Malibu City Council
October 27, 2025

Agenda Item # 5.A.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Tyler Eaton, Assistant Community Development Director Reviewed by: Yolanda Bundy, Community Development Director Approved by: Candace Bond, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: October 15, 2025 Meeting date: October 27, 2025 Subject: Zoning Text Amendment No. 25-003 – An Amendment to Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code Modifying Regulations to Accessory Dwelling Units to Bring Existing Regulations into Compliance with New Changes to State Law
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Continue this item to the November 10, 2025 Regular City Council meeting.

City Council Meeting
10-27-25
Item

5.A.

Agenda Item # 5.B.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Sarah Flores, Emergency Services Coordinator Reviewed by: Susan Duenas, Public Safety Director
Approved by: Candace Bond, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: October 7, 2025 Meeting date: October 27, 2025 Subject: Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the City of Malibu RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) After the City Attorney reads the title, introduce on first reading Ordinance No. 527 an Ordinance of the City of Malibu Designating Fire Hazard Severity Zones Within the City of Malibu based on the State Fire Marshal 2025 Local Responsibility Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map and Finding such Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, and 2) Direct staff to schedule a second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 527 for the November 10, 2025, Regular City Council Meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

WORK PLAN: This item is part of the day-to-day operations identified in the Adopted FY 2024-25 Strategic Priority Project List.

DISCUSSION: Cal Fire released the 2025 Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Maps for Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and State Responsibility Area (SRA) on March 24, 2025, and the LRA map was adopted by the Malibu City Council on June 9, 2025.

However, Government Code Section 51179 requires a local agency to designate, by ordinance, moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in its jurisdiction within 120 days of receiving recommendations from the State Fire Marshal pursuant to Section 51178.

Therefore, attached for the City Council's consideration is Ordinance 527 that designates Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the City of Malibu based on the State Fire Marshal 2025 Local Responsibility Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map. This Ordinance is an update to, and replaces, Ordinance No. 299 adopted in 2006. Since the 2025 map makes no City Council Meeting
10-27-25
Item

5.B.
1

Agenda Item # 5.B.
changes to the Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the City of Malibu, no changes to the current building codes are needed, and all parcels will remain subject to current fire regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance No. 527

2. Ordinance 299
2 ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO. 527

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DESIGNATING FIRE HAZARD

SEVERITY ZONES WITHIN THE CITY OF MALIBU BASED ON THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL 2025 LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY

ZONES MAP AND FINDING SUCH ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The City Council of the City of Malibu does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals.

A. Government Code Section 51178 requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones (“FHSZs”) based on statewide criteria and severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas.

B. Government Code Section 51179 requires a local agency to designate, by ordinance, moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in its jurisdiction within 120 days of receiving recommendations from the State Fire Marshal.

C. On March 24, 2025, the State Fire Marshal published a new Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map for the City of Malibu (“City”).

D. The City Council desires to designate by ordinance the FHSZs in its jurisdiction recommended by the State Fire Marshal.

SECTION 2. Environmental Review.

The City Council finds that the proposed actions are not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15060(c)(3).) Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment do not qualify as a project subject to CEQA. Here, the proposed actions constitute an organization or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment because it involves the designation of Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Local Responsibility Area as recommended by the State Fire Marshal. Accordingly, the proposed actions are not a project subject to CEQA. Even if the proposed actions do qualify as a project subject to CEQA, they would be exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed actions in question may have a significant effect on the environment for the same reasons referenced above. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15061(b)(3).) SECTION 3. Designation of FHSZs.

The City Council hereby designates the Fire Hazard Severity Zones recommended by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as shown in the Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map dated March 24, 2025 attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. 3 SECTION 4. Submittal to State and Posting.

The City Clerk shall submit a copy of this Ordinance to the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection within thirty (30) days of adoption and take any necessary and proper actions to post all notices required under Government Code Section 51179.

SECTION 5. Severability.

Should any section, subsection, clause, or provision of this Ordinance for any reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality or the remaining portions of this Ordinance; it being hereby expressly declared and this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, and ratified irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 6. Effective Date.

This Ordinance takes effect thirty (30) days following its adoption.

SECTION 7. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this _______ day of ___________ 2025. _____________________________
MARIANNE RIGGINS, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney
4 EXHIBIT A
Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map
[attached behind]
5 City and County boundaries as of 10/22/24 (CA Board of Equalization) CAL FIRE State Responsibility Areas (SRA25_1)
CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZSRA23_3, FHSZLRA_25_1) Data Sources:

Daniel Berlant, State Fire Marshal, CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Joe Tyler, Director/Fire Chief, CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Wade Crowfoot, Secretary for Natural Resources, CA Natural Resources Agency The State of California and the Department of Forestry and Fire Gavin Newsom, Governor, State of California Protection make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy of data or maps. Neither the State nor the Department shall be liable under any circumstances for any direct, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to any claim by any user or third party on account of, or arising from, the use of data or maps. and other relevant factors including areas where winds
have been identified by the Office of the State Fire Marshal as a major cause of wildfire spread.
statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, Government Code section 51178 requires the State Fire
Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent Waterbody
Federal Responsibility
Area (FRA)
Unzoned LRA
Incorporated City
Projection: NAD 83 California Teale Albers
Scale: 1:138,000 at 11" x 17"
Km 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Mi 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Very High High
Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area (SRA), Effective April 1, 2024
Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) in Local Responsibility Area (LRA), as Identified by the State Fire Marshal
Malibu

UNINCORPORATED
LOS ANGELES CO.

UNINCORPORATED
VENTURA CO.

Pa
Coa
cific
st Hwy
1 23
AGOURA
HILLS

CALABASAS
HIDDEN
HILLS

LOS ANGELES

THOUSAND OAKS

WESTLAKE

VILLAGE
L O S A N G E L E S C O . V E N T U R A C O .

L O S A N G E L E S
C O .

March 24, 2025
As Identified by the
State Fire Marshal
Local Responsibility Area
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
CITY OF MALIBU – LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Very High High Moderate
6 ORDINANCE NO. 299

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MALIBU REQUIRING THE FIRE

CHIEF TO DESIGNATE VERY HIGH FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY

ZONES AND REQUIRIG THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ENFORCE
THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 3203, TITLE 24 OF THE

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
The City Council of the City of Malibu does ordain as follows:

Section 1 . The Fire Chief is hereby authorized to designate Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones within 120 days of receiving recommendations from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

Section 2. The Fire Chief may designate areas not identified as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection following a finding supported by substatial evidence in the record that the requirements for Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones are necessary for effective fire protections within the area(s).

Section 3 . The Fire Chief may decline to designate areas identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as Very High Fire Hazard Severity. Zones following a finding supported by substantial evidence in the record that the requirements for Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones are not necessar for effective fire protection within the area(s).

Section 4. The Building Official shall enforce the provisions of Section 3203 Title 24 California Code of Regulations, in all Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones designated by the Fire Chief.

Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25 day ofS ptember 2006. ayor
ATTEST:
cX1 PtrLISA POPE, City,"
Th certes tht this
document consisting
of
..
pages is a tre
and corr copy of the
origial on fie with the
City of Mal bu.
1- rn At,th of
By
Title LLi CLL
O(Q
7 Ordinance No. 299

I CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE NO. 299 was passed and adopted at the regular City Council meeting of September 25, 2006, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT: .

Councilmembers: Barovsky, Conley Ulich, Stern, Jennings, Kearsley i;vf-,
L/ 'o !2.

LISA ?OPE, City tlerk
(seal)
8

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Joseph D. Smith, Contract Planner
Reviewed by: Yolanda Bundy, Community Development Director Approved by: Candace Bond, Interim City Manager
Trevor Rusin, Interim City Attorney
Date prepared: October 17, 2025 Meeting date: October 27, 2025 Subject: Negative Declaration No. 19-002, Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 16-001, General Plan Amendment No. 16-001, Zoning Map Amendment No. 15-001, Coastal Development Permit No. 23-046, Coastal Development Permit Amendment No. 25-002, Conditional Use Permit No. 16-007, Lot Tie No. 24-001 and Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity – Ryokan Bed and Breakfast Inn Project RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 25-51 (Attachment 1) adopting Negative Declaration No. 19-002 and directing the filing of the Notice of Determination, approving Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 16-001 to change the land use designation from Community Commercial (CC) to Commercial Visitor Serving-One (CV1) in the LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) on the parcel at 22752 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) (existing Nobu Ryokan Motel lot, formerly known as the Casa Malibu Inn) and on the parcel at 22762 PCH (existing Malibu Tidepool Health Club lot) (collectively, Property), General Plan Map Amendment (GPMA) No. 16-001 to change the land use designation from CC to CV-1 on the parcel at 22752 PCH, Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 23-046 for the change in use from motel and gym on both parcels to a bed and breakfast inn and the conversion of office space on the parcel at 22762 PCH into a new guest suite, CDP Amendment (CDPA) No. 25-002 to amend a condition of approval in previously issued CDP No. 13-066 for the parcel at 22762 PCH (Tidepool) related to swimming pool use for guests of the bed and breakfast inn only, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 16-007 to permit the conversion of an existing legal non-conforming motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and adjacent private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH into a bed and breakfast inn and the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption on the Property, Lot Tie (LT) No. 21- City Council Meeting
10-27-25
Item

5.C.
1

Agenda Item # 5.C.
001 to hold the two parcels as one parcel for the conjunctive use1 of the Property as a bed and breakfast inn, and authorizing the Community Development Director to submit a Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity for the sale of alcohol; 2) After the City Attorney reads the title of the ordinance, introduce on first reading Ordinance No. 528 (Attachment 2) approving Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 16-001 and Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 15-001 to change the zoning from CC to CV-1 in the LCP Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) for the Property; and 3) Direct staff to schedule a second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 528 for the November 10, 2025 Regular City Council meeting and, if adopted, direct the filing of LCPA No. 16-001 (Resolution No. 25-51 and Ordinance No.528) with the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for certification.

