the of-
fice building steps down or otherwise relates to the adjacent
residential zone. Compliance with this mitigation could require
the following in part or in whole: reduction in number of
stories of the development, redesign to provide additional ar-
chitectural stepbacks and/or reduction in floor area.
A reduction imposed solely on the floor area or floor area ratio
of the project will not directly affect the pertinent issues of
height and bulk of the project, as a reduction in floor area
could potentially be accommodated by decreasing the building
footprint without reducing the building's height or perceived
bulk. Therefore, it appears a more direct control of height and
bulk may be accomplished by restricting the number of stories and
establishing setback requirements for the project.
A redesign of the project will be required to satisfy the design
related EIR mitigation measures, as well as to comply with Land
Use Element, Policy 3.2.1, which states that "allowable height
limits for commercial and industrial uses should step down or
otherwise relate to the height limit of the adjacent residential
zone, to reduce visual intrusion, shading and scale incongruity."
Staff recommends that the project be redesigned to a maximum of
five stories, not to exceed a height of 70 feet, with the build-
ing footprint and setbacks to be maintained as proposed. Any
additional refinement to the building facade which may be neces-
sitated by the loss of the sixth floor to ensure the proportion
and rhythm of the structure may be presented to the Architectural
Review Board. Assuming no additional stepbacks are provided on
the upper levels, the reduction of the building to five stories
would result in a total floor area of 64,178 and an F.A.R. of
2.52.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the
resolution certifying Environmental Impact Report, EIA 872, and
approve Conditional Use Permit 512, Development Review 446 and
Variance 5345-Y subject to the following findings and conditions.
VARIANCE FINDINGS
1. There are special circumstances or exceptional charac-
teristics applicable to the property involved, including
size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, or to
the intended use or development of the property that do
not apply to other properties in the vicinity under an
identical zoning classification, in that the number of on-
site parking spaces exceeds the code requirement and the
inclusion of compact and tandem parking spaces will not
detrimentally affect the circulation and parking patterns
of the project. The extension of the subterranean parking
into the unexcavated side yard areas of the residential
property permits the provision of extra parking spaces.
2. The granting of such variance will not be detrimental or
injurious to the property or improvements in the general
vicinity and district in which the property is located, in
that similar projects in the past have utiliaed compact,
tandem and extended subterranean parking with no signifi-
cant impact on circulation patterns or neighboring
properties and that provided parking is in excess of that
required.
3. The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter
would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary
hardships, not including economic difficulties or economic
hardships, in that past projects have incorporated compact
and tandem parking spaces with no significant impacts and
the total number of parking spaces provided exceeds the
required number.
4. The granting of a variance will not be contrary to or in
conflict with the general purposes and intent of this
Chapter, or to the goals, objectives, and policies of the
General Plan, in that the project is consistent with the
General Plan.
5. The variance would not impair the integrity and character
of the district in which it is to be located, in that more
parking than is required will be provided and the variance
will not affect the appearance of the project.
6. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed
variance, in that it is a recycling of commercial land
with the provision of adequate access and circulation.
7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and
public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed
variance would not be detrimental to public health and
safety, in that the project is an in-fill in a developed
area with all necessary improvements.
8. There will be adequate provisions for public access to
serve the subject variance proposal, in that adequate
driveways will be provided on Yale Street and pedestrian
sidewalks are in existence.
9. The strict application of the provisions of Chapter 10 of
the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning
Ordinance would result in unreasonable deprivation of the
use or enjoyment of the property, in that similar varian-
ces have been granted in the past which have not created
any deleterious effects and parking is provided for the
project in excess of that required.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS
1. The physical location, size, massing, and placement of
proposed structures on the site and the location of pro-
posed uses within the project are compatible with and re-
late harmoniously to surrounding sites and neighborhoods,
in that the apartment building is of similar scale to ex-
isting residential uses and the office building is located
on a busy, commercial corridor, will be reduced to a
maximum of five stories and is setback 135' from the
nearest developed residential property.
2. The rights-of-way can accommodate autos and pedestrians,
including parking and access, in that the site design
provides adequate driveway and parking facilities and the
site is adjacent to two improved streets, Wilshire
Boulevard and Yale Street.
3. The health and safety services and public infrastructure
are sufficient to accommodate the new development, in that
the project is proposed to be an in-fill of an already
developed area with all necessary services and infrastruc-
ture preestablished.
