STAFF REPORT (WITHOUT ATTACHMENTS) SEPTEMBER 24, 2015 BEvERLY HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ATTACHMENT 10

Transcription

1 STAFF REPORT (WITHOUT ATTACHMENTS) SEPTEMBER 24, 2015 BEvERLY HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ATTACHMENT 10

2 BEVERLYRLY Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. R.xford Drivi Beverly Hills, CA TEL. (310) FAX. (310) Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: Subject: September 24, 2015 Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Plan Review Request for a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Plan Review to allow construction of a new, 31-unit multi-family condominium building partially located in City of Los Angeles. Pursuant provisions forth in California Environmental Quality Act, City of Beverly Hills, as a responsible agency, must also consider Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and by City of Los Angeles, which serves as lead agency for this project. PROJECT APPLICANT: Terry Moore adopted to that set Recommendation: That Planning Commission: 1. Conduct a public hearing and receive testimony on Project; and 2. Adopt resolution conditionally approving a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Plan Review allow proposed condominium project. attached to REPORT SUMMARY A for a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Plan Review has been made to allow construction of a new 31-unit multi-family condominium project. The project is partially located in City of Beverly Hills, with a majority portion located in City of Los Angeles. The proposed building would have a total height of 4 stories and 40 for portion located in Beverly Hills, and a total height of 5 stories and for portion located in Los Angeles. The Beverly Hills portion, which is located toward front of lot and fronts on North Oakhurst Drive, would contain all of part of 7 units, with remaining 24 units located in Los Angeles. The project proposes a total of 82 parking spaces in a garage, 22 of which would be located in Beverly Hills, with remaining 60 parking spaces located in Los Angeles. This provides an overview of proposed project and analyzes key project components including architectural and urban design, neighborhood compatibility, traffic, and General Plan consistency. This report also provides a summary of project s background and jurisdictional responsibilities of Beverly Hills and Los Angeles. Based on analysis contained in this report, recommendation is for project approval. request subterranean 59 -ll report Attachment(s): A. RequIred FindIngs B. Public Notice C. Draft Resolution D. Traffic Analysis E. City of Los Angeles Advisory Agency Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map F. City of Los Angeles Appeal Recommendation Report to Central Area Planning Commission G. Los Angeles City Council Action Denying Appeal H. Mitigated Negative Declaration (Prepared and Adopted by City of Los Angeles) I. Architectural Plans Report Author and Contact Information: Andre Sahakian (310) asahaklan@beverlyhllls.org

3 Application Complete 2/7/2014 Subdivision Deadline 180 days from CEQA Determination File Date 1/7/2014 BACKGROUND Page2of 14 East City of Los Angeles ([QIR4-1-O North R-4 (Multiple Residential Lot Dimensions & Area Beverly Hills High High Medium Residential) Density) Adiacent Zoning and Land Uses Protected Trees/Grove None Property Information found that none of properties are eligible as historic resources. PROPERTY AND NEIGHBORHOOD SING Zoning District R-4 x (6,589.4 SF) Year Built 1931 (332 N. Oakhurst Drive) Historic Resource The Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted by City of Los Angeles Address General Plan Multiple Residential High Density 1930 (336 N. Oakhurst Drive) 1930 (334 N. Oakhurst Drive) TOTAL x 150 (23,175 SF) Los Angeles x (16,585.6 SF) Existing Land Use(s) Three (3) multiple-family residential buildings Assessor s Parcel No , , CHC Review None CC/PC Liaison None majority of City Council did not vote in support of filing an appeal. Los Angeles decision approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map and MND. A Prior PC Action None Prior Council Action 02/12/2015: City Council discussion regarding wher to appeal City of 04/22/2015: Appeal denied by Los Angeles City Council Angeles Action 03/10/2015: Appeal denied by Central Area Planning Commission Prior City of Los 02/03/2015: Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map and MND Representative(s) Terry Moore Owner(s) Oakhurst 90210, LLC Applicant(s) Terry Moore Permit Streamlining Take action on project within 180 days of Lead Agency approval. responsible agency. Accordingly, City of Beverly Hills is required to consider MND adopted by City of Los Angeles. Los Angeles serves as lead agency, and City of Beverly Hills serves as a CEQA Determination Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). For purposes of CEQA, City of Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015