FISCAL IMPACT: Pursuant to LIP §12.10, the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH has elected to contribute an in-lieu fee2 of $22,350 toward lower-cost visitor accommodations due to the creation of one net new guest room within the proposed 17- room bed and breakfast inn. This amount is calculated based on the methodology outlined in LIP §12.10 with a voluntary supplement by the property owner to align the rate to an amount CCC staff estimated as the cost of constructing one room of lower cost accommodations. In 2013, the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH contributed an in-lieu fee of $33,801.55 for 16 guest rooms as part of the conversion from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel authorized by CDP No. 16-004. These guest rooms are proposed to continue to be used as part of the proposed bed and breakfast inn use.

Therefore, the Property Owners of the are not required to provide any further in-lieu fee payment for the 17 rooms included in the bed and breakfast inn use. The City may transfer these funds to a public agency, non-profit organization, or private entity after entering a Memorandum of Understanding or other contractual agreement that requires use of the funds for construction of lower cost overnight visitor accommodations in the Malibu-Santa Monica Mountains Coastal Zone area of Los Angeles County or Ventura County and requires that the accommodations remain lower cost.

In 2023, the applicant indicated the existing motel use generated approximately $850,000 in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) for 2022 and expects TOT to increase to approximately $1,000,000 annually with the Project, resulting in a $150,000 annual increase in TOT to the City.
1 “Conjunctive use” means joint use.
2 The LIP sets a rate of $10,419 per room, adjusted for inflation since January 2000, using the most recent available CPI data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) (https://www.bls.gov)). The current CPI data, available through July 2025, calculates to $9,520.79. Therefore, the LIP’s current rate would be $19,939.79 per room ($10,419 + $9,520.79). The LIP applies the in-lieu fee at 15% of total number of rooms proposed. Since the project only proposes one net new room, the in-lieu fee amounts to $2,990.97 (15% of $19,939.79). As an alternative, the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH is voluntarily contributing a supplement to the LIP rate by using a CCC rate of $149,000 per room. This would result in a total in-lieu payment of $22,350.00 (15% of $149,000), amounting to an additional $19,359.03 above the required $2,990.97.

The CCC rate was presented by CCC staff at the July 11, 2024 CCC hearing as Item 7 here:
https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2024/7/Th7/Th7-7-2024-exhibits.pdf. 2

Agenda Item # 5.C.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY: This item is part of the day-to-day operations identified in the Adopted FY 2024-25 Strategic Priority Project List.

DISCUSSION: This agenda report provides a Project overview, summary of surrounding land uses and Project setting, description of the Project, analysis of its consistency with the LCP, MMC, General Plan, and environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Proposed Project
The Project proposes to convert the existing 16-room motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and adjacent private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH into a 17-room bed and breakfast inn (Attachment 3 - Project Plans). One new guest room would be created from converted second floor space on the parcel at 22762 PCH, while the remaining 16 rooms would continue as-is on the parcel at 22752 PCH. The bed and breakfast inn would utilize kitchen facilities, a 300 square-foot gym, and a 600 square-foot swimming pool that were previously constructed under CDP No. 13-066. No interior remodel or exterior improvements are proposed. The sale of alcohol beverages would continue to be provided but extended to the subject parcel at 22762 PCH. Alcohol sales would be exclusive to guests of the bed and breakfast inn only. Upon approval of the Project, the existing private health club would cease operations.

To facilitate the conjunctive use of a bed and breakfast inn across both parcels, a lot tie would be recorded on title the Property. This lot tie will allow the two parcels to function as one parcel while preserving separate ownership and maintaining their distinct boundaries.

As conditioned, the CUP would be invalidated if one of the parcels is sold/transferred separately or no longer functions as a bed and breakfast.

To allow the proposed bed and breakfast inn use, the land use designations and zoning will need to be changed for the Property in the LCP from CC (which does not allow overnight accommodations) to CV-1 (which allows for motels and bed and breakfast inns).

As corollary amendments to the LCPA, the land use designation in the General Plan will need to be changed from CC to CV-1 for the parcel at 22752 PCH; however, no change is needed for the parcel at 22762 PCH as it currently has a land use designation of CV-1 in the General Plan. Additionally, zoning will need to be changed for the Property in the MMC Title 17 (Zoning) from CC to CV-1.

The Project application originally requested a land use designation and zoning of CV-2; however, during the Planning Commission’s review of the Project, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council reduce the request to CV-1. This recommendation was made to minimize the potential for a more intensive project since CV-2 could allow for hotel3 use, while CV-1 would limit the use to motels and bed and 3 LIP §2.1 defines a hotel as a facility offering transient lodging accommodations to the general public and providing additional services, such as restaurants and meeting rooms.
3

Agenda Item # 5.C.
breakfast inns.4 Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant accepted the reduction to CV-1 as the Property was intended to be used as a bed and breakfast inn.

The change to CV-1 is reflected in Resolution No. 25-51 and Ordinance No. 528.

Amenities at the bed and breakfast inn would be exclusively available to its guests5 and not to the general public. With exception of filming permits, the Project has been conditioned to prohibit all special events that require authorization, such as a temporary use permits (TUPs), as operations on the Property will only be permitted for guests staying at the bed and breakfast inn. This means that the bed and breakfast inn is intended and conditioned to be solely used by guests staying on the Property. Further, the applicant confirmed that no events would be hosted by guests or by the general public.

Requested operational parameters include the following:
 Bed and Breakfast Inn and Lobby: Available seven days per week and will provide concierge, bellman, housekeeping, and guest services from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. daily. It is anticipated that one overnight bellman and one security guard will be on duty from 10:30 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. daily.
 Gym: The gym would be open from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and available to guests of the bed and breakfast inn only.
 Deck and Pool: The deck and pool would be open from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and available to guests of the bed and breakfast inn only.
 Operations: 24 hours daily and staffed by employees and security personnel.

Vehicular access to the Property will continue to be provided via two existing driveways on PCH. Combined, the Property currently has 25 parking spaces which comply with the parking requirements in LIP Section 3.14.3 to provide one parking space per guest room (17 spaces) and one parking space for the average, per-shift number of employees.

However, in lieu of using an average to determine parking requirements of employees, employee parking was set using the maximum per shift number of employees (8 spaces).

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance:
 Negative Declaration (ND) No. 19-002 for adoption in Resolution No. 25-51 finding that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment.

Under CEQA, an Initial Study (IS) was conducted to analyze the Project and find if there would be a significant effect on the environment resulting from the proposed zoning and land use changes and operation of a bed and breakfast inn on the Property with an existing 16-room motel and private health club and gym. With the standard conditions of approval, 4 LIP §2.1 defines a bed and breakfast inn as a facility offering transient lodging accommodations to the public and providing kitchen facilities adequate to provide meals to the guests of the facility only and not otherwise open to the public. 5 “Guest” means a customer of the bed and breakfast inn who is staying at the Property. 4

Agenda Item # 5.C.
the analysis found that the Project would not significantly impact the environment and a ND was prepared and circulated for a 30-day public review period (December 2, 2021, to January 3, 2022) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 (State Clearinghouse No. 2021120124). No comment letters were received during the review period. The Planning Commission reviewed the IS and ND at their meeting on December 18, 2023 and recommended the City Council reduce the CV-2 land use and zoning amendments to a CV-1 amendment to prevent a more intensive project hotel project from later being brought forward without further amendment of the City’s codes. CV-2 could allow for hotel use, while CV-1 would limit the use to motels and bed and breakfast inns. The Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the ND, finding no substantial evidence of significant environmental impact and that it reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.

Amendments to the LCP, General Plan and MMC would only amend the land use and zoning maps within each respective document with no changes to text or policies. The requested actions to allow the bed and breakfast inn use include the following:
 LCPA No. 16-001 to change the land use designation and zoning of the Property from CC to CV-1 in the LCP;
 GPMA No. 16-001 to change the land use designation for the parcel at 22752 PCH from CC to CV-1 in the General Plan; and
 ZMA No. 15-001 to rezone the Property from CC to CV-1 in MMC Title 17 (Zoning).

Entitlements associated with the development and operation of the Project include:
 CDP No. 23-046 for the change in use from motel and health club/gym on the Property to a bed and breakfast inn and the conversion of office space on the parcel at 22762 PCH into a new guest room. The CDP will not become effective unless and until certification of the LCPA is complete and the CCC appeal period is exhausted).
 CDPA No. 25-002 to amend a condition of approval related to swimming pool use in previously issued CDP No. 13-066 for the parcel at 22762 PCH. The amended condition would limit the use of the pool solely to guests of the bed and breakfast inn.
o The current condition language reads, “Use of the pool is restricted to the occupants of the existing office building. Use of the pool by any other person or for any other purpose is thus strictly prohibited unless or until any necessary approvals are obtained from the City that would allow use of the pool by individuals other than the occupants of the office building”. o The amended condition would read, “Use of the existing pool is restricted to guests of the proposed bed and breakfast inn. Use of the pool by any other person or for any other purpose is not authorized under this approval.”  CUP No. 16-007 to allow for a bed and breakfast inn within the CV-1 zone and the sale of alcoholic beverages for onsite consumption on the Property by guests of the 5

Agenda Item # 5.C.
bed and breakfast inn only. The CUP would apply to the entire Property due to the requested lot tie. Neither parcel currently has a CUP that authorizes an overnight accommodation use or the sale of alcohol.

Additional authorizations associated with the Project include:
 LT No. 21-001 to hold the two parcels identified as 22752 and 22762 PCH as one parcel for the conjunctive use of the Property as a bed and breakfast inn while maintaining separate ownership and preserving lot boundaries; 6 and
 Authorizing the Community Development Director to submit a Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity for the sale of alcohol if requested by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC).

The Planning Division, City Environmental Health Administrator, and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD) reviewed the subject application and determined it is consistent with applicable local and State provisions. The LACSD’s review was specific to the sale of alcohol on the Property.

ABC Licensing
The parcel at 22752 PCH currently has two active licenses issued by ABC – Type 66 (Controlled Access Cabinet Permit) and Type 70 (On-Sale General Restrictive Service).

The Type 66 license allows for minibar use within the 16 guest rooms and the Type 70 license allows for the sale or furnishing of alcohol for consumption on the premises. The Type 70 license is normally issued to suite-type accommodations which provide guests complimentary happy hours and allow guests to consume alcohol obtained from the minibar on the premises. The parcel at 22762 PCH does not have any active ABC licenses.