4. Any on-site provision of housing or parks and public open
space, which are part of the required project mitigation
measures required in Subchapter 5G of the City of Santa
Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance,
satisfactorily meet the goals of the mitigation program,
in that 11 apartment units will be provided which will
comply with Program 12, the required parks and recreation
fee per residential unit will be paid and the office
project will be required to pay all necessary housing and
parks mitigation fees.
5. The project is generally consistent with the Municipal
Code and General Plan, in that the project is designed to
meet all code requirements and the General Plan, with the
exception of those parking issues for which a variance has
been applied.
6. Reasonable mitigation measures have been included for all
adverse impacts identified in the Environmental Impact
Report, in that all reasonable mitigation measures
espoused by the EIR have been included as conditions of
approval for the project, as well as additional staff
conditions.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
1. The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the
subject district and complies with all of the applicable
provisions of the "City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land
Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that the extension of the
subterranean, commercial parking garage beneath the
residentially zoned property will not be a visible en-
croachment into the residential neighborhood and is ex-
pressly permitted by Code with approval of a Conditional
Use Permit.
2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and
character of the district in which it is to be established
or located, in that the subterranean, commercial garage
will be accessed solely from the commercial lot and will
not be a visible encroachment into the residential zone.
3. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of
land use being proposed, in that it is of adequate
size,dimension and topography to support the proposed use.
4. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses
presently on the subject parcel if the present land uses
are to remain, in that none of the existing land uses will
remain and the project will essentially be built upon a
vacant parcel.
5. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and
permissible land uses within the district and the general
area in which the proposed use is to be located, in that
the office development is compatible with those existing
uses along the Wilshire Corridor and the apartment build-
ing is compatible with surrounding residential
developments.
6. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and
public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed
use would not be detrimental to public health and safety,
in that these services are already existing and the EIR
determined that no significant impacts would be created
which would overburden any of these established services.
7. Public access to the proposed use shall be adequate, in
that vehicular access may be acquired through the sur-
rounding, improved street system and pedestrian access may
be served along the existing sidewalk network.
8. The physical location or placement of the use on the site
is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the sur-
rounding neighborhood, in that the apartment building is
of a similar scale to surrounding residential development
and the office building will be stepped back at the
corners, will receive review of the Architectural Review
Board and is separated by 135' from the nearest developed
residential property.
9. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies of the General Plan, in that it complies with
the various Elements of the General Plan.
10. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public
interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare,
in that the subterranean garage will provide parking in
excess of the code requirement with no visible encroach-
ment into the residential area.
11. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration
of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that the
General Plan has established the densities for commercial
and residential development in the area and the project
complies with both.
CONDITIONS
Plans
1. This approval is for those plans dated April 6, 1988, a
copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City
Planning Division. Project development shall be consis-
tent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in
these conditions of approval.
2. The Plans shall comply with all other provisions of Chap-
ter 1, Article IX of the Municipal Code, (Zoning Or-
dinance) and all other pertinent ordinances and General
Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica.
3. Final parking lot layout and specifications shall be sub-
ject to the review and approval of the Parking and Traffic
Engineer.
4. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval
by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the
approved concept shall be subject to Planning Commission
Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the
plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission,
Architectural Review Board or Director of Planning.
5. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash en-
closures, and signage shall be subject to review and ap-
proval by the Architectural Review Board.
6. The Architectural Review Board, in its review, shall pay
particular attention to the project's pedestrian orienta-
tion and amenities; scale and articulation of design ele-
ments; exterior colors, textures and materials; window
treatment; glazing; and landscaping.
Fees
7. The City is contemplating the adoption of a Transportation
Management Plan which is intended to mitigate traffic and
air quality impacts resulting from both new and existing
development. The Plan will likely include an ordinance
establishing mitigation requirements, including one-time
payment of fees on certain types of new development, and
annual fees to be paid by certain types of employers in
the City. This ordinance may require that the owner of
the proposed project pay such new development fees, and
that employers within the project pay such new annual em-
ployer fees related to the City's Transportation Manage-
ment Plan.
8. A Park and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per
residential unit shall be due and payable at the time of
issuance of a building permit for the construction of the
residential units on the subject lot, per and subject to
the provisions of Section 6670 et seq. of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code.
Demolition
9. Until such time as the demolition is undertaken, and un-
less the structure is currently in use, the existing
structure shall be maintained and secured by boarding up
all openings, erecting a security fence, and removing all
debris, bushes and planting that inhibit the easy surveil-
lance of the property to the satisfaction of the Building
and Safety Officer and the Fire Department. Any landscap-
ing material remaining shall be watered and maintained
until demolition occurs.