4 Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015 Page3ofl4 South West Circulation and Parking Adjacent Street(s) Existing Traffic Volumes Adjacent Alleys Parkways & Sidewalks R-4 (Multiple Residential High Density) R-4 (Multiple Residential High Density) Alden Drive, W. Third Street N. Oakhurst Drive (South of Beverly Boulevard) both directions Weekday: 2,230 Saturday: 1,370 Sunday: 1,350 Alden Drive (between Foothill Road & N. Maple Drive) both directions Weekday: 2,305 W. 3 Street (between N. Oakhurst Drive & Doheny Drive) both directions Weekday: 8, wide two-way, north-south alley at end of properties Note: The alley is located entirely within City of Los Angeles. N. Oakhurst Drive parkway/sidewalk 16 from face of curb property line east to Neighborhood Character The project site is located on side of North Oakhurst Drive, between Alden Drive north and West 31C1 south. The boundary line City of Beverly Hills and City of Los Angeles bisects project site in a north-south direction; approximately 30% of site is located within City of Beverly Hills site is located within City of Los Angeles to east. The project site is part of a large grouping of multi-family residential properties between Burton Way and Civic Center Drive, and is completely bordered by multi-family residential uses in both jurisdictions. For purposes of this analysis, more immediate neighborhood surrounding project site consist of both sides of 300- and 400-blocks of North Oakhurst Drive, Burton Way and Beverly Boulevard. The 300-block of North Oakhurst Drive consists primarily of two-story residential buildings generally built in 1930 s in period revival styles; however, some properties have been redeveloped with higher densities and heights. The 400 block and portions of 300 block of North Oakhurst Drive south of West Third Street have experienced more large-scale and contain buildings of varying densities, building ages, and architectural styles. Building heights in 400 block of North Oakhurst Drive range 2- and 4-stories, and range 3- and 5-stories in 300 block of North Oakhurst Drive south of West Third Street. North Oakhurst Drive is located parallel to and just to Drive, a thoroughfare connects cities of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, and West Hollywood. Both sides of 300 and 400 blocks of North Oakhurst Drive between Burton Way and Beverly Boulevard are located in an Al Preferential Parking Permit area, which limits non-permit parking to 2 hours 8AM 6PM daily. between between to Street to that eastern between between to west and approximately 70% of between redevelopment to west of Doheny

5 p Page4ofl4 Project Site and Neighborhood Surroundings -v wgwrá. L ] Surroundings T 7 Neighborhood Project Site Property Lines I - City Boundary LEGEND 1I -. 4,. LLT& J WirdSfrt - J - Z $1-1.q R F kp 4 l-, ; E j hhi - p 0t 4. I jj :t4-4 - LJ - 4. i:i r w j-.. I I _ _4, -.. JJF Beverly Boulevaid Planning CommissIon Report: September 24, 2015

6 Page 5 of 14 I I (North) DensIty 1 unit per 900 SF of 7 Units 24 UnIts Where portions of units are Side Setback 19 combined 9 -O 11,-C Side Setback 19 combined 10,-C 11,-C Site Area N/A 6,591 SF 16,579 SF Total Lot Area is 23,170 SF Site Area = 7 Units split between Beverly Hills and Height 45 Max 40 -O 59 -ll (South) Max Stories 4 Stories 4 Stories 5 Stories 25 Front Setback 25 N/A Front setback located in City of Beverly Hills 2m1 Floor N/A 3,574 SF 7,088 SF number of units allowed on 4th Floor N/A 3,511 SF Z,088 SF 5th Floor N/A OSF 10,005SF 3 Floor N/A 4,043 SF 7,088 SF Beverly Hills portion. 1 Floor N/A 3,183 SF 4,922 SF counted toward maximum Floor Area N/A 14,311 SF 36,191 SF Los Angeles, entire unit is Standard (Per BHMC) Hills Portion Angeles PortIon Development RequIred/Allowed City of Beverly City of Los N 0 es various development standards that apply to portion of proposed project located in City up to 5 stories and 59 -ll, and containing 60 subterranean parking spaces. The table below summarizes units would be located in portion of building located in City of Los Angeles, with a height of a height of 4 stories and 40, and provide 22 subterranean parking spaces. The remaining 24 residential portion of building located in City of Beverly Hills would contain 7 units or fractions reof, have of Beverly Hills, as well as details regarding proposed project (broken down by jurisdiction): The project consists of replacing 3 existing 2-story multi-family apartment buildings containing a total of 17 units with a single new 4 and 5 story multi-family condominium building containing 31 units. The PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existing Project Site Viewed from North Oakhurst Drive Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015