As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on the Property, the applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. If approved, the Type 66 would allow for minibar service for the proposed 17th guest room, and the Type 70 amendment would allow for onsite consumption on that parcel. However, ABC will not issue the licenses until the requested CUP is approved. However, since the parcel at 22752 PCH does not have a CUP for the sale of alcohol, the CUP would authorize the sale of alcohol on the Property.

A condition of approval has been included stating that the Property Owners/operator must submit a copy of the ABC licenses to the Planning Division prior to the consumption and sale of alcoholic beverages. The total area proposed on the Property where alcohol service could occur is approximately 19,030 square feet, comprised of the buildings and 6 The LT is not an entitlement but rather a method used by the Planning Division to document and track a proposed lot tie. Lot ties are commonly used in other jurisdictions for similar purposes. Applicant is proposing to enter into a covenant and agreement to hold both parcels as one parcel to guarantee that no portion shall be sold separately. Both parcels are under shared ownership pursuant to two separate LLCs. The agreement is executed for the purpose of creating a legally unified site for the Project. The agreement runs with the land, is binding and will remain in effect unless released by the City. 6

Agenda Item # 5.C.
outdoor deck. Specific conditions of approval have been included in the resolution requiring that this use remain ancillary to the bed and breakfast inn and not become a primary use such as a bar or cocktail lounge. No offsite sale of alcohol will be permitted.

A Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity may also be required by ABC for issuance of the amended Type 66 and 70 licenses. While it is not clear if this letter would be requested from the City, the resolution would authorize the Community Development Director to issue one should it be requested.

Background
22752 PCH (Ryokan): The existing motel is considered a legal, nonconforming use because motels are not an allowed use within the CC land use designation and zone. On May 6, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 13-32 (Attachment 4), approving CDP No. 13-004, Minor Modification (MM) No. 13-001, Demolition Permit (DP) No. 13-005 and Offer to Dedicate (OTD) No. 13-001 to allow a remodel of the existing motel (from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel), an upgrade to the existing OWTS, repair and maintenance of the existing bulkhead and pile foundation, replacement of hardscape, new trellises, water features, landscaping and other associated development. On July 21, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 14-65 approving Extension of Amortization Schedule No. 14-001 to extend the amortization period for the legal nonconforming motel use in order to provide sufficient time to process an LCPA and ZMA to change the zoning designation of the Property from CC to CV-1 and to process a CUP for a motel use in the CV-1 zone.
22762 PCH (Tidepool): The existing private gym and health club is an allowed use within the CC zone. On December 17, 2013, an application for CDP No. 13-066 was submitted to include tenant improvements to remodel the existing building into a day spa and health club, an upgrade to the OWTS and a deck extension. On November 12, 2014, the applicant modified the application to abandon the day spa and health club use and remodel, and pursue only the OWTS, seawall, pool and deck construction. At the time, the applicant stated that there was no intention to use the property as amenities that would intensify the use of the nonconforming adjacent motel. On September 21, 2015, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 15-64 (Attachment 5) approving CDP No. 13-066, OTD No. 15-003, and Variance (VAR) No. 15-014 for the removal of an existing 800 square foot deck and shoreline protection device, and construction of a 2,290 square foot deck with a 600 square foot swimming pool on 17 piles, a seawall with 10 piles, landscaping, OWTS, and repair of a seawall return. The private health club was re-opened in March 2017.

Environmental Review Board: Pursuant to LIP Sections 4.4.4(C) and (D), the Project is exempt from Environmental Review Board (ERB) review. This is because the Property is currently developed with commercial buildings, hardscaping and ornamental landscaping previously developed via approved permits, will not expand the existing required fuel 7

Agenda Item # 5.C.
modification area and is not located in a mapped environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA), an ESHA buffer zone or adjacent to any streams as designated in the LCP.

Nevertheless, staff forwarded the project for ERB review because an Initial Study was prepared for the Project, and projects subject to CEQA review have typically been reviewed by the ERB. On January 26, 2022, the ERB considered the Project and provided no recommendations.

Planning Commission: The Project was reviewed at two Planning Commission hearings.

Public correspondence submitted for the Planning Commission hearings is included as Attachment 6. The first hearing occurred on November 6, 2023, where the Planning Commission held a public hearing and continued the item to give the applicant and staff time to provide additional background information on the following topics: 1) history of the parcel at 22762 PCH since 2015; 2) capacity of the existing OWTSs; 3) whether the proposed change in occupancy would result in a change in approval from Los Angeles County Waterworks District 29 (LACWD); 4) history of the ABC licensing for the parcel at 22752 PCH; 5) history of the CC zoning designation on the Property; 6) whether the swimming pool on the parcel at 22762 PCH is a permitted use; and 7) whether a hotel use is more appropriate on the Property than a bed and breakfast inn use. This information was provided to the Planning Commission as part of their December 18, 2023 hearing. A summary of the responses and additional background information is included at Attachment 7.

The second hearing occurred on December 18, 2023, where the Planning Commission held a public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 23-46 (Attachment 8), recommending the City Council adopt the environmental analysis and approve the amendments and entitlements subject to the following adjustments to the proposed conditions of approval:
 Zoning for the Property shall be designated CV-1 (the original application requested CV-2 zoning which would have allowed a hotel whereas CV-1 limits overnight accommodations to motels and bed and breakfast inns only). Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant accepted the reduction to CV-1 as the Property was intended to be used as a bed and breakfast inn;
 Swimming pool shall only be used by guests and no use of any kind shall be allowed later than 10:00 p.m. The condition further requires that all pool lights shall be turned off no later than 10:00 p.m.; and
 Property Owners and operator shall not use either parking lot for any use other than the uses and activities explicitly permitted for or as permitted by a TUP or filming permit. The recommendation stipulated that if the required parking is not provided onsite, the property owner shall provide a parking plan to the satisfaction of Community Development Director that all offsite parking has been secured. The condition further requires that all parking for staff shall be provided onsite no matter what is occurring on the property. Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant confirmed that the bed and breakfast inn is intended to be solely used by guests staying at the bed and breakfast and that no events would be hosted by 8

Agenda Item # 5.C.
guests or by the general public. A condition of approval is added that specifies, with exception of filming permits, all special events are prohibited on the Property that would require authorization, such as a TUP, as operations on the Property will only be permitted for guests of the bed and breakfast inn.

The following revisions reflect amended/deleted conditions in Planning Commission Resolution No. 23-46 and proposed conditions that are reflected in the Council Resolution limiting events on the site:

Planning Commission Resolution 23-
46 Condition Language
City Council Resolution
Proposed Condition Language

18. No live entertainment is permitted on
the property except in compliance
with an approved temporary use
permit provided it can be
demonstrated that the noise
generated from the event would be in
compliance with Condition No. 20
and off-street parking spaces can be
secured to accommodate the
number of people expected in the
event. Amplified sound may be
permitted provided it is consistent
with Condition Nos. 20 and 45.

17. No live entertainment requiring
authorization by a special permit, such as
a temporary use permit, is permitted on
the Property.

26. Special events involving non-guests
shall require a temporary use permit.

15. Special events requiring authorization by
a special permit, such as a temporary
use permit, are prohibited with exception
of filming permits subject to Condition
No. 16.

29. The property owner and operator
shall not use the parking lot for any
use other than the uses and activities
explicitly permitted for the subject
parcel or as permitted by a
temporary use permit or filming
permit. In the event the required
parking is not provided onsite, the
property owner shall provide a
parking plan to the satisfaction of the
Planning Director that all offsite
parking has been secured. All

16. The Property Owners and operator shall
not use the parking lot for any use other
than the uses and activities explicitly
permitted for the subject parcel or as
permitted by a filming permit. For any
approved filming, Property Owners shall
provide a parking plan to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director
that offsite parking, if required, has been
secured. All parking for staff shall be
provided onsite no matter what is
occurring on the Property.
9

Agenda Item # 5.C.
parking for staff shall be provided
onsite no matter what is occurring on
the property.

30. The property owner and operator
must secure an off-site parking area
to accommodate vehicles for all
events that overlap with other uses
that will generate a parking demand
in excess of the proposed parking
spaces. A shuttle service must be
provided between the offsite parking
area and the subject property.
[Remove]
Surrounding Land Uses and Project Setting
The Property is located south of PCH in a commercial area of the City, approximately onethird mile east of the Malibu Pier and Civic Center Area. As shown in Figure 1, the Property is comprised of two commercially developed beachfront parcels that have direct access from PCH to the north. The Pacific Ocean borders the Property to the south. A driveway on the west is used to access 10 parking spaces on the parcel at 22762 PCH. A driveway on the east is used to access 15 parking spaces on the parcel at 22752 PCH. There is no internal access between the two parking areas. The Property is developed as follows:
 22752 PCH (Ryokan) is approximately 0.67 acre and developed with 9,030 square feet of total floor area, comprised of a two-story building, and two one-story bungalows. The motel was originally built in 1950 with an at-grade parking lot containing 15 parking spaces. The parcel has historically been used as a motel and was previously occupied by the Casa Malibu Inn providing 22 guest rooms. The building was remodeled in 2016 (CDP No. 13-004) to maintain the motel use but reduced the number of rooms to 16. An in-lieu fee in the amount of $33,801.55 was previously provided by the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH for the 16 guest rooms. The existing development and motel use are legal, non-conforming because the use does not conform with the current CC land use designation and zoning, which does not allow for transient lodging accommodations, and the development does not conform to current design and development standards.  22762 PCH (Tidepool) is approximately 0.30 acre and is developed with a 2,157 square foot, two-story building and attached 392 square foot one-story garage. The building was originally built in 1951 with an at-grade parking lot containing 10 parking spaces. The parcel was previously occupied by the Tidepool Gallery, a former art house. The building was remodeled in 2015 (CDP No. 13-066), which included construction of a swimming pool. Private health club amenities include a gym, swimming pool, and a kitchen to provide food/drink services to its members. 10

Agenda Item # 5.C.

The health club is a conforming use because it is a permitted use pursuant to the current land use designation and CC zoning.