10. Unless otherwise approved by the Recreation and Parks De-
partment and the Planning Division, at the time of
demolition, any street trees shall be protected from
damage, death, or removal per the requirements of
Ordinance 1242 (CCS).
11. Immediately after demolition and during construction, a
security fence, the height of which shall be the maximum
permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained
around the perimeter of the lot. The lot shall be kept
clear of all trash, weeds, etc.
Construction
12. Unless otherwise approved by the Department of General
Services, all sidewalks shall be kept clear and passable
during the grading and construction phase of the project.
13. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveways which need
replacing or removal as a result of the project as deter-
mined by the Department of General Services shall be re-
constructed to the satisfaction of the Department of
General Services. Approval for this work shall be ob-
tained from the Department of General Services prior to
issuance of the building permits.
14. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from
the site shall cover any open load with a tarpaulin or
other secure covering to minimize dust emissions.
15. Street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as
required in a manner consistent with the City's Tree Code
(Ord. 1242 CCS), per the specifications of the Department
of Recreation and Parks and the Department of General
Services. No street tree shall be removed without the ap-
proval of the Department of Recreation and Parks.
16. A construction period mitigation plan shall be prepared by
the applicant for approval by the Department of General
Services prior to issuance of a building permit. As ap-
plicable, this plan shall 1) Specify the names, addresses,
telephone numbers and business license numbers of all con-
tractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and
architect; 2) Describe how demolition of any existing
structures is to be accomplished; 3) Indicate where any
cranes are to be located for erection/construction; 4)
Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or side-
walk is proposed to be used in conjunction with construc-
tion; 5) Set forth the extent and nature of any pile-
driving operations; 6) Describe the length and number of
any tiebacks which must extend under the property of other
persons; 7) Specify the nature and extent of any dewater-
ing and its effect on any adjacent buildings; 8) Describe
anticipated contruction-related truck routes, number of
truck trips, hours of hauling and parking location; 9)
Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling;
10) State whether any construction activity beyond normal-
ly permitted hours is proposed; 11) Describe any proposed
contruction noise mitigation measures; 12) Describe con-
struction-period security measures including any fencing,
lighting, and security personnel; 13) Provide a drainage
plan; 14) Provide a construction-period parking plan
which shall minimize use of public streets for parking;
15) List a designated on-site construction manager.
17. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consis-
tent with the public hearing sign requirements which shall
identify the address and phone number of the owner and/or
applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and
complaints during the construction period. Said sign
shall also indicate the hours of permissible construction
work.
18. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily
visible and accessible location at all times during con-
struction at the project site. The pages shall be lami-
nated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the
copy.
Environmental Mitigation
19. Ultra-low flow plumbing fixtures are required on all new
development and remodeling where plumbing is to be added.
(Maximum 1.6 gallon toilets and 1.0 gallon urinals and low
flow shower head.)
20. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, project
owner shall present documentation to the General Services
Department certifying that existing Santa Monica
occupancies with toilets installed prior to 1978 have been
retrofitted with ultra low-flow toilets (1.6 gallons per
flush or less) such that development of the new project
will not result in a net increase in wastewater flows.
Flow from existing occupancies which will be removed as
part of the new development may be deducted from flow
attributable to the new development if such occupancies
have been occupied within one year prior to issuance of a
Building Permit for the proposed project. Flow
calculations for new development and existing occupancies
shall be consistent with guidelines developed by the
General Services Department.
21. To mitigate solid waste impacts, prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy, project owner shall submit a
recycling plan to the Department of General Services for
its approval. The recycling plan shall include 1) list of
materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans,
and glass to be recycled; 2) location of recyling bins; 3)
designated recycling coordinator; 4) nature and extent of
internal and external pick-up service; 5) pick-up
schedule; 6) plan to inform tenants/occupants of service.
22. To mitigate circulation impacts, prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy, project owner shall submit a
transportation demand managment plan to the Department of
General Services for its approval. This plan shall in-
clude: 1) Name, address and telephone number of desig-
nated person(s) responsible for coordinating transporta-
tion demand managment measures at the development. 2)
Demand management measures to be employed at the site to
reduce circulation impacts which would otherwise occur.