7 Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015 Page 6 of 14 Rear Setback N/A N/A 7 -O Rear setback located in City of LA Parking 20 Standard Tenant 22 Standard 35 Standard All parking for Beverly Hills Parking Spaces; Parking Spaces parking spaces; units complies with City of 2 Standard Guest 25 Compact Beverly Hills parking standards Parking Spaces parking spaces (number of spaces and dimensions). According to traffic analysis provided, project also provides number and types of parking spaces per Los Angeles standards for units in Los Angeles. Open Space 200 SF per unit = 1,412 SF 2,490 SF Common outdoor space 1,400 SF Required (2,400 SF counted separately for BH and Modulation Mm. 3,045 SF 3,052 SF N/A Requited; Mm. 60% and Max. 68.3% of front N/A 70% of front façade façade on first 2 on first 2 stories built stories built to to front setback line front setback line required) LA portions (no double counting). Requited Entitlements. As proposed, developed: project requires following entitlements in order to be Vesting Tentative Tract Map: Pursuant to California Government Code 66426, a is required for all subdivisions creating five or more condominiums. tentative map Development Plan Review: Pursuant BHMC (F), a Development Plan Review is required for all common interest development projects (e.g. a condominium building). to Multi-Jurisdictional Processing and Background. The subject property is unusual in only a portion of property is located in City of Beverly Hills, with a majority portion located in City of Los Angeles. Thus, are several jurisdictional issues associated with project processing. In for project to proceed, approvals are from both City of Los Angeles as well as City of Beverly Hills for portions of project located in each respective jurisdiction. While City of Beverly Hills jurisdiction over project is generally limited to portions of project located in Beverly Hills, Planning Commission is required to make specific findings, which may take into consideration entire project, including portions located in City of Los Angeles, to portions in Los Angeles relate to required findings for approval denial of project that entitlements. re needed those somewhat or that order extent

8 Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015 Page7ofl4 For purposes of CEQA, City of Los Angeles is designated lead agency for this project1, whereas City of Beverly Hills serves as a responsible agency 2. As such, City of Los Angeles prepared an Initial Study to determine proposed project s potential impact on environment. After reviewing Initial Study, lead agency determined that this project may have a significant effect on environment, but that by implementing certain mitigation measures, project s potentially significant effects could be reduced to less than significant levels. Accordingly, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared by City of Los Angeles in During public review period carried out by Los Angeles, City of Beverly Hills submitted comments regarding project s potential environmental impacts, specifically relating to concerns that subject properties could be part of a potential historic district. In response to Beverly Hills comments, a Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared by applicant s historic consultant, which concluded that subject properties are not potentially historic. Subsequently, City of Beverly Hills engaged its own historic consultant, Historic Resources Group, to study subject properties. This study concluded that subject properties are located within a potential historic district. These comments were considered by City of Los Angeles, and City of Los Angeles ultimately determined that subject properties are not part of a potential district, and that no environmental impacts would result from project relating to historic resources. On February 3, 2015, City of Los Angeles adopted MND and approved project. Subsequent to adoption of MND by City of Los Angeles, Beverly Hills City Council considered appealing Los Angeles decision; however, a majority of Council did not vote in support of filing an appeal. Noneless, decision was appealed by a member of public to City of Los Angeles Central Area Planning Commission. At its meeting on March 10, 2015, Central Area Planning Commission denied appeal and upheld original approval. The decision to uphold approval was furr appealed to Los Angeles City Council. At its meeting on April 22, 2015, Los Angeles City Council voted to deny appeal and uphold approval of project and adoption of MND. This was a final action with no additional opportunities for appeal; however, a subsequent lawsuit was filed challenging City of Los Angeles decision. Although lawsuit is currently pending, State law mandates that City of Beverly Hills continue processing its portion of project unless orwise stipulated by courts. To staffs knowledge, court has not issued a stay or or injunction that would prevent City of Beverly Hills from considering and acting upon project. Accordingly, project is now being presented for consideration by Planning Commission, and additional information regarding relevant CEQA provisions is provided below in this report. 1 2 The procedure for determining which city is lead agency is set forth in State law ( CEQA Guidelines), and is based on which city first undertook review of project. Since a majority of project is in Los Angeles, City of Los Angeles was first to undertake review of project. Accordingly, City of Los Angeles became lead agency, and is primarily responsible for preparing environmental review for project. A responsible agency is an agency that has a role in reviewing a project and issuing permits or approvals, but is not primary agency (a.k.a. lead agency) carrying out review of project. Except in some limited circumstances, a responsible agency generally must rely on CEQA documentation prepared by lead agency.

