At the meeting on June 9, 2010, the following action was taken by the East Los Angeles Area Planning Commission:

Transcription

1 EAST LOS ANGELES AREA PLANNING COMMISSION 200 N. Spring Street, Room 272, Los Angeles, California, , (213) Determination Mailing Date JUN CASE NO.: ZA ZV-SPR-1A Address: Riverside Drive Council District: 4 Plan Area: Silver Lake-Echo Park-Elysian Valley District Map: 151A207 Legal Description: Unnumbered lot, Rancho Los Felis Tract; Lots 12-23, 25, ARB 1, 2, & 3, 26, , 29, 30, lvanhoe Tract; Lot A, Tract 2835 Applicant: Sam Menlo and Menlo Trust Representative: Jim Ries. Craig Lawson & Company, LLC Appellant: Paul Edelman At the meeting on June 9, 2010, the following action was taken by the East Los Angeles Area Planning Commission: 1. Granted the appeal in part. 2. Sustained the Zoning Administrator's decision I ) for the approval of a Variance to permit the continued use of an existing 157-unit building in lieu of the 90-unit maximum density permitted in the RD2-1VL Zone (Site 2), and 2) for the approval of Site Plan Review to permit the construction of 120 condominium units (Site 1). 3. Modified Conditions of Approval Nos. 9 and Adopted the attached Modified Conditions and Findings. 5. Approved the adopted environmental clearance Mitigated Negative Declaration ENV MND. Fiscal Impact Statement: There is no General Fund impact as administrative costs are recovered through fees. This action was taken by the following vote: Moved: Seconded: Ayes: Absent: Nagao Angulo Lopez Garcia, Marquez Vote: 3-0 ~asf LOS ~ngeles Area Planning d mmission

2 Page 2 Effective Date I Appeals: The Commission's determination on the Zone Variance will be final 15 days from the mailing date of this determination unless an appeal is filed to the City Council within that time. All appeals shall be filed on forms provided at the Planning Department's Public Counters at 201 N. Figueroa Street, Fourth Floor, Los Angeles. or at 6262 Van Nuys Boulevard, Suite 251, Van Nuys. LASTDAYTOAPPEAL JUL If you seek judicial review of any decision of the City pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section , the petition for writ of mandate pursuant to that section must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which the City's decision became final pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section There may be other time limits which also affect your ability to seek judicial review. Attachments: Modified Conditions and Findings cc: Notification List Maya Zaitzevsky

3 MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. All other use, height and area regulations of the Municipal Code and all other applicable government/regulatory agencies shall be strictly complied with in the development and use of the property, except as such regulations are herein specifically varied or required. 2. The use and development of the property shall be in substantial conformance with the plot plan submitted with the application and marked Exhibit "A, except as may be revised as a result of this action. 3. The authorized use shall be conducted at all times with due regard for the character of the surrounding district, and the right is resewed to the Zoning Administrator to impose additional corrective Conditions, if, in the Administrator's opinion, such Conditions are proven necessary for the protection of persons in the neighborhood or occupants of adjacent property. 4. All graffiti on the site shall be removed or painted over to match the color of the surface to which it is applied within 24 hours of its occurrence. 5. A copy of the first page of this grant and all Conditions andlor any subsequent appeal of this grant and its resultant Conditions andlor letters of clarification shall be printed on the building plans submitted to the Zoning Administrator and the Department of Building and Safety for purposes of having a building permit issued. 6. Indemnification. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, or employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul this approval which action is brought within the applicable limitation period. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the applicant of any claim action or proceeding, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 7. Herein authorized is the installation, construction, operation and maintenance of a development consisting of: a. A 120-unit, 57-foot high residential building located on Site 1. b. The maintenance of an existing 157-unit apartment building located on Site This approval is tied to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No (ENV MND). The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures and conditions of approval identified in that case.