Such measures may include, but are not limited to programs
addressing: A. Education and Marketing to alert employees
and visitors to the site to demand reduction programs and
incentives; B. Parking Management such as parking charges
for single-occupant vehicles, reduced rates for car and
vanpools; C. Ridesharing programs such as a rideshare
matching program, incentives, and car and vanpool sub-
sidies; D. Transit programs such as provision of bus
schedules to employees and visitors, subsidized bus tokens
and passes to employees and visitors; E. Bicycling pro-
grams such as provision of secure bicycle storage facili-
ties, provision of showers and lockers; F. Alternative
Work Schedules for building employees to avoid peak AM and
PM traffic hours and reduce overall trips; G. Trip Length
Reduction by programs to increase proportion of employees
residing within three miles of the project site. The
goal of the Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be
to reduce vehicle trips which would otherwise occur by
twenty percent.
23. On-site commercial parking shall be made available without
cost to building customers and employees until such time
as a preferential parking district is established in the
vicinity of the site.
24. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 5B
(Landscaping Standards) of the zoning ordinance including
use of water-conserving landscaping materials, landscape
maintenance and other standards contained in the
Subchapter.
25. The project owner shall restripe both approaches of Yale
Street to accommodate a 10' exclusive left-turn lane and a
15' through lane per the specifications of the General
Services Department. This would require the prohibition
of on-street parking during p.m. peak hours on both sides
of Yale Street, from Wilshire Boulevard to approximately
120' north and south of the intersection. This will re-
quire no-parking restrictions for approximately 14 on-
street parking spaces during p.m. peak hours.
26. The project owner shall restripe both approaches of Yale
Street to accommodate a 10' exclusive left-turn lane and a
15' through lane per the specifications of the General
Services Department. This would require the prohibition
of on-street parking during p.m. peak hours on both sides
of Yale Street, from Santa Monica Boulevard to approxi-
mately 110' north and south of the intersection. This
will require no-parking restrictions for approximately
ten, on-street parking spaces.
27. The project owner shall restripe the existing roadway
width to provide a 12' exclusive, right-turn lane in the
westbound direction of Wilshire Boulevard east of 26th
Street per the specifications of the General Services De-
partment. No on-street parking will be restricted as a
result of the restriping.
28. The project shall be reduced to a maximum of five stories,
not to exceed a height of 70 feet, with the building foot-
print and setbacks to be maintained as proposed, in order
to conform to the character of surrounding development, in
accordance with Policy 3.2.1 of the Land Use Element,
which states that "allowable height limits for commercial
and industrial uses should step down or otherwise relate
to the height limit of the adjacent residential zone, to
reduce visual intrusion, shading and scale incongruity."
29. A detailed plan of pedestrian improvements illustrating
features intended to enhance the street orientation of the
project shall be submitted to the Architectural Review
Board for approval.
30. An 8', decorative, masonry wall shall be provided between
the proposed residential and office structures; such wall
shall step down to a height of 42" in the required front
setback of the residential development.
31. The subterranean parking structure shall not exceed a
height of 3 feet above adjacent, average grade on either
the commercial or residential portions of the development.
Miscellaneous Conditions
32. The building address shall be painted on the roof of the
commercial building and shall measure four feet by eight
feet (32 square feet).
33. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner
not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by
reason of lights, noise, activities, parking or other
actions.
34. No medical office use shall be permitted at the site.
35. If any archaeological remains are uncovered during
excavation or construction, work in the affected area
shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be
contacted to conduct a survey of the affected area at
project's owner's expense. A determination shall then be
made by the Director of Planning to determine the sig-
nificance of the survey findings and appropriate actions
and requirements, if any, to address such findings.
Validity of Permits
36. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with
any conditions of approval of this permit, no further
permits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy
shall be issued until such violation has been fully
remedied.
37. Within ten days of Planning Division transmittal of the
Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall
sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official Action
prepared by the Planning Division, agreeing to the Condi-
tions of approval and acknowledging that failure to comply
with such conditions shall constitute grounds for poten-
tial revocation of the permit approval. By signing same,
applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights appli-
cant may possess regarding said conditions. The signed
Statment shall be returned to the Planning Division.
Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute
grounds for potential permit revocation.
38. This determination shall not become effective for a period
of fourteen days from the date of determination or, if
appealed, until a final determination is made on the ap-
peal. Any appeal must be made in the form required by the
Zoning Administrator.