9 Some policies relevant to Planning Commission s review of project include: The General Plan includes numerous goals and policies intended to help guide development in City. GENERAL PLAN3 POLICIES Pages of 14 3Available online at htto:// dlvlslon/eneral nlan/uenolan.aso entitlements, City of Beverly Hills, as a responsible agency, must rely on MND prepared and Pursuant to Section of State CEQA Guidelines, as part of its review of requests for project Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.) and City s Local CEQA Guidelines. Environmental Quality Act [Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (CEQA)], State CEQA The Project has been assessed in accordance with authority and criteria contained in California ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT plazas. complement urban setting by providing accessible, landscaped entries, courtyards, and Policy OS 6.3 Landscaping. Requite that new development be located and designed to visually streets and drainage systems. landscaping materials and irrigation systems that minimize water use and runoff onto public Policy LU 14.8 Private Development Landscaping Material and Irrigation. Requite use of and avoid use of toxics and hazardous materials. programs such as City s Green Building Ordinance or comparable criteria to reduce energy, renovated buildings be designed and constructed in accordance with City s sustainability water, and natural resource consumption, minimize construction wastes, use recycled materials, Policy LU 14.4 New Construction of Private Buildings. Require that new and substantially and to leave room for landscaping while being open and contributing to a quality walls; and o Building facades and entrances that directly address street, including use of o Modulation of building volume and masses, avoiding effect of blank continuous o Setback of ground floor from sidewalk to provide privacy, a sense of security, existing neighborhoods. designed to reflect high level of architectural and landscape quality that distinguishes Policy LU 7.1 Character and Design. Require that multi-family dwellings and properties be stoops, porches, and recessed entries; pedestrian environment. development. and amenities that contribute to City s distinctive image and complement existing existing buildings and properties exhibit a high level of excellence in site planning, architectural design, building materials, use of sustainable design and construction practices, landscaping, Policy LU 2.4 Architectural and Site Design. Require that new construction and renovation of Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015

10 Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015 Page 9of14 adopted by City of Los Angeles, which is lead agency for this project. After consideration by City Council, City of Beverly Hills did not appeal decision of lead agency to adopt MND prepared for this project, and thus determination of lead agency is final and conclusive. Pursuant to Section of State CEQA Guidelines, an MND adopted by a lead agency shall be conclusively presumed to comply with CEQA for purposes of use by responsible agencies unless MND is finally adjudged in a legal proceeding not to comply with requirements of CEQA, or a subsequent EIR is made necessary. Furr environmental review could be required only if re were to be 1) substantial changes in project that require major revisions to MND due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to circumstances under which project is undertaken which require major revisions of MND due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) new information of substantial importance that was not know and could not have been known with exercise of reasonable diligence at time of preparation of MND that shows one or more significant effects not discussed in MND. Furrmore, Pursuant to Section of State CEQA Guidelines, in cases where a lawsuit is filed challenging an MND for noncompliance with CEQA, if no injunction or stay is granted in lawsuit, responsible agency shall assume that MND fully meets requirements of CEQA, and shall approve or disapprove project within applicable time limits. As to Beverly Hills, re are limited circumstances in which, if it is determined through provision of new or additional information about project that changes made to project since adoption of MND result in new impacts or mitigation measures, recirculation of MND may be required. If newly identified environmental impacts cannot be mitigated, an Environmental Impact Report may be required. Presently, no such circumstances have been identified. PUBUC OUTREACH AND NOTIFICATION Type of Notice Required Required Actual Actual Notice Period Notice Date Notice Date Period Posted Notice (Agenda) N/A N/A 9/17/15 7 Days Newspaper Notice 10 Days 9/14/15 9/11/15 13 Days Mailed Notice (Owners & Occupants 10 Days 9/14/15 9/14/15 10 Days Radius + block face) Property Posting 10 Days 9/14/15 9/14/15 10 Days Website N/A N/A 7/16/15 7 Days Public Comment As of writing of this report, staff had not received any public comments regarding project.

