Extension of Coastal Development Permit No. 08

Planning Commission
Meeting
07-18-16
Commission Agenda Report
Item
3.B.5.
To:
Chair Stack and Members of the Planning Commission
Prepared by:
Stephanie Hawner, Associate Planner
Approved by:
Bonnie Blue, Planning Director1~,
Date prepared:
July 6, 2016
Subject:
Extension of Coastal Development Permit No. 08-055, Variance Nos.
10-005 and 10-006, Conditional Use Permit No. 10-003, Demolition
Permit No. 08-014, and Site Plan Review No. 10-012 A request to
extend the Planning Commission’s previous approval for demolition of
an existing gas station, construction of a new commercial building,
and associated development
Meeting Date: July 18, 2016
—
Location:
APN:
Owner:
22729 Pacific Coast Highway
4452-022-010
WFS Seastar Co., LLC
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Planning Commission Resolution No. 16-63 (Attachment 1)
granting a one-year extension of Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 08-055,
Variance Nos. 10-005 and 10-006, Conditional Use Permit No. 10-003, Demolition
Permit No. 08-014, and Site Plan Review No. 10-012, an application for demolition of an
existing gas station, construction of a new commercial building, and associated
development in the Community Commercial zoning district located at 22729 Pacific
Coast Highway (WFS Seastar Co., LLC).
DISCUSSION: On June 1, 2010, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1043, approving the subject application. Pursuant to Local Coastal Program Local
Implementation Plan Section 13.21, Condition of Approval No. 6 in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 10-43 states that the coastal development permit and associated
requests shall expire if the project has not commenced within two years after final City
action. Extension to the permit may be granted by the approving authority for due cause.
The item before the Commission is an extension request by the applicant. A complete
project chronology of the project, including scope of work and approvals, can be found in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 16-63.
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item 3.B.5.
The subject coastal development permit was originally approved on June 1, 2010, has
been extended three times previously, and was set to expire on June 1, 2016. On May
24, 2016, the applicant submitted a fourth extension request to ensure a valid CDP
remains in place while the applicant processes building plan check corrections.
CONCLUSION: The project conditions, and the zoning ordinance under which the
approval was issued, have not significantly changed. Upon the Planning Commission’s
approval of the time extension request, the approval set forth in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 10-43 shall remain valid for an additional one-year term. The expiration
date of this approval would then be June 1, 2017. All conditions of approval in Planning
Commission Resolution No. 10-43 will remain in effect.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 16-63
Time Extension Request
Public Hearing Notice
Copies of all previously issued resolutions relating to the project can be obtained from
the Planning Department upon request.
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item 3.B.5.
CITY OF MALIBU PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 16-63
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MALIBU
GRANTING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NO. 08-055, VARIANCE NOS. 10-005 AND 10-006, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 10-003, DEMOLITION PERMIT NO. 08-014, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW NO.
10-012, AN APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING GAS STATION,
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING, AND ASSOCIATED
DEVELOPMENT AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 22729 PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY (WFS SEASTAR CO., LLC)
The Planning Commission of the City Of Malibu does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals.
A.
On June 1, 2010, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution
No. 10-43, approving Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 08-055, Site Plan Review No. 10-0 12,
Variance Nos. 10-005 and 10-006, Conditional Use Permit No. 10-003 and Demolition Permit No.
08-014. The expiration date for the approval was June 1, 2012.
B.
On May 1, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 12-39, granting a
two-year extension of CDP No. 08-055.
C.
On May 19, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 14-51, granting a
one-year extension of CDP No. 08-055.
D.
On June 15, 2015, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 15-36, granting a
one-year extension of CDP No. 08-055.
E.
On May 24, 2016, the applicant submitted a fourth time extension request.
F.
On June 23, 2016, a Notice of Public Hearing was published in a newspaper of general
circulation within the City of Malibu and was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a
500-foot radius of the subject property.
G.
On July 18, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the
request, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written
correspondence, public testimony, and other information in the record.
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No 16-63
Page 2 of 3
SECTION 2. Environmental Review.
Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the Planning Commission previously determined the project to be categorically exempt pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301(1)(3) Existing Facilities and 15303(c) New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures. As such, Categorical Exemption No. 10-063 was filed for CDP No.
08-055,
—
SECTION 3.
—
Findings of Fact.
Pursuant to Local Coastal Program Local Implementation Plan Section 13.21, the Planning
Commission, having considered the staff report, all written correspondence and oral testimony
presented at the public hearing, hereby finds that the applicant has demonstrated due cause for the
necessity of a time extension of the approval of the coastal development permit and associated
requests.
SECTION 4. Planning Commission Action.
A.
The approvals set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 10-43 are hereby
extended for an additional one-year term. The approval is now set to expire on June 1, 2017.
B.
No other changes to the conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No.
10-43 are made and all other findings, terms and/or conditions contained in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 10-43 shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 5. The Planning Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18t1~ day of July, 2016.
ROOHI STACK, Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
KATHLEEN STECKO, Recording Secretary
Resolution No 16-63
Page 3 of 3
LOCAL APPEAL A decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council by
an aggrieved person by written statement setting forth the grounds for appeal. An appeal shall be
filed with the City Clerk within 10 days and shall be accompanied by an appeal form and proper
appeal fee. The appellant shall pay fees as specified in the Council adopted fee resolution in effect at
the time of the appeal.
