M I N U T E S
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Founded 1875
"Populus felix in urbe felici"
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1995 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M ROOM 213, 1685 MAIN STREET
1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:25
p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Gruber led the Pledge
of Allegiance.
3. ROLL CALL: Present: Kenneth Breisch, Chairperson
Berton R. Bradley
Terry Graboski, ARB Liaison
Frank Gruber
Eric Parlee
Kathy Weremiuk
Absent: Lou Moench
John Zinner
Also Present: Kyle Ferstead, Commission Secretary
Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning/
PCD
Karen Ginsberg, Planning Manager/PPA
Amanda Schachter, Senior Planner
Mary Strobel, Deputy City Attorney
Kenyon Webster, Planning Manager
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes were not submitted for
approval.
5. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
Ms. Frick gave the Director's Report. In City Council
action, Ms. Frick reported that the Earthquake Recovery
Act has been amended which impacts tonight's project on
Palisades Beach Road in that a condition of the project is
that its effective date will be the effective date of the
amended ordinance. Also approved were the revised
definitions and a Zoning Ordinance amendment requiring
mixed-use projects to have their residential units deed-restricted so they may not be converted to other uses.
Finally, Ms. Frick reported that next week's meeting will
be at the Ken Edwards Center for the Circulation Element
Workshop and Open House.
6. STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL ACTION: Consent Calendar
No items were submitted for approval.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Consent Calendar
7-A: Resolution of Intention, Gun Ordinance. (Planner: P.
Foley)
Staff Report
Commissioner Weremiuk made a motion for approval of the
resolution as submitted. Commissioner Parlee seconded the
motion, which was approved by voice vote.
8-A: EQPC 95-002, TM 95-006 (VTPM 24337), 1351 Palisades Beach
Road, R2B, Applicant: Westec Construction, Inc., Application
for a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map and an Earthquake Recovery
Permit to consider the replacement of a demolished four story
17,845 square foot commercial office building with a four story
14,483 square foot building with three (3) residential
condominium units at 1351 Palisades Beach Road. (Planner:
Steven Ross)
The applicant, Craig Jones, 429 Santa Monica Boulevard,
was present to discuss the project.
The following members of the public spoke:
Joseph Palazzolo, 11111 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite
1200, Los Angeles 90025
Scott Burgess, 1319 Palisades Beach Road #2, Santa Monica
90401
Mario Savvides, 1230 25th Street #3, Santa Monica 90404
Suzanne R [address not given]
Jason Froehlich, 1329 Palisades Beach Road, Santa Monica
90401
Martin Tahse, 1364 Palisades Beach Road, Santa Monica
90401
Jim Barden, 1355 The Promenade, Santa Monica 90401
Chris Harding and Craig Jones spoke in rebuttal to the
public comment.
Commissioner Gruber asked about the faux window
treatments.
Commissioner Parlee commented on the need to maximize the
envelope and utilize the south view. He also commented on
the awkward interior circulation, the location of the
stairwells, elevators and lack of vestibules. He
suggested the addition of fenestration on the south
facade. Mr. Jones stated that the design meets code.
Commissioner Gruber asked if the development must
replicate the envelope of the destroyed building to
qualify for this type of permit. Ms. Frick stated that
the developer has the discretion to modify the building
envelope, but may not decrease the building setbacks.
Additionally, the developer can increase the setbacks and
do various other design changes. Ms. Frick also stated
that the Commission is acting as the Architectural Review
Board (ARB) and must find that the proposed design meets
the specified criteria cited in the staff report.
Commissioner Gruber expressed puzzlement over the location
of the stairways. Mr. Jones explained how the placement
could have been different, but noted that the best view
from this property is to the north, so the majority of the
windows are designed to face in that direction.
Commissioner Gruber commented that one set of stairs open
into a bathroom and another into a bedroom. Ms. Frick
stated that this is beyond the discretion of the
Commission and restated the criteria for approval of the
building design.
Commissioner Bradley commented on the amount of traffic on
Palisades Beach Road (a.k.a. Pacific Coast Highway) and
potential visibility problems for vehicles exiting the
garage. Mr. Jones stated that this issue was studied
thoroughly due to the dangerous location and the driveway
into the parking garage is extra wide and deep with the
access gate at the bottom of the ramp.
Boardmember Graboski stated that he likes the overall
project, that the design is compatible with the
neighborhood, and that the faux windows are a good
addition. He asked about the roof deck. Mr. Jones stated
that there is no roof deck in this design, however the
roof will be painted in a checkerboard design to add
interest when viewed from Palisades Park.