11 project are provided as Attachment A to this report, and may be used to guide Planning Project approval, conditional approval, or denial is based upon specific findings for each discretionary application requested by applicant. The specific findings that must be made in order to approve ANALYSIS4 Page 10 of 14 report. change to findings may result in a final action that is different from staff recommended action in this hearing. The Planning Commission in its review of administrative record and based on public testimony may reach a different conclusion from that presented in this report and may choose to make alternate findings. A The information provided in this section is based on analysis prepared by report author prior to public best available information at time of writing of this report; however, information may be decisions/agreements. property s configuration. The table is provided for informational purposes only and is based on subject to change in future depending on interjurisdicational policy and infrastructure providers, and ir responsibilities and agreements for providing ir respective services given ir own utility and service providers. The table below summarizes various utility and service Public Services. As noted above, project is split between Beverly Hills and Los Angeles, each with well as expected future built environment based on existing development standards that allow larger in scale than existing buildings on block, but exhibits good architectural design and and Beverly Boulevard), project is generally compatible with existing built environment, as attempts to integrate into its surroundings through use of modulation and step-backs, while enhance character, distribution, built form, scale, and aestic qualities of existing Although proposed project complies with applicable development standards (height, policies related to new multi-family residential development, which are referenced in this report. in a controlled and appropriate manner. The proposed project is consistent with applicable maintain City s existing residential neighborhoods while allowing for new development to occur density, setbacks, etc.), it is frequently challenging for newer developments to maintain and General Plan Consistency. The General Plan provides numerous policies regarding desire to neighborhoods that have historically been lower in density and scale. In that regard, project is meeting height restrictions of Height District applicable to this area (Height District B: 4 stories and 45 height). From a broader neighborhood perspective ( area between Burton Way for 4 and 5 story buildings. information as it relates to project and required findings: In reviewing requested entitlements, Commission may wish to consider following consideration all aspects of project, including those portions located in City of Los Angeles that pertain to required findings. Commission s deliberation of subject project. Application of required findings may take into Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015

12 The jurisdiction in which property is addressed (or fronts) is responsible Page 11 of 14 Fire BHFD has an agreement with LAFD for properties that have dual jurisdiction. Service Jurisdiction Information Gas Utility Independent provider. Beverly Hills. Code Portions of property/structure located within Beverly Hills will be serviced Parking Permits Since property has frontage on a Beverly Hills street, permits ate issued Business Tax Business tax will be paid to Beverly Hills for portions of structure(s) in Rent Control Rent control regulations of jurisdiction in which more than 50% of floor building. The jurisdiction that will handle inspections is yet to be determined. Beverly Hills. The City of Beverly Hills has no jurisdiction over how district Electric Provided by LADWP. Third Street. Check Fees structure that is located in Beverly Hills. Beverly Hills will check fire code Alley The City of Los Angeles is requiring that alley be improved. The area of structure(s) onsite is constructed shall apply. For project site, Enforcement by Beverly Hills Code Enforcement and portions of property/structure investigation (if event occurred within Los Angeles boundary), as City of Los Angeles. Consequently, City of Los Angeles tent control BH school district), students could attend BHUSD. They would be number of parking spaces that are provided to a tenant on site and number of vehicles tenant owns. by Beverly Hills for all tenants (if y qualify). Qualifications are based upon Water Provided by Beverly Hills to portions of building in Beverly Hills and BHUSD Since project has a Beverly Hills address and has zip code of (in Hills, BHPD would be primary responder. While BHPD would be Police BHPD confirmed that since property is addressed (or fronts) in Beverly first responders; however, a larger incident would likely include mutual aid from LAFD. primary responder, re may be larger events in which LAPD may carry out would need to be paid to BHUSD for entire project, not just portion in for responding to calls for service. For project site, BHFD would be opposed to BHPD. located in Los Angeles will be covered by Los Angeles Code Enforcement. more than 50% of floor area of structure(s) onsite is located within boundaries are determined eir now or in future. regulations apply. zoned for Hawthorne for grades K-B and BHHS for grades School fees provided by LADWP for portions in Los Angeles. Sewer Provided by Los Angeles. Improvements improvement requires reconstruction of alley intersection with West Permit/Plan Beverly Hills charges plan check and permit fees for portion of and sprinkler system for entire building since BHFD services entire Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015