Appeal forms and fee schedule may be found online at
www.malibucity.org/planningforms, in person at City Hall, or by calling (310) 456-2489, extension
245.
-
-
I CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOll’~G RESOLUTION NO. 16-63 was passed and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Malibu at the regular meeting thereof held on the 1 8th day of
July, 2016, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
KATHLEEN STECKO, Recording Secretary
WFS Seastai
Coo,
LLC
22741 Pacific Coast Highway, Ste. 400
Malibu CA 90265
MAY 24201
BY EMAIL
PLANNING “L~rI,
flt~
May2O,20l6
City of Malibu
Stephanic Hawner
23825 Stuart Ranch Road
Malibu CA 90265
RE:
RECEI V~
Email: [email protected]
CDP 08-055, 22729 Pacific Coast Highwa~r, Extension Request
Dear Ms. Hawner:
This time extension is being requested because the City’s Geotechnical Engineer has asked for
additional information which required additional time for the project geotechnical engineer to provide
Due in part to this reason and also that the plan checker has asked for extensive information which the
architect is in the process of providing, the owner has not yet been able to obtain the building permit,
notwithstanding three plan checks have been completed and paid for. All of the requested information
will be provided as quickly as the geologist/soils engineer and architect are able to compile the
information. The owner and the owner’s project consultants, engineer, and architect have been working
diligently to complete the plan check process, which has been extremely time consuming. The owner is
also unable to obtain a construction loan until such time as the plan check process has been completed
and the owner is able to obtain firm cost estimates.
There have not been any changes in the City’s commercial development standards since the project was
found to be in compliance with the existing development standards. No change to the approved project
is being requested with respect to this requested time extension.
For the above stated reason, the Owner is requesting a 12-month extension of the existing CDP. Without
the requested one-year extension, the current CDP will expire on June 1, 2016.
Sincerely yours,
Norman R. Haynie
Manager, Las Tunas Beach, LLC and Grey Granite, LLC
Owner’s Representative
NRH/cek
ATTACHMENT2
Notice Continued...
The extension request will be presented on the consent
calendar based on staff’s recommendation but any person
wishing to be heard may request at the beginning of the
meeting to have the application addressed separate
ly. Please see the recording secretary before start of the
meeting to have an item removed from consent calendar.
The Commission’s decision will be memorialized in a writ
ten resolution.
A written staff report will be available at or before the hear
ing for the project. All persons wishing to address the
Commission regarding this matter will be afforded an op
portunity in accordance with the Commission’s proce
dures.
Copies of all related documents are available for review at
City Hall during regular business hours. Written com
ments may be presented to the Planning Commission at
any time prior to the beginning of the public hearing.
LOCAL APPEAL - A decision of the Planning Commission
may be appealed to the City Council by an aggrieved per
son by written statement setting forth the grounds for ap
peal. An appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten
days following the date of action for which the appeal is
made and shall be accompanied by an appeal form and
filing fee, as specified by the City Council. Appeal forms
may be found online at www.malibucity.org/planningforms
or in person at City Hall, or by calling (310) 456-2489,
extension 245.
IF YOU CHALLENGE THE CITY’S ACTION IN COURT,
YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE IS
SUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE PUB
LIC HEARING DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, OR IN
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE
CITY, AT OR PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
If you have questions regarding this notice, please contact
Stephanie Hawner, Associate Planner, at (310) 4562489, extension 276.
Date: June 23, 2016
By: Bonnie Blue, Planning Director
H
H
City of Malibu
23825 Stuart Ranch Road
Malibu, CA 90265
(310) 456-2489 Fax (310) 456-7650
-I
c,
CD
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING
c
C71_,,
o~Q~
=
I.
-a
~~OD
0z,
c~CD
0
C)
CD
3
CD
The Malibu Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on
MONDAY, July 18, 2016, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, Malibu City HaIl, 23825 Stuart Ranch Road,
Malibu, CA, for the project identified below.
EXTENSION OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.
08-055.
VARIANCE
NOS.
10-005
AND
10-006,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 10-003, DEMOLITION
PERMIT NO. 08-014, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 10-012
— A fourth
request to extend the Planning Commission’s
previous approval for demolition of an existing gas station,
construction of a new commercial building, and associated
development
LOCATION:
APN:
ZONING:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
EXTENSION FILED:
CASE PLANNER:
22729 Pacific Coast Highway
4452-022-010
Community Commercial (CC)
Norman R. Haynie, Manager,
Las Tunas Beach, LLC and
Grey Granite, LLC.
WFS Seastar Co., LLC
May 24, 2016
Stephanie Hawner
Associate Planner
(310) 456-2489, ext. 276
[email protected]
Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning
Commission analyzed the proposed project. The Planning
Commission found that this project is listed among the classes
of projects that have been determined not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Therefore, the project is
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301(l)(3) and 15303(c) — New
Construction. The Planning Commission further determined
that none of the six exceptions to the use of a categorical
exemption apply to this project (CEQA Guidelines Section
15300.2).
H
c.)
I>
co
M
a
3,
I2~-l4
PM .t58
-
eQ
‘—
N
N