Figure 1 – Aerial Map
Source: City GIS
Parcels immediately adjacent to the Property and north (across PCH) are zoned CC and developed with commercial structures and uses. Areas further east and west of the Property are developed with CV-1 and Multi-Family (MF) residential uses. Areas further north on the hillside are zoned Rural Residential One (RR-1) and developed with single family residential. Table 2 summarizes the surrounding zoning and land uses and Figure 2 provides a depiction of zoning in the vicinity.

Table 2 – Surrounding Land Uses
Direction Address Lot Size Zoning Land Use
North 22761 PCH 64,033 sq. ft. / 1.47 acres CC Commercial/Office 22775 PCH 10,454 sq. ft. / 0.24 acre CC Commercial/Office 22809 PCH 60,984 sq. ft / 1.40 acres CC Commercial/Office West 22766 PCH 12,632 sq. ft. / 0.29 acre CC Multi-Family Residential 22772 PCH 13,939 sq. ft. / 0.32 acre CC Multi-Family Residential 22800 PCH 13,939 sq. ft. / 0.32 acre CV-1 Retail/Multi-Family Residential 22806 PCH 9,583 sq. ft. / 0.22 acre MF Multi-Family Residential East 22716 PCH 45,738 sq. ft. / 1.05 acres CC Restaurant/Soho House 22706 PCH 13,939 sq. ft. / 0.22 acre CV-1 Restaurant/Nobu 22664 PCH 25,264 sq. ft. / 0.58 acre MF Multi-Family Residential Source: City GIS
Figure 2 – Existing Zoning
11

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Source: City GIS
The Property is located within the Appeal Jurisdiction of the CCC as depicted on the PostLCP Certification Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map. This means that CDP No. 23-046 would be appealable to the CCC. However, since the Project would first require certification of an LCPA in order for the requested use to be consistent with the LCP’s land use and zoning, the CDP would not become effective unless and until the CCC’s certification process is complete and the CCC appeal period has been exhausted. The CCC’s appeal period would commence upon receipt of the City’s Notice of Final Action.

This would be sent to the CCC upon completion of the LCPA certification process. A condition of approval is included in the City Council’s resolution stipulating that the CDP shall not become effective unless and until the LCPA is certified and the CCC appeal period has been exhausted.

The Property has no trails on or adjacent to it according to the LCP Park Lands Map and is not in a designated ESHA or ESHA buffer as shown on the LCP ESHA and Marine Resources Map. However, the California Coast Trail is presumed to be sited parallel to and all along the coast and, therefore, would traverse across the ocean portion of the Property. As part of previously issued CDP Nos. 13-004 (22752 PCH) and 13-066 (22762 PCH), OTD Nos. 13-001 and 15-003 were already provided by the Property Owners and recorded on title. These contiguous OTDs already offer lateral easements for the general public from the most seaward building projection to the ambulatory mean high tide line 12

Agenda Item # 5.C.
(MHTL). Additionally, CDP No. 13-004 included other conditions in support of the LCP's public access policies, including an in-lieu fee to provide for lower cost visitor-serving accommodations as part of the motel conversion from 22 rooms (21 guest rooms and 1 manager unit) to 16 guest rooms, and a requirement to remove beach spotlights and “Private Beach” signage.

Existing and Proposed Land Use Designation and Zoning
As reflected in Table 1, the LCP, General Plan and MMC designate the Property with a CC land use designation and zoning; however, the parcel at 22762 PCH is designated as CV-1 in the General Plan.

Table 1 - Existing and Proposed Zoning and Land Use Designations Existing Proposed Action
22752 PCH (Ryokan)
General Plan Land Use CC CV-1 GPMA 16-001
MMC Zoning CC CV-1 ZMA 15-001
LCP Land Use & Zoning CC CV-1 LCPA 16-001
22762 PCH (Tidepool)
General Plan Land Use CV-1 CV-1 None
MMC Zoning CC CV-1 ZMA 15-001
LCP Land Use & Zoning CC CV-1 LCPA 16-001
The Project includes LCPA No. 16-001 to redesignate the land use and zoning of the Property from CC to CV-1, GPMA No. 16-001 to redesignate the land use on the parcel at 22752 PCH from CC to CV-1 (the parcel at 22762 PCH does not need to be redesignated in the General Plan), and ZMA No. 15-001 to rezone the Property from CC to CV-1. The CV-1 land use and zoning district allow a bed and breakfast inn as a conditionally permitted use subject to a CUP.

Existing
The CC land use designation and zone are intended to provide the resident-serving needs of the community, including uses such as restaurants, banks, offices and retail.

Specifically,
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC): The CC designation is intended to provide for the resident serving needs of the community similar to the CN designation, but on parcels of land more suitable for concentrated commercial activity. The community commercial category plans for centers that offer a greater depth and range of merchandise in shopping and specialty goods than the neighborhood center although this category may include some of the uses also found in a neighborhood center. Often a supermarket or variety store functions as the anchor tenant. The maximum FAR is 0.15. The FAR may be increased to a maximum of 0.20 where 13

Agenda Item # 5.C.
public benefits and amenities are provided as part of the project. Uses that are permitted and/or conditionally permitted include the following: all permitted uses within the CN designation, financial institutions, medical clinics, restaurants, service stations, heath care facilities, offices, and public open space and recreation.

Proposed
The bed and breakfast inn use is allowed as a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 land use designation, as provided for in the General Plan. The MMC and LCP also specifically provide that a bed and breakfast inn is allowed as a conditionally permitted use in the CV1 and CV-2 zoning districts. Specifically, COMMERCIAL VISITOR SERVING (CV): The CV designation provides for visitor serving uses such as hotels and restaurants that are designed to be consistent with the rural character and natural environmental setting, as well as public open space and recreation uses. Uses allowed in the other commercial categories (Commercial Neighborhood, Community Commercial, and Commercial General) may be permitted as part of projects approved on parcels designated Commercial Visitor Serving, so long as at least 50 percent of the overall floor area of any individual project is devoted to visitor serving uses. The maximum FAR is 0.15. The FAR may be increased to a maximum of 0.25 where public benefits and amenities are provided as part of the project. CV designations are divided into two levels of density. Hotels are only permitted in CV-2 designations, the highest density designation. Motels and bed and breakfast inns are allowed in the CV-1 designation.

Local Coastal Program Amendment (LIP Section 19.6)
LCPA No. 16-001 includes an amendment to the certified LUP and LIP. Specifically, the amendment consists of a map amendment (Appendix 2 Maps) to change the existing land use designation and zoning of the Property from CC to CV-1. In order to amend the LCP, the finding listed below must be made:

Finding 1. The proposed amendments meet the requirements of, and are in conformance with, the LCP and the policies of Chapter 3 the California Coastal Act.

The proposed bed and breakfast inn use is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 zoning district. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn. A private health club currently exists on the parcel at 22762 PCH and would cease in order to join as a conjunctive use with the proposed bed and breakfast inn. With the certification of LCPA No. 16-001 to amend the existing land use designation and zoning of the Property, the proposed bed and breakfast use is one that is conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provisions of the LCP. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that any new development must not impede or adversely impact 14

Agenda Item # 5.C.
public access to the beach, must protect marine resources and scenic views and must not significantly disrupt environmentally sensitive habitat areas. LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Chapter 2 incorporates the public access policies set forth in the Coastal Act, including Public Resources Code Section 30210.

The proposed LCPA does not impede public access to the beach, impact coastal resources, impact scenic views or disrupt environmentally sensitive habitat areas as the Project does not involve any new construction or improvements outside of the existing building footprint and is not designated as ESHA. Furthermore, pursuant to LCP Local Implementation Plan (LIP) §12.10, the property owner for 22762 PCH will contribute an inlieu fee of $22,350 toward lower-cost visitor accommodations for the approval of one net new guest room associated with the proposed 17-room bed and breakfast inn. This amount is calculated pursuant to the methodology in LIP §12.10 ($2,990.97) and an additional voluntary contribution provided by the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH ($19,359.03). In 2013, the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH contributed an in-lieu fee of $33,801.55 for 16 guest rooms as part of the conversion from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel authorized by CDP No. 16-004. These guest rooms would continue to be used as part of the proposed bed and breakfast inn use. Therefore, the Property Owners are not required to provide any further in-lieu fee payment for the 17 rooms included in the bed and breakfast inn use.

The Project site is located along a public road and immediately east of an existing public vertical access way and the Property already has contiguous Offers-to-Dedicate (OTDs) for lateral easements for the general public to use the Property from the most seaward building projection to the ambulatory mean high tide line (MHTL). No expansion of building footprints, exterior walls or shoreline devices would be effectuated by the certification of LCPA No. 16-001. As such, the overall amendment is consistent with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.

The relevant Coastal Act policies regarding New Development are provided in LUP Chapter 5. The following LUP policies and sections apply and provide in pertinent part as follows:
a. Section A.2: Visitor serving commercial uses shall be allowed in all commercial zones in the City and shall be given priority over other non-coastal dependent development.
b. Policy 5.11: Recreational development and commercial visitor-serving facilities shall have priority over non-coastal dependent uses. All uses shall be consistent with protection of public access and ESHA.

The relevant Coastal Act policies regarding Public Access and Recreation, and visitor serving recreational facilities and commercial uses such as hotels and motels are provided in LUP Chapter 2. The following LUP policies and sections apply and provide as follows:
15

Agenda Item # 5.C.
a. Policy 30222: The use of private lands suitable for visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation shall have priority over private residential, general industrial, or general commercial development, but not over agriculture or coastal-dependent industry. b. Policy 2.33: Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving and commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation. On land designated for visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational facilities, priority shall be given to such use over private residential or general commercial development. New visitor-serving uses shall not displace existing low-cost visitor-serving uses unless an equivalent replacement is provided. c. Policy 2.37: Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational uses that complement public recreation areas or supply recreational opportunities not currently available in public parks or beaches. Visitorserving commercial and/or recreational uses may be located near public park and recreation areas only if the scale and intensity of the visitor-serving commercial recreational uses is compatible with the character of the nearby parkland and all applicable provisions of the LCP.