13 Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015 Page 12 of 14 While allocation and equity of municipal services and associated policies is an for City, Planning Commission s purview is limited to specific findings in to approve or deny Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Plan Review. In review of required findings, does not to be a clear link between allocation of municipal services and approval or denial of project, except project must result in detrimental impacts to general welfare. Given sufficient resources exist to serve project site, allocation of municipal services does not be detrimental general welfare of order not staffs City. requested re appear that appear to important matter that must be made that Urban Design and Neighborhood Compatibility. The front 42-8 of property is located in City of Beverly Hills, while remaining of property is located in City of Los Angeles. The portions of building located in City of Beverly Hills conform to City of Beverly Hills development standards, which restrict building height 4 stories and 45. The proposed project maintains a height of 4 stories and 40, which is 5 lower than maximum allowed. The height of building increases 5 stories and city boundary line. This increase in height is achieved through gradual increases as building steps back from front property line. This stepping back of height reduces appearance of bulk and mass of building as viewed from Additionally, front façade of building is well modulated and contains openings provide space for units facing as well as units facing neighboring to north and south. Landscaping is also proposed along front façade of building, as well as in open courtyards located north and south ends of building. The combination of modulation, open space, landscaping, and setbacks result in meaningful reductions in bulk and mass as experienced from and from adjacent properties. street. properties outdoor to 59 -ll at to street, at streetscape While proposed building varies from existing buildings on side of 300-block of North Oakhurst Drive, where a majority of buildings are two-story structures, development for newer buildings is to build to height allowed by code, which is 4 stories (45 ) and 5 stories (55 ) as exhibited by buildings on 400 block of North Oakhurst Drive. Additionally, while modulation is compatible with side of North Oakhurst Drive, scale project is also compatible with developments located on 400 block of North Oakhurst Drive between Alden Drive and Beverly Boulevard, 300 block of North Oakhurst Drive and Burton Way, and with a handful of new developments on side of 300 block of North Oakhurst Drive. As in previous sections of this report, it is often challenging for newer developments orwise meet development to be balanced with scale and massing of existing, older buildings to be of lower scale and density. Given challenges, Planning Commission may wish to consider how well scale, massing, and height of proposed project fit into neighborhood context. pattern of between West Third se Street that newer stated east current east that tend between standards to that west Privacy. The proposed building is back from sourn property line by 9 -O in Beverly Hills and 11,-a in Los Angeles, and from norrn property line by 10 -O in Beverly Hills and 11 -O within Los Angeles. To accommodate code-required open space for ground floor corner unit, building is back by 11 -O for length of Beverly Hills portion of property. The additional setback is carried through full height of building within Beverly Hills portion. Additionally, existing property immediately adjacent to subject property on north side is back approximately 14 -O from shared side property line. Taking into account code required setback, building setback for open space, and location of existing building on adjacent property, resulting total building separation to north is 35 -O. Two set set furr set entire