4 9. The applicant shall install and maintain air filters capable of achieving a Minimum Efficiency Rating Value (MERV) of at least 13 or better in order to reduce the effects of diminished air quality on the occupants of the project. The air filtration system is required in the new construction and to the existing 157-unit apartment building. 10. All open areas not used for buildings, driveways, parking areas, recreational facilities or walks shall be attractively landscaped and maintained in accordance with a landscape plan, including an automatic irrigation plan, prepared by a licensed landscape architect to the satisfaction of the decision maker. This plan shall include both: Site 1 which contains the proposed condominium and Site 2 which contains the existing apartment building. The landscape plan shall be reviewed by Council District 4 prior to the final approval by the Zoning Administrator. 11. During the construction of the 120-unit building, the property shall be fenced to avoid nuisance activities and vandalism. 12. The applicant shall make every attempt possible to have the hauling activities be contained in the parking lane in front of the project site and not block vehicular or bicycle traffic on Riverside Drive. 13. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the 120-unit condominium project, the applicant shall construct a landscaped median on Riverside Drive with input from the Department of Transportation and the Fire Department. The applicant will irrigate the median and maintain the landscaping. (Applicant volunteered) 14. The applicant shall shorten the existing retaining wall located on the site to a freeboard height of approximately 2 feet. The area behind and in front of the wall will be landscaped. (Applicant Volunteered) 15. The applicant shall adhere to the Sign Ordinance for all permanent or temporary advertising with the intent to preserve the "Scenic Highway" character of Riverside Drive as specified in the Community Plan. 16. The applicant shall install temporary lighting on the property prior to construction as needed to secure the site. 17. Prior to any landscaping projects being implemented, the existing retaining wall along Riverside Drive, towards the south end, as well as all smaller retaining walls upslope on the subject property, shall be treated with "micro-guard product for anti-graffiti protective treatment. 18 The applicant shall plant over any visible retention structures with vines or similar covers.

5 19. A 24-hour "hot line" phone number shall, be provided for the receipt of complaints from the community regarding the subject facility and shall be: a. Posted at the entry. b. Provided to the immediate neighbors, schools, and local neighborhood council groups. 20. Prior to issuance of any permits relative to this matter, a covenant acknowledging and agreeing to comply with all the terms and conditions established herein shall be recorded in the County Recorder's Office. The agreement (standard master covenant and agreement for CP-6770) shall run with the land and shall be binding on any subsequent owners, heirs or assigns. This agreement with the conditions attached must be submitted to the De~artment of Citv Plannina for aooroval before being recorded. After recordation, a bertified copy Laring the ~ecdider's number and date shall be provided to the Department of Citv Planning - for attachment to the subject case file. 21. Prior to the clearance of any conditions herewith, the applicant shall show proof that all fees have been paid to the Department of City Planning, Expedited Processing Section.

6 MANDATED FINDINGS In order for a variance to be granted, all five of the legally mandated findings delineated in City Charter Section 562 must be made in the affirmative. Following (highlighted) is a delineation of the findings and the application of the relevant facts of the case to same: 1. The strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of the zoning regulations. The applicant is proposing to construct a 120-unit condominium project on the vacant portion of an approximately 10-acre site, while maintaining a 157-unit apartment building, constructed in1991, on the remaining portion of the site. In 1987, building permits were issued to construct a two-phase project consisting of 288 units on the subject site. At the time the building permit was issued', the site's zoning included C2, R3 and RD1.5 and the 1987 project was allowed as a matter of right requiring no discretionary actions from the City. As a condition of the building permit, all lots were required to be tied together via a Covenant and Agreement recorded against the completed Phase 1 (located on Site 2), which now consist of 157 residential units completed in The applicant states that due to the economic recession of the time, Site 1 (easterly portion) was never developed although a 128-unit residential project was proposed. In March of 1992, permit 92LA88223 was issued which revised the plot plan to eliminate all three buildings referred to as Phase 2 (Site 1). The lot tie required for the construction of the 288 unit project covering the entire site was never amended to reflect the change in the development scope that eliminated the three buildings and Site 1. On September 11, 1989, the 10-acre site was down zoned to RD2, via Ordinance No SA-60&70, which reduced the permitted density of the site from at least 288 to 216. Not amending the lot tie agreement at the time that permit 92LA88223 was amended, has created the practical difficulty of overcoming the presumption that the undeveloped portion of the 10-acre property is required to justify the density of the developed portion of the property. The vacant easterly portion of the site has remained undeveloped due solely to this unique practical difficulty applicable to the site. If the RD2 Zone been applicable to the site in 1987, the site plan may have been designed differently to better utilize the entire area. The residential dwelling units would have been disbursed more uniformly over the site, instead of clustering them in one section. The strict application of the density provision of the zoning ordinance results in practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purposes of the zoning regulations. The granting of this variance will allow the existing building, constructed under a different set of development standards to remain in compliance with the Code while allowing a new project that is consistent with the current development regulations to be developed.

