Item 8-B

 

Planning Commission Meeting:  May 18, 2004                                 Santa Monica, California.

 

TO:                  The Honorable Planning Commission

 

FROM:            Planning Staff

 

SUBJECT:     04-DEV-002

                        530 Pico Boulevard Development Agreement Amendment Concept Plan

 

Address:        530 Pico Boulevard, Sheraton Delfina Hotel

Applicant:       Regis Properties LLC

 

INTRODUCTION

 

The applicant proposes an amendment to a previously approved Development Agreement (DA) for the hotel at 530 Pico Boulevard. A DA was approved for this site in 1984, allowing the existing 11-story 182-room hotel to add 134 rooms and a 2-level subterranean garage as well as six new rental units to the existing 97 unit apartment building adjacent to the hotel. One of the requirements of the original Development Agreement was that there would be no charge for parking for guests, hotel users or employees.  The applicant is proposing to delete the free parking condition in order to allow a valet parking fee for hotel guests and a lower valet parking fee for restaurant patrons and attendees of hotel events.  Free parking for hotel employees would be retained under the proposal. A brief summary of the project proposal is contained in Attachment A.

 

This project was continued from the April 20, 2005 meeting as the Planning Commission requested that staff provide additional information regarding permit parking in the neighborhood and potential alternative parking facilities in the vicinity of the hotel.  An additional paragraph relating to these parking issues has been added to the analysis section.

 

Development Agreements are negotiated contracts between and applicant and the City. Unlike more familiar applications such as Development Review Permits or Conditional Use Permits, a Development Agreement is not a quasi-judicial matter. It is a legislative act. In order to avoid negotiating a project the City finds unacceptable, staff has scheduled this matter to obtain input from the Planning Commission.  The Commission’s discussion will be forwarded to the City Council. The Council will then provide direction regarding how, or if, to proceed with negotiations. If the City is interested in entering these negotiations, staff would use this direction to negotiate with the project proponent.

 

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

 

The subject property includes a parcel with an area of 31,110 square feet, with a Pico Boulevard frontage of 305 feet and a Sixth Street frontage of 102 feet.  The parcel is zoned Ocean Park High Density Multiple Residential District (OP4). Surrounding uses consist of multi-family residential to the east, south and west in the OP-2 and OP-4 districts. Santa Monica High School is located directly across Pico Boulevard from the site in the R3 Medium Density Multiple Family residential district.    

 

Zoning District:             OP-4 Ocean Park High Density Multiple Residential District

 

Land Use District:        High Density Housing

 

Parcel Area:                 31,110 square feet

 

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

 

The applicant requests amendment of an existing Development Agreement to allow the hotel to charge for valet parking by guests and visitors.  More specifically, the applicant is requesting a modification to Section 9J of the Development Agreement which states:

 

“(1) Project Owner shall prominently post a sign in the parking area of the Hotel indicating that there will be no charge for Hotel parking for Hotel guests, Hotel employees and users of Hotel facilities; and

 

(2) Project owner shall prominently post a sign in the parking area of the hotel indicating that the tipping of parking valets is contrary to Hotel Policy.”

 

The proposal does not require any physical change to the existing hotel building which has been recently remodeled to achieve a Four-Star hotel rating.  The proposed amendment includes a change in operations to allow the hotel to charge guests $22.00 per night for valet parking, and $5-7 for restaurant patrons and $9-14 for event attendees at the hotel. The project will be re-striped to more clearly identify tandem parking spaces, but no additional spaces are being added.

 

Background

 

This project was originally approved in 1968 as a 182 unit hotel and apartment complex with a shared garage. Building permits were issued in 1969.  The Development Agreement approved in 1983 allowed the addition of 134 additional guest rooms and 2 levels of subterranean parking to the hotel and six additional units to the apartment building adjacent to the hotel to replace six units that were demolished to accommodate the hotel addition. The hotel, now called the Sheraton Delfina, contains 309 hotel rooms (the DA allowed more rooms than were actually constructed) and 282 hotel parking spaces. The adjacent 103 apartment units have separate parking arrangements entered from Bay Street  which are not affected by this proposal. In 2004, the City issued building permits for the upgrade of the interior of the hotel building.

 

In December 2004 the applicant submitted an application to amend the DA, requesting the removal of the condition which prohibits charging for parking. The applicant states that valet and pay parking are expected by the type of clientele who will be using the upgraded facility. Charging for parking will enable them to remain competitive with other luxury hotels in the area by providing the same level of service.

 

ANALYSIS

 

The original condition was included in the Development Agreement to protect the Ocean Park neighborhood from the loss of available street parking. At the time the DA was adopted, there was concern that charging hotel guests for parking would result in guests seeking free parking on the neighborhood streets (Attachment C - City Council minutes from original approval).