Chair Breisch closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Parlee acknowledged that this is an aesthetic
review and stated he has problems with the design. He
asked if he could make friendly suggestions to the
application. Ms. Frick stated that this would be
permissible and that there is a lot of flexibility in the
findings. She then read from the Earthquake Recovery Act
the three findings the Commission must agree with to
approve the project.
Commissioner Parlee verified that the Commission could
find the design not compatible with the neighborhood. Ms.
Frick stated that this is correct and the Commission could
cite that it does not look like the pre-earthquake
structure.
Commissioner Weremiuk stated that she does not like the
proposed design and that it is not similar to the prior
building. She stated that the "echo design" is not
attractive. She commented that the neighborhood has an
architectural mixture of hi-tech buildings to the north of
the property and historic-type dwellings to the south.
She again stated that she does not feel it is compatible
with the district and is not comfortable with the design.
Chair Breisch asked about a landmark status. Ms. Frick
stated that there is no building on the site as it was
ordered demolished by the Nuisance Abatement Board.
Commissioner Gruber expressed agreement with Commissioner
Weremiuk regarding changing the site to residential use,
which is preferable to commercial use in this area, and
with her opinion on the proposed building design.
Boardmember Graboski stated for the record that the ARB
had approved a commercial project design for this site,
however with the conversion of the use to residential, the
previously approved design is negated. Ms. Frick stated
that this is correct as the Commission is only reviewing
the residential design.
Boardmember Graboski commented that the new building
design is different from the approved commercial design
and that is a transitional point in the neighborhood. He
expressed the opinion that the residential bungalows to
the south will be rebuilt eventually and that the current
design is generally good. He stated he would like to see
more fenestration, however the proposed building is
compatible with the area and he supports the project.
Commissioner Bradley commented on the design of the
building, how it "echoes" the previous structure, and
noting that the neighbors have expressed support for the
project design. He stated he would support the project.
Commissioner Weremiuk stated she likes the residential
character, but does not like the proposed design and does
not feel it is compatible with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Parlee commented on his problems with the
facade design, particularly the fenestration, massing and
proportions. He expressed the opinion that opportunities
were missed in the design by comparing it to the prior
building on the site. He also expressed his fondness for
the previous tower element, which was not repeated in the
current proposed design. Additionally, he commented that
the ocean facade balconies are too asymmetrical and very
foreign to the rest of the building design. He stated he
could not support the current building design.
Commissioner Gruber commented on the issue of windows on
the south side and suggested the architect study the hi-tech designs to the north of the property. He expressed a
desire for cleaner lines in the design or starting over
with a completely modern design as is seen in the
buildings to the north of the property.
Commissioner Bradley commented on the small setbacks on
the south side. Commissioner Parlee suggested that the
architect could consider more setbacks and windows on the
side.
Chair Breisch stated that the architect should study the
previous building on the site for its classic proportions.
He expressed distaste for the "fat molding" and felt that
the design was like bad Beverly Hills architecture. He
stated that if the developer wants an Italianate design,
then better proportions are needed. He also stated that
the painted windows are wasted and blank, unarticulated
wall would be better. He then stated he could not support
the design.
Ms. Frick suggested that the Commission move to continue
the project for redesign, or make a motion for denial or
approval.
Commissioner Parlee asked if the motion could be split.
Deputy City Attorney Strobel stated that approval findings
are needed for the conversion from commercial to
residential under the Earthquake Recovery Act, which only
allows rebuilding in-kind, i.e. commercial.
Commissioner Weremiuk made a motion to continue EQPC 95-002 to December 6, 1995.
Commissioner Parlee seconded the motion.
Commissioner Gruber asked staff for the effective date of
the City Council action that affects this project. Deputy
City Attorney Strobel stated that the date is thirty days
from October 17, 1995.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Bradley, Breisch, Graboski, Gruber, Parlee,
Weremiuk;
ABSENT: Moench, Zinner.
ACTION: Continued to December 6, 1995 for redesign.
8-B: Conditional Use Permit 94-022, 1429 Third Street
Promenade, C3C, Applicant: Albert Mizrahi/Gotham Hall,
Application for a Conditional Use Permit to amend Conditional
Use Permit 92-014 to permit a 4,766 sq.ft. expansion of an
existing 9,365 sq.ft. restaurant/bar with an approved Type-47
(On-Sale General for Public Eating Place) alcohol license on
the second floor and roof deck of 1429 Third Street Promenade.
The proposal includes a request for a 190 sq. ft. dance floor,
a 102 sq. ft. stage, and live music. The proposal would add
237 seats to the existing 206 seats for a proposed total of 443
seats. (Planner: Susan Healy Keene)
Continued to November 1, 1995.