Loading...
CC RESOLUTION 3813RESOLUTION NO. 3813 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VARIANCE 91-8 AND DENYING SMOKY HOLLOW SITE PLAN 91 -2 FOR ACTIVATION OF THE GAC ZONE FOR CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING VACANT MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSING FACILITY TO AHEALTH CLUB AT 1222 E. GRAND AVENUE (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA 263) PETITIONED BY MR. MARTY BENSON. WHEREAS, on July 17, 1991 an application was received from Mr. Marty Benson for Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8, and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2 to allow the conversion of an existing vacant industrial building to a health club at 1222 E. Grand Avenue; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation was filed on April 14, 1992 for preparation of the Environmental Impact Report, and the Environmental Impact Report was duly circulated and noticed as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact Report identified significant and adverse related projects cumulative impacts concerning air quality and public services, including water, police and fire services, which cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level by conditions imposed on the proposed project and unavoidable adverse short-term project construction related air quality impacts; and WHEREAS, on November 12 and December 10, 1992, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, duly - advertised public hearings on such matter, and notice of said hearings were given in the rime, form and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, at said hearings opportunity was given to all persons to present testimony or documentary evidence for or against Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8, and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 1992, the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 2331 recommending approval to the City Council of Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8, and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 16, and March 16, 1993, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, duly - advertised public hearings on such matter, and notice of said hearings were given in the rime, form and manner prescribed by law and opportunity was given to all persons to present testimony or documentary evidence for or against Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8 and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 1993, the City Council referred the applications back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration, specifically directing the Planning Commission to review each of the four (4) required variance findings as they apply to each of the three individual variances; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 1993, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly - advertised public hearing on such matter, and notice of said hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, at said hearing opportunity was given to all persons to present testimony or documentary evidence for or against Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8, and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 1993, the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 2337 recommending to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment EA- 263, certifying an Environmental Impact Report and adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration for the proposed project, approval of Variance 91 -8 for Grand Avenue access, denial of Variance 91 -8 for minimum lot size and landscaped setbacks, and denial of Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2 for activation of the GAC zone, for conversion of an existing vacant manufacturing and warehousing facility to a health club; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 1993, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly - advertised public hearing on such matter, and notice of hearing was given in the rime, form and manner prescribed by law and opportunity was given to all persons to present testimony or documentary evidence for or against Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8 and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2; and 1 WHEREAS, at said City Council hearing the following facts were established: 1. The applicant is proposing to convert an existing vacant manufacturing and warehousing facility • to a health club to service the LAX business traveler at 1222 E. Grand Avenue in the Medium Manufacturing (M -M) zone. 2. The proposed project requires activation of the Grand Avenue Commercial (GAC) Floating Zone in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area, which activation requires City Council approval. 3. The 20,294 sq. ft. site contains two (2) lots, which have been merged, and a two -story 13,200 sq.ft. concrete block industrial building. 4. The applicant is requesting three variances from the GAC development standards: (1) allowing development with less than the minimum 1 acre lot size (0.47 acres proposed); (2) allowing vehicular access from Grand Avenue (one vehicular access to employee parking proposed); and (3) waiving the requirement for fully landscaped fifteen foot front and side yard setbacks (5 -ft adjacent to Nevada Street, 6 -ft 6 -in adjacent to Grand Avenue, and 0 -ft adjacent to the south property line proposed). 5. The site and surrounding area to the west, south and east are designated by the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan as Medium Manufacturing (MM), with a Grand Avenue Commercial (GAC) overlay district, and to the north MM with a Medium Density Residential (MDR) overlay, all of which is consistent with the zoning of the site. The surrounding land uses are manufacturing and industrial • uses to the north, south, east and west. 6. The intent section of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan (SHSP) states that, "The purpose of the GAC zone is to provide for limited commercial development along Grand Avenue. The development regulations are specifically designed to discourage strip commercial uses and restrict vehicular access directly onto Grand Avenue ". 7. The principal uses permitted with a site plan review under the GAC zone are five general commercial uses and other similar uses which the Planning Commission finds not inconsistent with the intent of the zone and which would be similar to the uses listed as permitted uses and which would be compatible to those uses. 8. The City's General Plan indicates that if a project is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the Specific Plan then it is also consistent with the City's General Plan. 9. The intent of the SHSP minimum lot size requirement is to encourage lot consolidation. Throughout the Specific Plan there are goals, policies and objectives which encourage lot consolidation as a means to effectively integrate new uses, create efficient and consistent parcel sizes and configurations, create sizeable and deep parcels to discourage strip commercial uses, and • to more efficiently utilize the land. 10. There are approximately twenty-four (24) lots within the GAC Floating Zone and the majority of these lots are less that one -acre minimum in size. Additionally, the majority of these lots could be consolidated with adjacent lots to create a minimum one -acre lot size. 11. A goal of the SHSP is to create adequate lot area to allow access off of side streets to reduce impediments to traffic flow on Grand Avenue and provide safe and convenient vehicular access. It is also an objective of the Plan to provide development regulations which require safe and effective ingress and egress for each business. 12. The majority of the existing parcels in the GAC zone, as currently developed, would not be able to provide the required number of parking spaces if they were to convert to commercial use. Approximately 25% of the total lots in the GAC zone have existing parking areas which are accessed off of Grand Avenue. 