 

Since this DA was first approved in 1984, there have been several factors that have further impacted the availability of street parking in the adjacent neighborhood:

 

·        Parking supply at nearby Santa Monica High School has been reduced due to the construction of a playing field in an area that had previously included parking spaces.

 

·        The east side of 7th Street between Michigan Avenue and Pico Boulevard, which had historically been used for parking by high school students, was designated for preferential permit parking in 1996, shifting high school students across Pico Boulevard to the street parking adjacent to the hotel.

 

  • The neighborhood is located in the City’s Coastal Zone.  As of 1999, the City has agreed not to implement any additional daytime restrictions in the neighborhood through preferential parking in response to the California Coastal Commission’s contention that the on-street parking restrictions are contrary to the Coastal Act.

 

Permit Parking

 

The project is located on Pico Boulevard and has three street frontages - Pico Boulevard, Bay Street, and Sixth Street. The main entrance to the hotel and parking garage is from Pico Boulevard with the garage exiting onto Sixth Street. Both the entrance and exit for the apartment building portion of the project are on Bay Street.

 

According to Transportation Management Division staff, the following streets have preferential parking within 3 blocks of the hotel site:

 

East of Lincoln:

Preferential Parking District

Ninth Street, Santa Monica Freeway to Pico Boulevard

(MM)

Michigan Avenue between Lincoln  Avenue and 10th Street

(MM)

Bay Street  between Lincoln Avenue and 10th Street

(MM)

7th Street between Michigan Avenue and Pico Boulevard

(GG)

 

 

West of Lincoln

 

Strand Street between 7th and Lincoln

(FF)

Bicknell Avenue between 4th and Main Street

(M)

Third Street between Pico Boulevard and Strand Avenue

(M)

Pacific Avenue between Third Street and Main Street

(M)

Strand Street between Third and Main Street

(I)

Bay Street from Third Street to Neilson Ave

(M)

Hollister Avenue between Third Street and Main Street

(I)

 

The relevant parking restrictions for these districts are shown in Attachment I

 

Grant Street and Pacific Street east of Lincoln have been approved for preferential parking that will be implemented at such time as the residents submit the required petition.  A preferential parking map is included in Attachment H.

 

The adjacent residential neighborhood is located in the City’s Coastal Zone.  Therefore, as noted above, the City will not implement daytime preferential permit parking on Bay and Sixth Streets.

 

Parking Alternatives in the Vicinity

 

The closest available public parking is at the Civic Center Parking lot, for which there is an $8.00 fee.  Parking here is accessible to the public from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The gates close at 6:00 p.m. and the lot cannot be accessed without an authorized pass. On site special event parking hours after 6:00 p.m. are tailored to that specific event. Approximately 10 metered parking spaces are available on Lincoln Boulevard south of Pico, two blocks to the east of the hotel, and 11 metered spaces are available on Grant and Bay Streets. These meters operate from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. In addition, there are five un-metered commercial spaces on Grant Street for a total of 26 available spaces. Despite the availability of these spaces, staff believes that they are too far away to be readily used by hotel patrons.

 

There are no other nearby private or public parking facilities that could reasonably provide parking alternatives to visitors or guests of the hotel. In addition, staff believes that it is unlikely that patrons of the Sheraton Delfina will use the Civic Center Parking lot (or parking structure when completed) given its cost, distance from the hotel and hours of operation.  It is equally unlikely that patrons will use the beach lots or the parking structures at Santa Monica Place.

 

On-Street Parking

 

The original DA condition was intended to prevent hotel users from parking in the surrounding areas. Therefore, staff considered the current parking capacity of the neighboring streets in the initial evaluation of this proposal. Parking capacity is one of the factors Transportation Management Division staff reviews when evaluating preferential parking requests. A street parking usage rate of greater than 85% is considered to be close to capacity. A street with fewer than 15% of its parking spaces available means that finding street parking is extremely difficult and encourages “trolling” for parking. This can result in vehicle circulation concerns. The residential streets surrounding this project are either at, or approaching, 85% occupancy of street parking spaces. For example, an addition of three cars during the day and eight cars at night on the 600-700 block of Bay Street would create over-capacity conditions.

 

Based on past experience with fee parking in residential areas, staff is concerned that required parking fees would result in some hotel users, particularly event and restaurant patrons, parking their vehicles on the neighboring streets rather than paying a fee to park. As the streets are already parked to capacity, the addition of as few as eight cars per night would result in more difficult parking conditions for neighborhood residents. These streets already provide parking for both multi-family housing and high school students.   Since the neighborhood is in the Coastal Zone, this problem could not be rectified by approving preferential parking zones for these streets.

 

Staff is concerned that despite there being no increase in square footage  or  change of use, the operational change would result in a negative impact on parking availability for the residents. If the Council were to approve the amendment to the DA, staff believes that it is appropriate to require environmental analysis of the potential parking impacts.