General Plan Map Amendment No. 16-001 (MMC Section 17.74.030) GPMA No. 16-001 will change the land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH from CC to CV-1 on the General Plan Land Use Policy Map Section 2 – Figure LU-2C. The GPMA is necessary for the proposed LCPA and will only be approved if the LCPA is approved, and on the condition that the GPMA only take effect if the LCPA is certified by the CCC. The parcel at 22762 PCH is currently in the CV-1 land use designation on the General Plan Land Use Policy Map Section 2 – Figure LU-2C and, therefore, is not included in the GPMA.

The GPMA will make the land use designation for the parcel at 22752 PCH consistent with the LCP (LCPA No. 16-001) and the zoning designation for the Property (ZMA No. 15-001 via Ordinance No. 528).

The General Plan land use designations in the area surrounding the Project site are primarily commercial, with some multi-family residential. The current land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH is CC, which is intended to provide resident serving needs on land that is suitable for concentrated commercial activity but does not allow for the proposed bed and breakfast inn or reflect the existing overnight accommodation use that has existed on the site since the 1950s. The parcel at 22762 PCH has an existing land use designation of CV-1 in the General Plan, which is intended for general commercial uses as well as for bed and breakfast inns and motels. Therefore, the GPMA is proposed to change the land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH to CV-1 so that the Property has a consistent land use designation in the General Plan and to allow for a bed and breakfast inn use.
16

Agenda Item # 5.C.

The GPMA is consistent with General Plan objectives and policies. General Plan Land Use (LU) OBJECTIVE 4.4 provides for successful businesses appropriate to Malibu. To fulfill this policy, 4.4.3 provides: “The City shall regulate design of new bed and breakfast inns to foster “country-inn type” establishments and regulate the size and design of other hotel development to ensure development compatible with a rural residential community and discourage convention hotel developments by limiting on the same site ancillary uses such as banquet and meeting rooms and limiting restaurants to a capacity necessary to serve guests of the hotel only.” In addition, the request for the GPMA to change the land use designation that allows for a bed and breakfast inn supports the General Plan's objective to permit the development of commercial visitor-serving facilities at suitable locations [LU Goal 3; LU Objective 3.2]. The bed and breakfast inn, including the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption, would contribute to the visitor-serving areas for use by visitors.

The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with the existing overnight accommodation use and the surrounding development. The existing commercial development at the Property can accommodate the proposed visitor-serving commercial use through the conversion of the existing motel use on the parcel at 22752 PCH and the expansion into the private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH to be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn on the Property. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood.

Zoning Map Amendment (MMC Section 17.74.050)
ZMA No. 15-001 will change the zoning of the Property from CC to CV-1. The ZMA is necessary for the proposed LCPA and will only be approved if the LCPA is approved, and on the condition that the ZMA only take effect if the LCPA is certified by the CCC.

The ZMA is consistent with the objectives, policies and general land uses in the General Plan, as amended by LCPA No. 16-001 and GPMA No. 16-001 (Resolution No. 25-51).

The ZMA will allow the MMC to be amended and be consistent with the amended LCP zoning map (LCPA No. 16-001) and is only a corollary of that action. The ZMA is necessary for the proposed LCPA and will only be approved if the LCPA is approved, and on the condition that the ZMA only take effect if the LCPA is certified by the CCC. The amendment is consistent with the following General Plan policies:

LU Objective 3.2: The City shall permit the development of commercial recreational and visitor servicing facilities at suitable locations which provide convenient public access, adequate infrastructure, convenient parking and, when feasible, are located where existing low cost recreational uses will be enhanced. 17

Agenda Item # 5.C.

LU Policy 6.1.1: The City shall use development standards and procedures that protect the property owners’ reasonable use of their land consistent with the goals and policies of this General Plan.

LU Policy 6.1.2: The City shall allow a parcel legally created and existing as of March 26, 1993, regardless of size, to be used for any purpose permitted by right or, if permits obtained, any conditionally permitted use, in the zone district in which the parcel is situated, provided that such use or any new construction complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance.

LCP Analysis
The LCP consists of the LUP and the LIP. The LUP contains programs and policies implementing the Coastal Act in Malibu. The LIP contains provisions to carry out the policies of the LUP to which every project requiring a CDP must adhere.

There are 14 LIP chapters that potentially apply depending on the nature and location of the Project. Of these, five are for conformance review only and contain no findings: 1) Zoning, 2) Grading, 3) Archaeological/Cultural Resources, 4) Water Quality, and 5) OWTS. These chapters are discussed in the LIP Conformance Analysis section.

The nine remaining LIP chapters contain required findings: 1) CDP; 2) ESHA; 3) Native Tree Protection; 4) Scenic, Visual and Hillside Resource Protection; 5) Transfer of Development Credits; 6) Hazards; 7) Shoreline and Bluff Development; 8) Public Access; and 9) Land Division. For the reasons described in this report, only the CDP findings are applicable to the Project.7 This chapter is discussed in the LIP Findings section of this report.

LIP Conformance Analysis
The Project has been reviewed by the Planning Division, City Environmental Health Administrator and LACSD (Attachment 9 – Department Review Sheets). The Project, as proposed and conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable LCP codes, standards, goals and policies, with the inclusion of a certified LCPA.

Zoning (LIP Chapter 3)
The Project is subject to development and design standards set forth under LIP Sections

3.5 and 3.6; however, no new construction is proposed and all existing development on the Property has been approved pursuant to CDP Nos. 13-004 (22752 PCH) and 13-066 (22762 PCH).
7 The Scenic, Visual and Hillside Resource, ESHA, Native Tree Protection, Transfer of Development Credits, Public Access, Hazards, Shoreline and Bluff Development, and Land Division findings are neither applicable nor required for the proposed project.
18

Agenda Item # 5.C.

For informational purposes, the allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for CC and CV parcels is

0.15. The CC zoning may permit an increase in FAR to a maximum of 0.20 where public benefits and amenities are provided as part of a project. Meanwhile, the CV zoning may permit the FAR to be increased to a maximum of 0.25 where public benefits and amenities are provided as part of the project. The approval of the rezoning by the City Council would thus increase the maximum allowable FAR to .25 from .20 if public benefits and amenities are provided as part of a project. However, no new increase in FAR is proposed as part of the Project and no physical changes to the Property are proposed with the subject application. Increasing the maximum FAR as a result of the rezoning action is being disclosed for informational purposes only. All legal, non-conformities such as setbacks and FAR will remain. Currently, the parcel at 22752 PCH has a developed FAR of 0.31 and the parcel at 22762 PCH has a developed FAR of 0.17. The FAR thus may not be increased on the parcel at 22752 PCH even with approval of this Project. The FAR on the parcel at 22762 PCH could be increased from 0.17 to up to 0.25 if this Project is approved—but that increase would need to be approved by the City Council and include public benefits and amenities.

Grading (LIP Chapter 8)
LIP Section 8.3(B) ensures that new development minimizes the visual resource impacts of grading and landform alteration by restricting the amount of non-exempt grading to a maximum of 1,000 cubic yards per acre of commercial development. The Property is currently developed with existing structures including amenities, swimming pool and surface parking spaces. No construction is proposed that would alter the existing buildings or introduce new ground-disturbance or grading.

Archaeological / Cultural Resources (LIP Chapter 11)
LIP Chapter 11 requires certain procedures be followed to determine potential impacts on archaeological resources. The Property is currently developed with existing structures including amenities, swimming pool and surface parking spaces. The Project would not involve new construction that would alter the existing onsite buildings or introduce new ground-disturbance. As such, the Project would not affect any historical or archaeological resources or have the potential to disturb any human remains. The Property has been developed and used for commercial activities since the 1950s, with the parcel at 22752 PCH also being used since the 1950s for visitor-serving overnight accommodations. There is no evidence of cultural resources present at the Property.

Water Quality (LIP Chapter 17)
The Property is entirely developed and the Project would not increase impermeable surfaces as no new construction is proposed. The Project is for an amendment to the existing land use designation and zoning from CC to CV-1. The Property has been 19

Agenda Item # 5.C.
developed and used for commercial activities since the 1950s, with the parcel at 22752 PCH also being used since the 1950s for visitor-serving overnight accommodations. The Property is consistent with the development and uses in the vicinity. Because the Project involves no change to the existing uses or ground-disturbing construction activity, there would be no changes to hydrologic/hydraulic processes or water quality. The Project would not be anticipated to increase existing stormwater flows off the Property or otherwise affect water quality.

Wastewater Treatment System Standards (LIP Chapter 18)
LIP Chapter 18 addresses OWTS. LIP Chapter 18.7 includes specific siting, design and performance requirements. Each parcel comprising the Property has an existing alternative onsite wastewater treatment system (AOWTS) that has been designed by an engineer and approved by the City Environmental Health Administrator as part of prior CDPs to handle the flow (with a substantial margin of safety) from the buildings. The bed and breakfast inn would not increase wastewater demand beyond the AOWTS design flow at the Property. The Project does not include the replacement or modification of the existing AOWTSs, and the Project can be supported by the two existing AOWTSs.

LIP Findings
Coastal Development Permit (LIP Chapter 13)
LIP Section 13.9 required that the following four findings be made for all CDPs.

Finding 1. That the project as described in the application and accompanying materials, as modified by and conditions of approval, conforms with the Certified City of Malibu Local Coastal Program.

The proposed bed and breakfast inn use is conditionally permitted in the CV-1 zoning district. With the approval and adoption of the proposed changes to the existing LCP land use designation and zoning, the proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 land use designation and zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provisions set forth in the LCP. The Project will conform to the LCP upon final LCPA certification by the CCC. All improvements to facilitate the bed and breakfast inn would occur within the footprint of existing structures onsite and no expansion of the building footprint is proposed.

Pursuant to LIP §12.10, the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH will contribute an in-lieu fee of $22,350 toward lower-cost visitor accommodations for the approval of one net new guest room associated with the proposed 17-room bed and breakfast inn. This amount is calculated pursuant to the methodology in LIP §12.10 ($2,990.97) and an additional voluntary contribution will be provided by the property owner for the parcel at 20

Agenda Item # 5.C.
22762 PCH ($19,359.03).
8 In 2013, the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH contributed an in-lieu fee of $33,801.55 for 16 guest rooms as part of the site’s conversion from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel authorized by CDP No. 16-004. These guest rooms would continue to be used as part of the proposed bed and breakfast inn use.