Monitoring of Conditions
39. Pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Sec-
tion 21081.6, the City Planning Division will coordinate
a monitoring and reporting program regarding any required
changes to the project made in conjunction with project
approval and any conditions of approval, including those
conditions intended to mitigate or avoid significant ef-
fects on the environment. This program shall include, but
is not limited to, ensuring that the Planning Division
itself and other City divisions and departments such as
the Building Division, the General Services Department,
the Fire Department, the Police Department, the Community
and Economic Development Department and the Finance De-
partment are aware of project requirements which must be
satisfied prior to issuance of a Building Permit, Certifi-
cate of Occupancy, or other permit, and that other respon-
sible agencies are also informed of conditions relating to
their responsibilities. Project owner shall
demonsdrate*compliance with conditions of approval in a
written report submitted to the Planning Director and
Building Officer prior to issuance of a Building Permit or
Certificate of Occupancy, and, as applicable, provide
periodic reports regarding compliance with such
conditions.
PROJECT MITIGATION FEE CONDITION
1. In accordance with Sections 9046.1 - 9046.4 of the Santa
Monica Municipal Code, prior to issuance of a building
permit the developer shall execute an irrevocable letter
of credit or other form of security acceptable to the City
for the payment of an in-lieu fee for housing and parks
equal to $2.25/sq.ft. for the first 15,000 sq.ft. of net
rentable office floor area and $5.00/sq.ft. for the
remaining net rentable office floor area. This fee shall
be adjusted for inflation by the percentage change in the
Consumer Price Index ("CPI") between October 1984 through
the month in which the payment is made. Upon mutual
agreement of the developer and the City, the developer may
satisfy the Project Mitigation measures by providing low
and moderate income housing or developing new park space
on or off the project site. To fulfill this obligation an
agreement shall be secured in writing by the developer and
approved by the City Attorney and City staff prior to is-
suance of a building permit. This fee, prior to adjust-
ment, will be $341,165, based on a net rentable office
floor area of 76,483 square feet.
INCLUSIONARY UNIT CONDITIONS
1. The developer shall covenant and agree with the City of
Santa Monica to the specific terms, conditions and
restrictions upon the possession, use and enjoyment of the
subject property, which terms, conditions and restrictions
shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's
Office as a part of the deed of the property to ensure
that two affordable units are provided and maintained over
time and through subsequent sales of the property. An
affordable unit shall be defined as being affordable to
households with incomes not exceeding 100% of the (HUD)
Los Angeles County median income, expending not over 30%
of monthly income on housing costs, as specified by the
Housing Division of the Department of Community and
Economic Development.
This agreement shall be executed and recorded prior to
approval of the Final Map. Such agreement shall specify
1) responsibilities of the developer for making the
unit(s) available to eligible tenants and 2) responsibili-
ties of the City of Santa Monica to prepare application
forms for potential tenants, establish criteria for
qualifications, and monitor compliance with the
provicions*of the agreement.
Owner shall provide the City Planning Division with a
conformed copy of the recorded agreement prior to approval
of the Final Map.
This provision is intended to satisfy the inclusionary
housing requirements of Program 12 of the Housing Element
of the General Plan of the City of Santa Monica ("Program
12"). Developer may satisfy the obligations created by
this Agreement by demonstrating to the Director of Plan-
ning compliance with Ordinance 1448 (CCS), which provides
implementation standards for Program 12.
Prepared by: Shari Laham, Associate Planner
Attachments: A. Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance
B. Radius and Location Map
C. Resolution of Certification of EIR
D. Statement of Certification of EIR
E. Project Description, Submitted by Applicant
F. Summary of Project
G. Letter from Applicant, dated 2/16/89
H. Protest Letter, dated 3/9/89
I. Final EIR
J. Plot Plan, Floor Plans, Elevations and Section
SL
PC/CUP512
$N-date
ATTACHMENT A
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Land Use
Category Municipal Code Element Project
Permitted Use C4: General General General
Commercial Commercial Office
R2 & R2A:
Low-Density Low-Density Low-Density
Residential Residential Residential
Commercial 6 stories/90' 4 stories/56;
Height
With Site Review: Site Review:
6 stories/84' 6 stories/83'
Residential 2 stories/30' Same as 2 stories/21'
Height Municipal Code
Commercial
Setbacks
Frontyard 0' Same as Code 6' - 28'
Sideyard 0' Same as Code 20'- 22'(east)
6' - 8' (west)
Rearyard 23' Same as Code 35'-6"
Residential
Setbacks
Frontyard 20' Same as Code 20'
Sideyard 9' Same as Code 9' - 50'
Rearyard 15' Same as Code 15'
Commercial 3.3 2.5;
F.A.R. With Site With Site
Review: 3.0 Review: 3.0
Parking 255 commercial 295 commercial
spaces; Same as Code spaces;
22 residential 27 residential
spaces spaces