 

Public Benefit

 

One of the key elements to any Development Agreement proposal is to weigh the public benefit of a proposal in relation to its potential impacts. The applicant is maintaining that approval of the DA amendment will result in the following related public benefits:

 

Increased TOT

·        Increased revenue to the City for Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from the upgraded hotel.

 

The hotel is already being upgraded through interior renovations and remodeling to achieve Four-Star status. Therefore, it is difficult for staff to link the addition of fee-based valet parking to greater TOT revenues.

 

Parking Tax Revenue

·        The hotel estimates parking tax revenue in the range of $122,810 to $135,806 per year.  (Once the rate structure has been finalized the actual amount can be calculated)

 

Continued Community Benefits

·        The applicant is proposing Continued Community benefits such as reduced rates and discounts at the restaurant for neighbors, free non-summer parking for Santa Monica High School teachers; and future partnership with Santa Monica High School and Santa Monica College to provide internships to introduce students to the hotel industry.

 

This proposal offers few if any additional public benefits as the existing Development Agreement includes conditions which require hiring priority from the Pico and Ocean Park communities and job training for four positions to be paid at not less than minimum wage, with the first priority given to Santa Monica High School students. Staff has conducted a preliminary analysis of the applicant’s compliance with the existing DA requirements and found that they appear to be in compliance with the physical requirements of the DA. (Attachment E)  Additional information is necessary to determine if the applicant is in full compliance of all operating requirements. Staff has requested that a full compliance monitoring report be submitted to the City.

 

Staff is concerned that charging for parking may result in increased demand for nearby on-street parking spaces from hotel guests and visitors, creating adverse impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood.  Therefore, staff is concerned that the public benefit of increased parking tax would not outweigh the potential drawbacks related to loss of neighborhood street parking.

 

Alternative Approach

 

Staff believes there is an alternative approach to fee-based parking that would address the concern about parking on neighborhood streets while still allowing the hotel to provide the desired valet services for the guests of their Four-Star hotel.  Staff would support modification of the DA condition to allow for an optional valet service for which guests would pay while still allowing free self-parking for guests, visitors and employees. The current proposed fees, for the restaurant and event attendees in particular, appear to be set at a level which would likely lead restaurant and event patrons to park on the street.

   

Staff has received written correspondence from neighbors included in Attachment G as well as two phone calls from neighbors expressing concern about the project.

 

Conclusion

 

This application is a legislative action; therefore the City enjoys broad discretion in reviewing Development Agreement applications. This proposed amendment is presented to the Planning Commission so that the Commission may comment on it’s merits, identify concerns with the proposal, and discuss public benefits. The City Council will make its decision on whether or not to authorize the commencement of negotiations for a Development Agreement Amendment based on the feedback provided by the Planning Commission.

 

In summary, there are two essential questions staff suggests the Commission focus on in considering this matter:

 

  1. Is the Planning Commission potentially interested in amending this Development Agreement?

 

  1. If so, what are the general negotiating points that should be addressed?

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss this proposal and make a recommendation to the City Council not to amend the Development Agreement as proposed , but  to direct the applicant to develop alternative concepts such as optional pay valet parking and incorporating parking costs into room and event fees to meet their parking revenue goals.  

 

Prepared by:  Sarah D. Lejeune, Associate Planner

 

Attachments:   A. Project proposal

                          B. Applicant’s Proposed Development Agreement Amendment

      C. City Council Minutes from 1983 hearing.

      D. 1983 Development Agreement

      E. Letter regarding compliance with existing DA conditions.

  F. Excerpts from Development Agreement Manual: Collaboration in Pursuit of Community Interests (2002)

  G. Correspondence

H. Preferential Parking Map

I.  Pertinent Permit Parking Restriction Information.

 

 

 

 

Attachment I

 

Permit Parking restrictions By Relevant  District :

 

 

I:       No vehicle shall be parked adjacent to any curb in Preferential Parking Zone between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. or for more than two hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. daily, except by permit.

 

M:                No vehicle shall be parked adjacent to any curb in Preferential Parking Zone M between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m., or for more than two hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily, except by permit.

 

FF:         No vehicle shall be parked adjacent to any curb in Preferential Parking Zone FF between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. daily, except by permit.

 

GG: No vehicle shall be parked adjacent to any curb in Preferential Parking Zone GG on Monday through Friday, except by permit.

 

MM: No vehicle shall be parked adjacent to any curb for more than two hours from 7:00 a.m. until 9:00 p.m. Monday-Friday, and from 9:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. Saturday,  except by permit on:

1. Bay Street, Grant Street and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street (north side of street only)

i.  Vehicles displaying residential parking permits shall be exempt from posted preferential parking regulations.