TITLE
Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing dealing with Negative Declaration
(ND 23-08), a Site Plan Review, a Conditional Use Permit and a Standards Variance to allow the construction of a 233-space parking garage with a setback of 10'-0" from Locust Avenue (instead of not less than 20'-0") at 3711 Long Beach Boulevard and either:
1) Overrule the appeal by Century Quality Management, and sustain the decision of the City Planning Commission to not certify the Negative Declaration and deny the proposed project; or
2) Uphold the appeal, support the initial staff position, overrule the decision of the City Planning Commission, certify Negative Declaration (ND 23-08) and approve the proposed project (Case No. 0606-08). (District 8)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND
This item was continued from the December 11, 2007 City Council meeting at the request of the applicant.
The subject property is a 63,640 (203'x313.5') square foot lot that is developed with a 118,918 square foot, 10-story commercial building, parking structure and surface parking lot. The property is a through lot with frontage on Long Beach Boulevard to the east and Locust Avenue to the west.
Currently, the property has a total of 273 parking spaces in the existing structure that is located adjacent to the building, and in the at-grade parking lot on the westerly portion of the lot. Based on the current parking requirements, the 118,918 square foot building would require 565 parking spaces. Therefore, from a code perspective, the site has a deficit of 292 spaces.
In addition, of the 273 existing parking spaces, 132 spaces are in tandem and 45 spaces are in triple-tandem (3-deep), all of which are non-conforming as the current parking code does not permit tandem parking for commercial uses. With the proposed addition and a reconfiguration, a total of 310 parking spaces will be in tandem, and there will be no triple-tandem. Therefore, only 96 of the 273 existing parking spaces comply with the parking standards. Combined with the parking deficit, the parking for this project is very inefficient, and the applicant has indicated that the owner of the building is unable to lease a large portion of the building due to the parking deficit.
The proposal attempts to correct a number of deficiencies by providing a new 233-space, 2-story, 4-level (one subterranean level, two story levels and a roof deck level) parking structure and modification of the existing surface parking lot and existing structure. The changes will result in a net parking increase of 170 spaces for a total of 443 on-site parking spaces. In order to maximize the number of parking spaces, a Standards Variance is requested to allow the parking structure to be setback 10'-0" off Locust Avenue, instead of the required 20'-0". In addition to the parking structure, the applicant is also proposing to upgrade the existing building along Long Beach Boulevard.
Staff recommended approval of these requests based on the project's consistency with the Central Long Beach Design Guidelines and Strategic Plan to revitalize the Long Beach Boulevard Commercial Corridor. The additional parking will allow the applicant to activate the office tower thereby attracting additional tenants and improving the long-term viability of the property. The structure will be fully enclosed (except for the roof level) which will minimize the impact of vehicular noise, lights and odor on the adjacent properties. Conditions of approval including requiring a minimum 6' high parapet from the roof deck side of the structure and limiting hours of operation for the new parking structure also help to mitigate potential impacts.
The Planning Commission conducted an initial public hearing on September 6, 2007 (see Attachment 1), the Planning Commission heard testimony from four people who were concerned about the negative impact of allowing the commercial use to further encroach into the adjacent residential neighborhood, as well as the lack of current upkeep of the property. After consideration and testimony from the applicant that additional upgrades were being proposed for the existing office building that include entry, lobby and landscape improvements, a motion was made by Commissioner Stuhlbarg to certify the Negative Declaration and approve the project as submitted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Greenberg, but no vote was taken. A substitute motion was made by Commissioner Jenkins to continue the project to allow the applicant to revise the plans to indicate all of the proposed improvements for the site. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Saumur and passed 4-2 with Commissioners Stuhlbarg and Gentile dissenting.
The second public hearing was conducted on October 18, 2007 (see Attachment 2). The applicant presented the proposed improvements, and testimony was heard from one additional person in opposition to the project. After consideration, Commissioner Smith made a motion to deny the proposal. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gentile and the motion passed 4-1 with Commissioner Greenberg dissenting. The issues voiced by the majority of the Commissioners were that the concerns of the adjacent residential neighbors had not been sufficiently addressed and the project, as proposed, would negatively impact the adjacent residential neighborhood.
As there were no findings prepared to support a denial, staff was directed to prepare findings of denial based on Planning Commission comments. The findings were prepared and presented to the Planning Commission for adoption at its November 1, 2007 meeting (see Attachment 3). Commissioner Saumur made the motion to adopt the findings. Commissioner Gentile seconded the motion, which passed 4-0-1, with Commissioner Greenberg abstaining. The decision was appealed by the applicant and thus requires action by the City Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Negative Declaration 23-07 was prepared in conjunction with this project but was not certified by the Planning Commission. The Negative Declaration is attached for consideration.
Assistant City Attorney Michael J. Mais reviewed this report on November 28, 2007.
TIMING CONSIDERATIONS
The Long Beach Municipal Code requires an appeal of a Planning Commission action to be transmitted by the Department of Planning and Building for presentation to the City Council within 60 days.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve recommendation.
Respectfully Submitted,
CRAIG BECK |
APPROVED: |
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING |
|
|
|
|
PATRICK H. WEST |
|
CITY MANAGER |