Therefore, the Property Owners are not required to provide any further in-lieu fee payment for the 17 rooms included in the bed and breakfast inn use.

The Project site is located within the Appeal Jurisdiction of the CCC as depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map. This means that CDP No. 23- 046 would be appealable to the CCC. However, since the Project would first require certification of LCPA No. 16-001, as conditioned, the CDP would not become effective until the CCC’s certification process is complete and the CCC appeal period has been exhausted. The CCC’s appeal period would commence upon the CCC’s receipt of the City’s Notice of Final Action that would be sent to the CCC upon completion of the LCPA certification process.

Finding 2. If the project is located between the first public road and the sea, that the project is in conformity to the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976 (commencing with Sections 30200 of the Public Resources Code).

The Property is located between the first public road and the sea, and is located along a public road and immediately east of an existing public vertical access way between PCH and the beach. The Property has no trails on or adjacent to it according to the LCP Park Lands Map; however, the California Coast Trail is presumed to be sited parallel to and all along the coast. As beachfront parcels, the California Coast Trail would traverse across the ocean portion of the Property. As part of previously issued CDP No. 13-004 for the Nobu Ryokan Motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and CDP No. 13-066 for the Malibu Tidepool Health Club on the parcel at 22762 PCH, OTD Nos. 13-001 (22752 PCH) and 15-003 (22762 PCH) were already provided by the Property Owners and recorded on the Property title. These contiguous OTDs already offer lateral easements for the general public on the Property from the most seaward building projection to the ambulatory mean high tide line (MHTL). Additionally, CDP No. 13-004 included other conditions in support of the LCP's public access policies, including an in-lieu fee to provide for lower cost visitorserving accommodations as part of the motel conversion from 22 rooms (21 guest rooms and 1 manager unit) to 16 rooms, as previously described above, and a requirement to remove beach spotlights and “Private Beach” signage. No expansion of building footprints, exterior walls or shoreline devices is proposed or required as part of the subject CDP No. 23-046. Therefore, the Project is in conformity to the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.
8 See Footnote 1 on pg. 2 for more information.
21

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Finding 3. The project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

By not approving the CDP, no change would occur to the legal nonconforming motel use or existing health club as previously authorized in CDP No. 13-004 and CDP No. 13-066.

The proposed bed and breakfast inn would convert the existing 16-room motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and include one net new guest room on the parcel at 22762 PCH.

The Property would be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn. The existing kitchen facility, swimming pool, and gym on the parcel at 22762 PCH would be used exclusively for guests of the bed and breakfast inn. All improvements to facilitate the bed and breakfast inn would occur within the footprint of existing structures onsite and no expansion of the building footprint is proposed. To effectuate the bed and breakfast inn use and ensure compliance with the land use designation and zoning in the LCP, LCPA No. 16-001 would amend the Property from CC to CV-1. The Project does not increase development onsite and utilizes existing buildings and amenities to accommodate the proposed bed and breakfast inn. As proposed and conditioned, the Project is considered the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Finding 4. If the project is located in or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat area pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Malibu LIP (ESHA Overlay), that the project conforms with the recommendations of the Environmental Review Board, or if it does not conform with the recommendations, findings explaining why it is not feasible to take the recommended action.

The Property is not located in a designated ESHA or ESHA buffer as shown on the LCP ESHA and Marine Resources Map and the Project is exempt from ERB review because the existing site contains commercial buildings, hardscaping and ornamental landscaping developed with approved permits. Additionally, the Project does not involve the expansion of the existing building footprint or the expansion of the required fuel modification area.

Nevertheless, staff forwarded the Project for ERB review because an IS/ND was prepared for the Project, as projects subject to CEQA review have typically been reviewed by the ERB. On January 26, 2022, the ERB considered the Project and had no recommendations to the Planning Commission or City Council for the Project.

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Overlay (LIP Chapter 4) The Property is not in a designated ESHA or ESHA buffer as shown on the LCP ESHA and Marine Resources Map. Therefore, the findings of LIP Section 4.7.6 do not apply.

However, due to the scope of the Project and preparation of an IS and ND, the Project was reviewed by the ERB on January 26, 2022 and no recommendations were provided.

Native Tree Protection (LIP Chapter 5)
The Project does not involve the removal of, or encroachment into the protected zone of any protected native trees. Therefore, the findings of LIP Chapter 5 are not applicable. 22

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Scenic, Visual and Hillside Resource Protection (LIP Chapter 6) The Scenic, Visual and Hillside Resource Protection Chapter governs those CDP applications concerning any parcel of land that is located along, within, provides views to or is visible from any scenic area, scenic road, or public viewing area. The Project includes a CDP for the change in use from motel, gym and health club the Property to a bed and breakfast inn and the conversion of office space on the parcel at 22762 PCH into a new guest suite. However, the CDP does not authorize any exterior development or expansion of existing structures. Because no exterior physical changes are proposed, the Project does not have the potential to cause adverse impacts upon Scenic Areas from or along Scenic Roads or Public Viewing Areas. Therefore, the findings of LIP Chapter 6 are not applicable.

Transfer of Development Credit (LIP Chapter 7)
The Project does not include a land division or multi-family development, and the request for a lot tie is not applicable to this LIP chapter. Therefore, the findings of LIP Chapter 7 do not apply.

Hazards (LIP Chapter 9)
Pursuant to LIP Section 9.3, written findings of fact, analysis and conclusions addressing geologic, flood and fire hazards, structural integrity or other potential hazards listed in LIP Sections 9.2(A)(1-7) must be included in support of all approvals, denials or conditional approvals of development located on a site or in an area where it is determined that the project causes the potential to create adverse impacts upon site stability or structural integrity.

The Project is an amendment to the existing land use designation and zoning from CC to CV-1 that will not involve new construction or increase exposure to geologic hazards. The Property has been developed and used for commercial activities since the 1950s, with the parcel at 22752 PCH also being used since the 1950s for visitor-serving overnight accommodations. The density and intensity of the use is consistent with the development in the surrounding area. There are no specifications pertaining to geologic processes, conditions and building standards that differ between the land use designations and zoning under CC or CV-1. Implementation of the Project would not alter the existing seismic or geologic conditions present on the Property, nor would it expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects due to seismic related ground failure or landslides.

The Project will neither be subject to nor increase the instability of the site from geologic, flood or fire hazards. Therefore, the findings in LIP Section 9.2(A) are not applicable. 23

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Shoreline and Bluff Development (LIP Chapter 10)
The Shoreline and Bluff Development Chapter govern those CDP applications that include development on a lot located on a bluff or along the shoreline as defined by the LCP. The Project is located on beachfront Property and includes a CDP for the change in use from motel, gym and health club to a bed and breakfast inn and the conversion of office space in the parcel at 22762 PCH into a new guest suite. However, the CDP does not authorize any exterior development or expansion of existing structures. Because no exterior physical changes are proposed, including no changes to the beachfront side of the existing buildings or any extension further seaward than the existing footprint, the findings of LIP Chapter 10 are not applicable.

Public Access (LIP Chapter 12)
LIP Section 12.4 requires public access for lateral, bluff-top and vertical access near the ocean, trails, and recreational access for the following cases:

A. New development on any parcel or location specifically identified in the Land Use Plan or in the LCP zoning districts as appropriate for or containing a historically used or suitable public access trail or pathway.

B. New development between the nearest public roadway and the sea.

C. New development on any site where there is substantial evidence of a public right of access to or along the sea or public tidelands, a blufftop trail or an inland trail acquired through use or a public right of access through legislative authorization.

D. New development on any site where a trail, bluff top access or other recreational access is necessary to mitigate impacts of the development on public access where there is no feasible, less environmentally damaging, project alternative that would avoid impacts to public access.

Although the Project does not include any improvements to the existing buildings, the Project is still considered a new development pursuant to LCP definition due to the requested change in use on the Property and conversion of an office space to guest room on the parcel at 22762 PCH. The Property is located along PCH and immediately east of an existing public vertical access way. According to the LCP Park Land Maps, existing lateral access easements (OTD Nos. 13-001 and 15-003) have been recorded for the Property and the neighboring contiguous properties to the east (22716, 22706 and 22664 PCH) also have lateral easements. With the recorded offers to dedicate lateral access easements (OTD Nos. 13-001 and 15-003), the Property provides adequate access and passive recreational use along the shoreline. Therefore, the Project meets the requirement for public access of LIP Section 12.4.
24

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Land Division (LIP Chapter 15)
This Project does not include a land division. Therefore, the findings of LIP Chapter 15 do not apply.

Conditional Use Permit No. 16-007 for the Operation of a Bed and Breakfast Inn and Associated Uses and Alcohol Sales (MMC Chapter 17.66)
The City Council may approve, deny, and/or modify an amendment to a CUP in whole or in part, with or without conditions, provided that it makes all of the findings of fact required by MMC Section 17.66.080. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of CUP No. 21-001 to allow the operation of a bed and breakfast inn, associated uses and alcohol sales. The CUP can be supported based on the findings below:

Finding 1. The proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the subject zone and complies with the intent of all the applicable provisions of Title 17 of the Malibu Municipal Code.

The proposed bed and breakfast inn is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 land use designation and CV-1 zoning district. Pursuant to MMC Section 17.24.030(A), onsite alcohol sales/consumption is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 zoning district. With the adoption of GPMA No. 16-001 from CC to CV-1 (22752 PCH) and zone change from CC to CV-1 (22752 and 22762 PCH) via Ordinance No. 528, the proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the subject zone and complies with the intent of the Zoning provisions of the MMC (and the LCP subject to LCPA No. 16-001). The Project will conform to the General Plan and MMC upon approval by the City Council (and will conform with the LCP upon final CCC certification of LCPA No. 16-001). The Project has been reviewed and conditioned for conformance by the Planning Division, City Environmental Health Administrator and the LACSD. Based on submitted documentation, Project plans and site investigation, the Project, as conditioned, complies with all applicable provisions of the MMC (and the LCP) subject to the associated amendments to the General Plan and MMC (and the LCP).

Finding 2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the zoning district in which it is located.