13. The policies and objectives of the Specific Plan indicate that site design guidelines should be established, enforced and a major consideration in the site plan review process and these design standards should be used to improve land use compatibility and provide contemporary landscape • treatments. Adherence to the design guidelines in the Plan is required for new development. 55605.1 2 14. The majority of the existing lots in the GAC zone, as currently developed, would not be able to provide the required minimum landscaped setbacks if they were to convert to commercial use. • 15. The GAC Zone standards require that a market survey be conducted, in order to activate the GAC zone, which demonstrates that the proposed project will not erode the commercial market for downtown businesses. 16. The Fiscal Impact Analysis for the project indicates that the project will generate annual revenues of approximately $4,500 and will create annual costs for services of approximately $3,200. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after consideration of the above facts and study of proposed Environmental Assessment EA -263, Variance 91 -8, and Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2, the City Council makes the following findings on Variance 91 -8: A. ONE ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE VARIANCE The City Council denies the variance for the one -acre minimum lot size because the record does not support making any of the four required findings for granting a variance under El Segundo Municipal Code section 20.74.030. 1. The City Council finds that there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone since: there is land adjacent to the south of the site which could be • acquired and consolidated with the subject property to create a one -acre minimum size; the majority of the existing lots within the GAC Floating Zone are less than one -acre in size; and a majority of these lots could be consolidated with adjacent lots to create a minimum one -acre lot size. 2. The City Council finds that the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question since: the majority of the existing lots within the GAC Floating Zone are less than one -acre in size; a majority of these lots could be consolidated with adjacent lots to create a minimum one -acre lot size; and there is land adjacent to the south of the site which could be acquired and consolidated with the subject property to create a one -acre minimum size 3. The City Council finds that the granting of the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvement in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located since: the goals and policies of the GAC zone of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan emphasize the consolidation of lots in order to create larger parcels to prevent strip commercial development and effectively integrate commercial uses. 4. The City Council finds that the granting of the variance will adversely affect the comprehensive general plan since: the General Plan requires conformity with the developmental standards of the Smoky • Hollow Specific Plan for the subject property and the subject project is not consistent with the developmental standards, goals and policies of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. B. PROHIBITION OF GRAND AVENUE VEHICULAR ACCESS VARIANCE The City Council denies the variance from the prohibition of vehicular access from Grand Avenue because the record does not support making any of the four required findings for granting a variance under El Segundo Municipal Code section 20.74.030. 1. The City Council finds that there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone since: approximately 25% of the total lots in the GAC zone have existing parking areas which are accessed off Grand Avenue; and these lots, similar to the subject property, would be required to prohibit access from Grand Avenue. 2. The City Council finds that the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question since: approximately 25% of the total lots in the GAC zone have existing parking areas accessed off of Grand Avenue which is not permitted under the GAC zone; and the subject • parcel is bounded by streets on two sides (Nevada and Oregon Streets) which provide alternative vehicle access to the site from other than Grand Avenue. 55605.1 3 3. The City Council finds that the granting of the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvement in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located since: the goals and policies of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan emphasize reducing impediments to traffic flow on Grand Avenue and providing safe vehicular access to lots by requiring access from side streets. 4. The City Council finds that the granting of the variance will adversely affect the comprehensive general plan since: the General Plan requires conformity with the developmental standards of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan for the subject property and the subject project is not consistent with the developmental standards, goals and policies of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. C. FRONT AND SIDE YARD LANDSCAPED SETBACKS VARIANCE The City Council denies the variance from the required front and side yard landscaped setbacks because the record does not support making three of the four required findings for granting a variance under El Segundo Municipal Code section 20.74.030. 1. The City Council finds that there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone since: if the site were vacant and met the one acre size requirement, the design and layout of the building would be more flexible and the required landscaped setbacks could be provided; and the majority of the existing lots, as currently developed, would also not be able to provide the required minimum landscaped setbacks. 2. The City Council finds that the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question since: if the site were vacant and met the one acre size requirement, the design and layout of the building would be more flexible and the required landscaped setbacks could be provided; and the majority of the existing lots, as currently developed, would also not be able to provide the required minimum landscaped setbacks. 3. The City Council finds that the granting of the variance will adversely affect the comprehensive general plan since: the General Plan requires conformity with the developmental standards of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan for the property and the project is not consistent with the developmental standards, goals and policies of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. SECTION 1. NOW, THEREBY, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby denies Variance 91 -8 and denies Smoky Hollow Site Plan 91 -2 for activation of the GAC Zone, for conversion of an existing vacant manufacturing and warehousing facility to a Health Club at 1222 E. Grand Avenue. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original resolutions of said city; and shall make a minute of the passage and • adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said city, in the minutes of the meeting which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 18th day of &Y, 1993. Carljacok City of El' California yMMwin 1. �`v ��•r .i-�� i ndy Mo son, City clerk (SEAL) AS TO FORM: 55605.1 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ] COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ] SS • CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ] I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of members of the City Council of the said City is five; that the foregoing resolution, being RESOLUTION NO. 3813 was duly passed and adopted by the said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor or said City, and attested by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of the said Council held on the 18th day of May, 1993, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: • AYES: Mayor Jacobson, Mayor ProTem Wise, Councilman West, Councilman Switz, and Councilman Robbins. NOES: None NOT PARTICIPATING: None WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this 19th day of May, 1993. 0 OINDY R' ESEN City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California (SEAL)