7 The applicant has agreed to landscape an area behind the apartment building and use it for passive recreation for the tenants and reduce a nuisance hazard for the neighborhood. The applicant has also agreed to install an MERV 13 air filtration system in the apartment building to mitigate the impacts of the project's proximity to the 1-5 freeway and the associated airborne contaminants. These improvements will enhance the property and would not be required without the subject entitlements. 2. There are special circumstances applicable to the subject property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings that do not apply generally to other property in the same zone and vicinity. At approximately 10 acres, the size of the site is unique in Los Angeles. There are few sites of this size in the City and even fewer that are as underutilized as the subject site. Consequently, it presents an opportunity to generate more than 100 residential units. The shape of the site, which is very long and shallow, creates unique design challenges. These challenges are intensified by the configuration of the site's southerly property line which jogs in and out along the entire length. The approximately 432,634 square feet site fronts along approximately 2,700 linear feet of Riverside Drive, while the its depth varies erratically between 96 feet and 300 feet. The site's slope is approximately 2:l. The site's Riverside Drive frontage is at a relatively consisted 388 feet elevation. The combination of these physical attributes along creates a special circumstance justifying the granting of the variance. The irregularly shape, size, slope and prior development history associated with the site combined to create a special circumstance not applicable to other property in the area. 3. Such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right or use generally possessed by other property in the same zone and vicinity but which, because of such special circumstances and practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships, is denied the property in question. The granting of the variance is necessary to maintain the existing 157-unit residential apartment building constructed under the density restriction applicable at the time, while at the same time allowing for the development of the remaining vacant portion of the 10-acre property as other property owners in the same zone are permitted. As mentioned previously, the site is subject to numerous special circumstances justifying the request. In addition to the physical attributes discussed previously, the property has experienced a unique history. A portion of the property is improved with a 157-unit apartment building which was designed to be part of a 288-unit unified development. The density of the 157-unit apartment would have complied with the applicable zoning at the time and the density for the proposed 120-unit condominium (VTT-70871) project would be allowed. However due to this oversight and the down zoning of the site, the variance to continue to

8 maintain the 157 existing units on the westerly portion of site is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right or use generally possessed bv other properties.. in the same zone and vicinitv but which, because of these special circumstance and practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships is denied to the property in question. 4. The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the same zone or vicinity in which the property is located. Granting of the variance is necessary to provide a benefit to the public welfare as the westerly portion of the site will be in compliance with the code and the easterly portion of the site will be more attractive for development opportunities that could eliminate some of the nuisance and neglect associated with the site. The 157-unit apartment building has existed on the site for almost twenty years and has not been materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in the same zone or vicinity. However, the easterly portion of the 10-acre site has experienced nuisance activities and neglect. Graffiti appears on the retaining walls, debris is found along the site and homeless encampments have been setup. Also, problems with hydrology, landslides and stormwater runoff are evident. The nuisance activities are associated primarily with the vacant portion of the site. Comments received from the local residents suggest that nature of the site has attracted vandals and a drug lab was removed from the site. The granting of the variance for the westerly portion of the 10-acre site containing the existing 157-unit apartment will encourage the development of the easterly portion of the site which has been a source activity detrimental to the community. 5. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect any element of the General Plan. The granting of the variance to allow the 157-unit apartment on the westerly portion of the 10-acre site will not adversely affect any element of the Silver Lake-Echo Park-Elysian Valley Community Plan, but rather advances many objectives of the plan. The request variance would conform to the Community Plan by maintaining an the existing 157-unit medium density residential building in an underutilized area of the Elysian Valley, providing housing opportunities for prospective residents, near an employment center and close to various public transportation opportunities. The propose project meets many of the Community Plan Objectives and goals, including the following: Obiective 1-1 Achieve and maintain a housing supply.. - sufficient to meet the diverse economic and socioeconomic needs of current and projected population to the Obiectivel-1.4 Encourage new infill residential development that complements existing