The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the onsite and surrounding development and uses. All improvements to 25

Agenda Item # 5.C.
facilitate the bed and breakfast inn would occur within the footprint of existing structures onsite and no expansion of the building footprint is proposed. The Project, as designed and conditioned, will not have significant adverse visual impacts and will not impair the integrity and character of the CV-1 zoning district.

Finding 3. The subject site is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed.

The Property is physically suitable for the proposed bed and breakfast inn use and allowance for onsite alcohol sales and consumption to guests of the bed and breakfast inn only. The existing commercial development can accommodate the proposed visitorserving commercial through the conversion of the existing motel use on the parcel at 22752 PCH and the expansion into the private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH to be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn. The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family residential development. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the surrounding development. Vehicular access to Property will continue to be provided via two existing driveways on PCH (one on each parcel) and onsite parking areas. The Property currently has 25 parking spaces which complies with the parking requirements in LIP Section 3.14.3 to provide one parking space per guest room (17 spaces) and one parking space for the average, per-shift number of employees; however, in lieu of using an average, parking was set for the maximum per shift number of employees (8 spaces).

The parcel at 22752 PCH currently has two active California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) licenses – Type 66 (Controlled Access Cabinet Permit) and Type 70 (On-Sale General Restrictive Service). As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on the Property, the Applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. If approved, the Type 66 amendment would allow for minibar service for the proposed 17th guest room, and the Type 70 amendment would allow for onsite consumption within the premises on the parcel at 22762 PCH. The proposed bed and breakfast inn use on the Property is suitable for alcohol sales and onsite consumption to guests of the bed and breakfast inn.

Finding 4. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood.

The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn.

The current land use designation on the parcel at 22762 PCH is CV-1 which allows for overnight accommodations. The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels, and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the surrounding development. The existing motel currently has two active ABC licenses. As the bed and 26

Agenda Item # 5.C.
breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on the Property, the Applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. The proposed bed and breakfast use and allowance for alcohol sales and onsite consumption are compatible with the land uses presently on the Property and in the surrounding neighborhood.

Finding 5. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and future land uses within the zoning district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located.

The proposed bed and breakfast inn is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 land use designation and zoning district. With the approval and adoption of the proposed changes to the land use designation for the parcel at 22752 PCH (GPMA No. 16-001) and zoning for the Property (ZMA No. 15-001), the proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provision of the MMC. The Project is located within the commercial corridor and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. Providing alcohol service is compatible with existing and future land uses and the proposed bed and breakfast inn is suitable for the consumption of alcoholic beverages. The restaurants in the surrounding zoning district also provide alcohol service; however, those uses are open to the general public while the proposed bed and breakfast inn would limit alcohol service to its guests only. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the surrounding development and is compatible with existing and future land uses within the zoning district.

Finding 6. There would be adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety and the project does not affect solar access or adversely impact existing public and private views, as defined by the staff.

Adequate public services and utilities are available to serve the Project and existing utilities already serve the existing motel and private health club on the Property. On December 14, 2017 and October 17, 2018, the City Environmental Health Administrator reviewed the Project and found it to meet the minimum requirements of the Malibu Plumbing Code, MMC and LCP. Each parcel has an existing alternative onsite wastewater treatment system (AOWTS) that has been carefully designed and approved by the City Environmental Health Administrator as part of prior CDPs to handle the flow (with a substantial margin of safety) from the buildings. The proposed bed and breakfast inn would not increase wastewater demand beyond the AOWTS design flow on either parcel. The Project does not include the replacement or modification of the existing AOWTSs, and the Project can be supported by the existing AOWTSs.

The Project does not affect solar access or adversely impact existing public and private views. The Project can be accommodated by converting the use of the existing commercial 27

Agenda Item # 5.C.
development on the Property with limited physical modifications. The proposed bed and breakfast inn is located within a commercial corridor and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multifamily beachfront residential development.

Finding 7. There would be adequate provisions for public access to serve the subject proposal.

Adequate public services are available to serve the Project. Access to the Project is from PCH, an existing public highway. The existing vehicle access from two existing driveways on PCH will remain as is. A driveway on the east is used to access 15 parking spaces on the parcel at 22752 PCH. A driveway on the west is used to access 10 parking spaces on the parcel at 22762 PCH. Combined, the Property currently has 25 parking spaces which complies with the parking requirements in MMC Section 17.48.030 to provide one parking space per guest room (17 spaces) and one parking space for the average, per-shift number of employees; however, in lieu of using an average, parking was set for the maximum per shift number of employees (8 spaces).

Finding 8. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and general land uses of the General Plan.

The General Plan land use is currently CV-1 for the parcel at 22762 PCH and CC for the parcel at 22752 PCH. The Project includes GPMA No. 16-001 to change the land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH to CV-1, consistent with the parcel at 22762 PCH.

The request for a conditionally permitted bed and breakfast inn with the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption on the Property is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and general land uses of the General Plan and with the CV-1 land use designation. The proposed bed and breakfast inn is a visitor-serving use and supports the General Plan's objective to permit the development of commercial visitor-serving facilities at suitable locations [Land Use (LU) Goal 3; LU Objective 3.2]. The bed and breakfast inn, including the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption, would contribute to the visitor-serving area for use by visitors. The existing motel currently has two active ABC licenses. As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on both parcels, the applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. The Property will not be physically altered by the conditionally permitted bed and breakfast inn use. Therefore, the proposed bed and breakfast inn, including the sale of alcoholic beverages for onsite consumption use is in alignment with the General Plan’s objective for visitor-serving facilities in suitable locations and to limit development impacts on the City's natural and environmental resources by focusing the proposed use at a site that already operates an overnight accommodation use (referring to the parcel at 22752 PCH).
28

Agenda Item # 5.C.

Finding 9. The proposed project complies with all applicable requirements of state and local law.

Bed and breakfast inns and alcohol service are conditionally permitted uses in the CV-1 zoning district. As conditioned, the proposed use complies with all applicable requirements of State and local law. The Project will comply with all applicable requirements of State and local law and is conditioned to comply with any relevant approvals, permits and licenses from the City and other related agencies such as the ABC and the LACSD.

Finding 10. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare.

Bed and breakfast inns and alcohol service are conditionally permitted uses in the CV-1 zoning district. The Project will comply with all applicable requirements of State and local law and is conditioned to comply with any relevant approvals, permits and licenses from the City and other related agencies such as the ABC and the LACSD. The existing motel currently has two active ABC licenses. As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on both parcels, the applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. As conditioned, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare.

Finding 11. If the project is located in an area determined by the City to be at risk from earth movement, flooding or liquefaction, there is clear and compelling evidence that the proposed development is not at risk from these hazards.

The Project is not located in an area determined by the City to be at risk from earth movement, flooding or liquefaction. The Project will not involve new construction. The Property has been developed and is used for commercial purposes. The parcel at 22752 PCH has been used for visitor-serving uses since the 1950s, and the density and intensity of the proposed use on the Property is consistent with the development in the surrounding area. There are no specifications pertaining to geologic processes, conditions and building standards that differ between the land use designations and zoning under CC or CV-1.

Implementation of the Project would not alter the existing seismic or geologic conditions present at the Property, nor would it expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects due to seismic related ground failure or landslides. Therefore, the Project is not at risk from earth movement, flooding, liquefaction or other potential hazards.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in CEQA, the Community Development Department prepared an IS pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063. The IS analyzed the Project and determined that with standard conditions of approval, the Project will not have a significant impact on the environment. As a result, an ND (Attachment 10) was prepared and circulated for a 30-day public review period pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 (December 2, 2021 through January 3, 2022) 29

Agenda Item # 5.C.
(State Clearinghouse No. 2021120124). The Planning Commission reviewed the IS and ND at their meeting on December 18, 2023 and recommended the City Council adopt the ND, finding on the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the ND reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis.

At the December 18, 2023 Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the applicant’s original request for a CV-2 zoning amendment be reduced to a CV-1 zoning amendment. This recommendation was made to prevent a more intensive hotel project from later being brought forward without further amendment to the City’s codes. CV-2 could allow for hotel use, while CV-1 would limit the use to motels and bed and breakfast inns. As reflected in Appendix A to the ND (Attachment 11), the Planning Commission’s recommendation is not a substantial revision to the project analyzed in the ND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15073.5(b) as it will not result in any new significant environmental effects. The uses allowed in CV-1 are the same as in CV2, except CV-1 does not allow hotel use. Limiting the change to CV-1 instead of CV-2 will thus reduce the potential environmental impact of redesignating the land use and rezoning the Property. Moreover, pursuant to CEQA the proposed amendment actions have been analyzed and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the CCC as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 of the Public Resources Code.

PUBLIC NOTICE: On September 18, 2025, staff published a Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Availability of LCP Amendments in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed the notice to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the subject properties (Attachment 12).

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 25-51

2. Ordinance No. 528

3. Project Plans

4. CDP No. 13-004 – Nobu Ryokan Motel (22752 PCH)

5. CDP No. 13-066 – Malibu Tidepool Health Club (22762 PCH)

6. Planning Commission Correspondence

7. Additional Background Information

8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 23-46

9. Department Review Sheets

10. Initial Study/Negative Declaration

11. Supplement to Negative Declaration

12. Public Hearing Notice
30 ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 25-51

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MALIBU
ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 19-002 AND DIRECTING THE

FILING OF THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, APPROVING LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 16-001 TO CHANGE THE LAND

USE DESIGNATION FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO

COMMERCIAL VISITOR SERVING-ONE IN THE LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM LAND USE PLAN FOR 22752 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND 22762 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND DIRECTING THE FILING OF THE

AMENDMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR
CERTIFICATION, GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT NO. 16-001 TO

CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL TO COMMERCIAL VISITOR SERVING-ONE FOR 22752
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 23- 046 FOR THE CHANGE IN USE FROM MOTEL AND GYM ON BOTH LOTS

TO A BED AND BREAKFAST INN AND THE CONVERSION OF OFFICE SPACE AT 22762 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTO A NEW GUEST SUITE, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AMENDMENT NO. 25-002 TO

AMEND A CONDITION OF APPROVAL RELATED TO SWIMMING POOL
USE IN PREVIOUSLY ISSUED COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 13-066 FOR 22762 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 16-007 TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING LEGAL NON-CONFORMING MOTEL AT 22752 PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY AND ADJACENT PRIVATE HEALTH CLUB AT 22762 PACIFIC

COAST HIGHWAY INTO A CONJUNCTIVE BED AND BREAKFAST INN

AND THE SALE OF ALCOHOL FOR ONSITE CONSUMPTION, LOT TIE NO. 21-001 TO HOLD THE TWO LOTS AS ONE FOR THE CONJUNCTIVE

USE OF THE PROPERTIES AS A BED AND BREAKFAST INN, AND

AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO

SUBMIT A LETTER OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY FOR THE

SALE OF ALCOHOL
The City Council of the City of Malibu does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Findings.

