City Council Meeting
November 28, 2022
Agenda Item 11-A
Conditional Use Permit Case No. CU 22-11
9542 Artesia Blvd
Presented By:
Elizabeth Corpuz
Planning Department
1 VICINITY AERIAL
2 N
2 BACKGROUND
Conditional Use Permit (CU 15-02): On 4/20/15, the Planning Commission approved CU 15-02 to allow for a hospital facility and several site improvements;
CUP (CU 16-05): On 9/19/16, the Planning Commission approved CU 16-05, to modify CU 15-02 changing the type of care provided from a combination behavioral/medical to an all-behavioral hospital, increase the beds from 80 to 92, and adjusting the phasing plan for various site improvements to be completed by December 31, 2018.
CUP (CU 22-05):
6/20/22: Planning Commission considered CU 22-05 to modify conditions of approval of CU 16-02. The Commission directed City staff to draft a resolution denying the modification request.
7/5/22: Planning Commission considered the denial resolution and decided to continue the adoption of the resolution. 7/11/22: City Council considered an appeal from the City Attorney to order a de novo public hearing regarding the Planning Commission’s decision. At the meeting, the Applicant agreed to withdraw its CUP application and submit a modified application. 7/12/22: Applicant withdrew its CUP application.
3 3
MODIFICATION REQUEST
Conditional Use Permit (CU 22-11):
The Applicant is requesting that the City Council modify CUP 15-02 and CUP 16-05 as follows:
Eliminate 8-foot high perimeter block wall requirement (COA Nos. 15, 17, 18, 19, and 22 of Resolution No. PC 16-16 - Exhibit A);
Allow an alternate façade improvement design/materials, landscaping, and signage, pursuant to newly submitted plans. (COA No. 15 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 15-10); and
Eliminate requirements requiring new lighting in the rear parking lot (COA Nos. 35, 36, and 48 of Resolution No. PC 15-10 - Exhibit A). 4 4
DISCUSSION
Perimeter Walls
BMC 17.44.060 requires walls abutting residential districts to be not less than 6’ and no more than 8’ in height.
The 2019 Noise Assessment concludes that the existing 6’ high perimeter walls address concerns of privacy and noise levels in the area do not require the need to install an 8’ high block wall.
As proposed, the Applicant will patch, repair and paint the existing walls to match the proposed façade improvements. 5 5
DISCUSSION
Façade Improvements
6 2015/16 RENDERING
PROPOSED RENDERING
6 DISCUSSION
Façade Improvements
7 DISCUSSION
Landscape Plan
8 N
Landscaped
Areas
Legend
8 DISCUSSION
Landscape Plan
9 9
DISCUSSION
Landscape Plan
10 10
DISCUSSION
Sign Plan
11 Sign Locations
Legend
N
11 DISCUSSION
Parking Lot Lighting
Applicant requests the Council approve an alternate lighting plan.
There are existing light poles (operated by Edison) along the east and west perimeter property lines that illuminate the parking lot.
Applicant obtained signed declarations from neighbors explaining they would prefer no additional lighting.
5 12
DISCUSSION
Block Walls: Staff can support eliminating the conditions of approval requiring a new 8-foot high block wall along the perimeter because the existing 6’-0” high block walls comply with the BMC and 2019 Noise Assessment Addendum.
Façade Improvement: The new façade design, including landscaping and signage, provides a high-quality building façade that will enhance the appearance of the overall site. A recommended COA is included requiring the Applicant to paint the south building elevation walls and interior walls to match the north and east building elevations. A recommended COA is included requiring the Applicant submit a Master Sign Plan. The City Council could require in the COAs the Applicant complete the improvements by a specific date similar to past approvals.
Lighting: Since the Applicant has no control over when the lights turn on or off, a COA is included allowing the Applicant to utilize the existing four light poles in the rear parking lot to illuminate the area but, if the lights are not consistently working, then the Applicant/Property Owner must install decorative lighting in the parking lot to compliment the building design.
Staff does not recommend removing COA Nos. 35 and 48. These require the Applicant to submit a photometric plan to determine if lighting is shielded to prevent spilling onto adjacent lots and streets to comply with BMC § 17.44.080 (Lighting). Lastly, staff does not recommend removing COA No. 36 as it addresses all other light fixtures on the building be decorative.
12 13
RECOMMENDATION
Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. 22-65; or
Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
13 14
City Council Meeting
November 28, 2022
Agenda Item 11-A
Conditional Use Permit Case No. CU 22-11
9542 Artesia Blvd
Presented By:
Elizabeth Corpuz
Planning Department
15