9 development and architectural style. Objective Promote the preservation of existing single and multiple family residential - neighborhoods. The granting of the variance will encourage the construction of 120 dwelling units with over 75% consisting of two bedrooms units, With a unit mix skewed more toward two bedroom units than one bedroom or studio units, the project is geared more toward couples and families, which reflects the growing needs of the regional population for consolidated living arrangements. The granting of the variance creates a medium density development that helps concentrate new housing on transit routes and boulevard. This concentration of new housing supply helps preserves the existing single and multiple family neighborhoods nearby by absorbing some of the local demand for housing and reducing the local economic incentive to raze and redevelop existing neighborhoods. The granting of the variance will help reduce the regional demand for housing which will help to prevent or mitigate any future erosion or intrusion in the existing surrounding neighborhoods. And it will preserve the varied and distinct character and integrity of the neighborhoods. It does so because it permits the construction of 120 new units at an appropriate location and scale. SITE PLAN REVIEW FINDINGS 6. The project complies with all applicable provisions of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, Planning and Zoning Sections and any applicable specific plan. The proposed 120-unit condominium project, situated on the easterly portion of the property (Site I), complies with the majority of provisions of the Los Angeles Municipal Code for project with the RD2-1VL Zone, including the maximum permitted height, minimum parking, setbacks and open space requirements. The vesting tentative tract (VTT-70871) has also been approved which also granted yard adjustments. The granting of the adjustment facilitates the future transfer of approximately 39,400 square feet of the proposed tract's 252,454 net square feet to eleven individual abutting property owners who presently encroach into the southwestern and uphill portion of the site. The encroachments range from portions of structures to yard improvements extending over the common property line between the properties. The encroachments will be eliminated by individually adjusting the respective property lines (via future lot line adjustment requests) so that all physical improvements associated with a particular single family home will be located entirely on the lot of that home. The future lot line adjustments will result in a reduction in lot area of the proposed tract with a corresponding increase in lot area of the encroaching properties. The project is not located within any specific plan area or other overlay zones that would impact the use of the property.

10 7. The project is consistent with the General Plan. Approval of the project will permit the construction of 120 dwelling units with over 75% consisting of two bedrooms units, With a unit mix skewed more toward two bedroom units than one bedroom or studio units, the project is geared more toward couples and families, which reflects the growing needs of the regional population for consolidated living arrangements. The approval of this Site Plan Review is consistent with the following objectives stated in the Housing Element: Housing Element Objectives include the following: Objective 1.1: Objective 2.1: Objective 2.3: Encourage production and preservation of an adequate supply of rental and ownership housing to meet the identified needs of persons of all income levels and special needs; and Promote housing strategies which enhance neighborhood safety and sustainability and provide for adequate population, development, and infrastructure and service capacities within the City and each community plan area, or other pertinent service area; and Encourage the location of housing, jobs, and services in mutual proximity. Accommodate a diversity of uses that support the needs of the City's existing and future residents. The Housing Element states that, "it is necessary to remember that Los Angeles is a substantially built-out city. The only major areas remaining where new construction can take place tend to be in the Santa Monica and Santa Susana Mountains where land and construction costs preclude even moderate income housing. Because of that, nearly all housing developments in the city is expected to be infill development involving the recycling of land." The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 8. The project is consistent with applicable adopted redevelopment plan. The project is not located with an adopted redevelopment plan area. 9. The project consist of an arrangement of buildings and structures (including height, bulk, and setbacks, off-street parking facilities, load areas, lighting landscaping, trash collection, and other such pertinent improvements, which is or will be compatible with existing and future developments on the neighboring properties. The proposed 120-unit residential project and the previously approved existing 157 apartment buildings consists of an arrangement of buildings and structures which are and will be compatible with the existing and future development on the neighboring properties. The buildings will be approximately 57 feet in height and will have 1.5 levels of parking. It will observe a 15-foot rear yard, 7-foot front