14 large building cutouts are also proposed in approximate middle of each side elevation, located may have potential to cause privacy concerns related to visibility and noise. While re is cutouts at ground level and at upper levels will provide required outdoor space, and thus fully within Los Angeles portion, which will create larger setbacks from adjacent properties. The Page 13 of 16 of units from 17 to 31. The results of this analysis are provided in tables below: daily and peak hour trips resulting from development of project, which will increase number Based on se trip generation rates, analysis was conducted to demonstrate net increase in Apartments % 80% % 35% 0.62 Condominiums % 83% % 33% Hours Morning Peak Hour Afternoon Peak Hour Total, Both Entering Leaving Total Entering Leaving Total Directions Component Vehicle Trips Per Unit (Arthur L. Kassan, P.E., February 29, 2014 Report, Pg. 3) Trip Generation Rates are provided in tables below. vehicle trips on North Oakhurst Drive that would result from project. The trip generation results apartment buildings on project site in order to estimate net increase in number of P.E. conducted a trip generation analysis of proposed project as compared with existing Engineer, which was peer reviewed by City s Senior Transportation Engineer. Arthur L. Kassan, The applicant provided a traffic analysis prepared by Arthur L Kassan, P.E., Consulting Traffic site, located in City of Los Angeles. There will be no new curb cuts on North Oakhurst Drive requirements). Parking access for project will be provided via 20 wide alley to rear of parking (per City of Beverly Hills parking requirements). The remaining 60 parking spaces are 24 units located in City of Los Angeles, plus guest parking (per City of Los Angeles parking also provides more off-street parking per unit than existing multi-family buildings on project and meet parking requirements for 7 units located in City of Beverly Hills, plus guest located in City of Los Angeles portion of property, and are intended to serve remaining site. As a result, re is less likelihood of residents and ir guests utilizing street parking on North Oakhurst Drive and West Third Street, leaving more spaces open for or buildings on street. subterranean levels, 22 of which will be located in City of Beverly Hills portion of property, to provide vehicular access from front of property. The proposed number of parking spaces Traffic and Parking. The proposed project will contain a total of 82 parking spaces within two illumination necessary for safety and requiring use of light caps to furr reduce potential spillover to adjacent properties. potential impacts. Furrmore, while lighting information is not provided at this time, potential wish to consider landscaping configuration and any or methods that could reduce any light and glare issues may be addressed through conditions requiting use of minimum amount of privacy that might be experienced in a single-family development, Planning Commission may generally an expectation that multi-family developments are not able to provide same level of Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015

15 Estimated Trip Generation (Arthur L Kassan, P.E., Exhibit A) Page 14 of 14 Michele McGrath, Principal Planner Report Reviewed By: with permit processing timelines. 2. Direct staff or applicant as appropriate and continue hearing to a date (un)certain, consistent EXISTING As shown in trip generation analysis, project is anticipated to result in a maximum total in density and scale. In that regard, Planning Commission may wish to give careful consideration It is recommended that Planning Commission conduct public hearing and adopt a resolution 1. Deny project, or portions of project, based on specific findings. Alternatively, Planning Commission may consider following actions: conditionally approving proposed project. NEXT STEPS development standards that allow for 4 and 5 story buildings. Summary and Conclusion. The proposed project is consistent with applicable General Plan frequently challenging for newer developments to maintain and enhance character, distribution, complies with applicable development standards (height, density, setbacks, parking, etc.), it is neighborhood, taking into account expected future built environment based on existing as to wher or not project, as proposed, is as compatible as possible with existing policies related to new multi-family residential development, and analysis in this report suggests built form, scale, and aestic qualities of existing neighborhoods that have historically been lower that findings required for project approval can be made. Although proposed project units would be minimal. that traffic impacts to adjacent residential streets resulting from net increase in number of maximum increase of 0.1% on weekdays on West Third Street. The results of this analysis indicate volumes, this represents a maximum increase of 0.2% on weekdays on North Oakhurst Drive, and a increase of 5 trips onto adjacent residential streets at peak hours. Based on existing traffic NETThIPS Apartments 17 units 113 (2) (7) (9) (7) (4) (11) Condominiums PROPOSED 31 units Directions 24 Hours Morning Peak Hour Afternoon Peak Hour Total, Both Entering Leaving Total Entering Leaving Total Component Size Number of Vehicle Trips Planning Commission Report: September 24, 2015