11 yard, and five-foot side yards internal to the project site. The proposed floor area ratio (FAR) is approximately 0.93:l which is well below the maximum permitted 3:l FAR. The project will entail the reduction of a large retaining wall on the site that has been a nuisance and subject to graffiti, and the entire site will be more attractively landscaped. The site is highly visible from both the I-F freeway and Riverside Drive which is a scenic highway. The existing development is a source of blight that has been subject to neglect by the owner. The project will provide home ownership opportunities that are located close to an industrial employment center, close to public transit and easy access to a major freeway which provides convenient access to multiple job centers throughout the Los Angeles County. On site, the project will provide sufficient parking (270 spaces), open space (14,600 square feet), recreation and an attractive design. The project is compatible with the RD2 Zone designation and with the surrounding urban fabric. 10. The project incorporates feasible measures, monitoring measures when necessary or alternatives identified in the environmental review which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the project, andlor any additional findings as may be required by CEQA The Mitigated Negative Declaration ENV MND was prepared for the subject property, pursuant to and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section et seq.) and it identified all project impacts and proposed measures to mitigate these impacts to a less than significant level. In the Biological Resource Assessment report dated October 6, 2009 prepared by the PCR Consultants, it was determined that the study area (site) has the potential to support raptor and songbird nests due to the presence of mature trees. Nesting activity typically occurs from mid-february to mid August. Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). In addition, nests and eggs are protected under the Fish and Game Code Section The removal of vegetation during the breeding season is considered a potential significant impact of the proposed protect because to do so would be a violation of the State and local statues. However, the project has been condition herein to comply with the proposed mitigation measures to reduce such impacts to less than significant. 11 That any project containing residential uses provides its residents with appropriate type and placement of recreational facilities and service amenities in order to improve habitability for the residents and minimize impacts on neighboring properties where appropriate. The proposed project is a unique development that provides a variety of recreational opportunities for the existing and new components on the site. The existing 157-unit apartment was built with open space that complied with the minimum requirements when constructed. The proposed 120-unit condominium will have 14,600 square feet of open space as required by the Municipal Code, all of which will consist of common outdoor space for the residents. The new

12 project will include a large rear yard, a pool with a deck and a various community rooms along private courtyards and balconies. The applicant is working with the neighboring property owners who have encroachments on the subject site to allow these to be transferred to them via lot line adjustments which will allow them to retain their existing improvements. The neighboring property owners spoke in support of the proposed project and stated that they were opposed to the idea of having an equestrian trail adjacent to the property as they were concerned it would increase crime and lead to more homeless encampments in the area. ADDITIONAL MANDATORY FINDINGS 12. The National Flood Insurance Program rate maps, which are a part of the Flood Hazard Management Specific Plan adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 172,081, have been reviewed and it has been determined that this project is located in Zone C, areas of minimal flooding. 13. On January 6, 2010, the Department of City Planning issued Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ENV MND. The City Council adopted the MND on May 19, 2010 and determined that it reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that this project would not have a significant effect upon the environment provided the potential impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level. The East Los Angeles Area Planning Commission hereby find that the information contained in the Mitigated Declaration has been reviewed and considered by the Deputy Advisory Agency, the City Council, and the Zoning Administrator, that the Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately describes the potential impacts of the Project and no additional environmental clearance is necessary; and find that there is no evidence in the record that any of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section are met. The custodian of the documents.or other material which constitute the record of aroceedinas uaon which the decision is based are located with the City of Los ;4ngeles, planr;ing Department located at 200 North Spring Street, Room 750, Los Angeles, California