A. On November 2, 2015, an application for Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 15- 001, Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 16-001 and General Plan Map Amendment (GPMA) No. 16-001 (collectively, Project) was submitted to the Planning Division by Patrick Perry of Allen Matkins (Applicant), on behalf of North Broadway Ventures and LLC and Wavebreak, LLC (Property Owners). The application was routed to the City Environmental Health Administrator and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD) for review.

Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 23-046 was later added to the Project for the change in use from motel and gym to bed and breakfast inn.
31 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
B. On December 17, 2016, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 16-007 was added to the Project.

C. On March 10, 2021, Lot Tie (LT) No. 21-001 was added to the Project.

D. On December 2, 2021, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND) was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu. The 30-day public review period began on December 2, 2021 and ended on January 3, 2022. The State Clearinghouse public review period for agencies began on December 8, 2021 and ended on January 6, 2022 (SCH No. 2021120124). No public comments were received during the 30-day public review period.

E. On January 26, 2022, the Project was presented to the Environmental Review Board (ERB). The ERB did not have any recommendations regarding the Project.

F. On March 9, 2022, the CDP application was deemed complete for processing.

G. On July 19, 2023, the Applicant was changed from Patrick Perry to John Heintz of Allen Matkins, to act on behalf of the Property Owners.

H. On July 26, 2023, Planning Division staff conducted a site visit to document the site conditions at two parcels comprising the Project site located at 22752 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and 22762 PCH (collectively, Property), and the surrounding area.

I. On October 4, 2023, the applicant posted a Notice of Application for CDP on both parcels.

J. On October 12, 2023, a Notice of Planning Commission 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 Property.

K. On November 6, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Project and continued the Project to the December 18, 2023 Regular Planning Commission meeting.

L. On December 18, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, reviewed and considered the staff report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information in the record. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-46 recommending the City Council adopt the environmental analysis and approve the amendments and entitlements subject to additional conditions including a reduction in the requested rezoning from Commercial Visitor Serving (CV) CV-2 to CV-1 for the Property. The recommendation also included an amendment to Condition No. 3 in previously issued CDP No. 13-066 (22762 PCH – Tidepool) related to swimming pool use (CDP Amendment (CDPA) No. 25-002).

M. On September 4, 2025, the Applicant posted updated Notices of Application for a 32 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
CDP at the Property.

N. On September 18, 2025, a Notice of City Council Public Hearing and Notice of Availability of LCP Amendments was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the Property indicating that the City Council would a hold public hearing on October 13, 2025 to consider the proposed Resolution.

O. On October 13, 2025, the City Council continued the Project date-certain to the October 27, 2025 hearing.

P. On October 27, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Resolution, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and related information.

SECTION 2. Adoption of Negative Declaration and Environmental Review.

The Community Development Department prepared an Initial Study (IS No. 17-002) pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15063. The IS analyzed the Project and determined that with standard conditions of approval, the Project will not have a significant impact on the environment; subsequently, a ND was prepared and circulated for a 30-day public review period pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 (December 2, 2021 through January 3, 2022) (State Clearinghouse No. 2021120124). No comment letters were received by the City during the 30-day public review period. The Planning Commission reviewed the IS/ND at their meeting on December 18, 2023, where the Planning Commission recommended that the Applicant’s request for the CV-2 zoning amendment be reduced to a CV-1 zoning amendment. This recommendation was made to prevent a more intensive hotel project from later being brought forward without further amendment to the City’s codes. CV-2 could allow for hotel use, while CV-1 would limit the use to motels and bed and breakfast inns. The Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the ND, finding on the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the ND reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis.

The City Council has analyzed the IS/ND and recommendations made by the Planning Commission together with any comments received during the public review process. The City Council has analyzed the LCPA, as amended with CV-1 in lieu of CV-2, and the corollary amendment to the General Plan and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code (MMC), and other associated entitlements and requests. Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in CEQA, the City Council finds on the basis of the whole record before it, including the IS and any comments received during the public review process, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and hereby adopts ND No. 19-002 for the Project. The City Council further finds that the reduction in the rezoning from CV-2 to CV-1 is not a substantial revision to the Project analyzed in the ND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15073.5(b) as it will not result in any new significant environmental effects. The uses allowed in CV-1 are the same as in CV-2, except CV-1 does not allow hotel use. Limiting the change to CV33 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
1 instead of CV-2 will thus reduce the potential environmental impact of redesignating the land use and rezoning the Property. The City Council’s decision on the ND reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis. The City of Malibu is the custodian of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based and all documents are located the City of Malibu City Hall located at 23825 Stuart Ranch Road, Malibu, CA 92065. The City Council hereby directs staff to file a Notice of Determination (NOD) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15075.

Moreover, the City Council finds that pursuant to CEQA, the amendment actions have been analyzed and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 of the Public Resources Code.

SECTION 3. Local Coastal Program Amendment Findings.

LCPA No. 16-001 will amend the land use designations of the Property from Central Commercial (CC) to CV-1 on LCP Appendix 2 (Maps – Land Use Map 3: Dan Blocker to Malibu Pier) (Exhibit A).

The City Council hereby makes the following findings and approves LCPA No. 16-001 to the LUP:

The proposed bed and breakfast inn use is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 zoning district. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn. A private health club currently exists on the parcel at 22762 PCH and would cease in order to join as a conjunctive use (i.e., joint use) with the proposed bed and breakfast inn. With the certification of LCPA No. 16-001 to amend the existing land use designation and zoning of the Property, the proposed bed and breakfast use is one that is conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provisions of the LCP. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that any new development must not impede or adversely impact public access to the beach, must protect marine resources and scenic views and must not significantly disrupt environmentally sensitive habitat areas. LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Chapter 2 incorporates the public access policies set forth in the Coastal Act, including Public Resources Code Section 30210.

The proposed LCPA does not impede public access to the beach, impact coastal resources, impact scenic views or disrupt environmentally sensitive habitat areas as the Project does not involve any new construction or improvements outside of the existing building footprint and is not designated as ESHA. Furthermore, pursuant to LCP Local Implementation Plan (LIP) §12.10, the property owner for 22762 PCH will contribute an in-lieu fee of $22,350 toward lower-cost visitor accommodations for the approval of one net new guest room associated with the proposed 17- room bed and breakfast inn. This amount is calculated pursuant to the methodology in LIP §12.10 34 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
($2,990.97) and an additional voluntary contribution provided by the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH ($19,359.03). In 2013, the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH contributed an in-lieu fee of $33,801.55 for 16 guest rooms as part of the conversion from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel authorized by CDP No. 16-004. These guest rooms would continue to be used as part of the proposed bed and breakfast inn use. Therefore, the Property Owners are not required to provide any further in-lieu fee payment for the 17 rooms included in the bed and breakfast inn use.

The Project site is located along a public road and immediately east of an existing public vertical access way and the Property already has contiguous Offers-to-Dedicate (OTDs) for lateral easements for the general public to use the Property from the most seaward building projection to the ambulatory mean high tide line (MHTL). No expansion of building footprints, exterior walls or shoreline devices would be effectuated by the certification of LCPA No. 16-001. As such, the overall amendment is consistent with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.

The relevant Coastal Act policies regarding New Development are provided in LUP Chapter 5. The following LUP policies and sections apply and provide in pertinent part as follows:
a. Section A.2: Visitor serving commercial uses shall be allowed in all commercial zones in the City and shall be given priority over other non-coastal dependent development. b. Policy 5.11: Recreational development and commercial visitor-serving facilities shall have priority over non-coastal dependent uses. All uses shall be consistent with protection of public access and ESHA.

The relevant Coastal Act policies regarding Public Access and Recreation, and visitor serving recreational facilities and commercial uses such as hotels and motels are provided in LUP Chapter 2. The following LUP policies and sections apply and provide as follows:
a. Policy 30222: The use of private lands suitable for visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation shall have priority over private residential, general industrial, or general commercial development, but not over agriculture or coastal-dependent industry.
b. Policy 2.33: Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving and commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation.

On land designated for visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational facilities, priority shall be given to such use over private residential or general commercial development. New visitor-serving uses shall not displace existing low-cost visitor-serving uses unless an equivalent replacement is provided.
c. Policy 2.37: Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational uses that complement public recreation areas or supply recreational opportunities not currently available in public parks or beaches. Visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational uses may be located near public park and recreation areas only if the scale and intensity 35 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
of the visitor-serving commercial recreational uses is compatible with the character of the nearby parkland and all applicable provisions of the LCP.

SECTION 4. Submittal to California Coastal Commission.

The City Council hereby directs staff to submit the LCPA to the CCC per Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 13544(c).

SECTION 5. General Plan Map Amendment Findings.

GPMA No. 16-001 will amend the land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH from CC to CV-1 on the General Plan Land Use Policy Map Section 2 – Figure LU-2C (Exhibit B). The GPMA is necessary for the proposed LCPA and will only be approved if the LCPA is approved, and on the condition that the GPMA only take effect if the LCPA is certified by the CCC. The parcel at 22762 PCH is currently in the CV-1 land use designation on the General Plan Land Use Policy Map Section 2 – Figure LU-2C (Exhibit B) and, therefore, is not included in the GPMA.

The City Council hereby makes the following findings and approves GPMA No. 16-001:

1. The GPMA will make the land use designation for the parcel at 22752 PCH consistent with the LCP (LCPA No. 16-001) and the zoning designation for the Property (ZMA No. 15-001 via Ordinance No. 528).

2. The General Plan land use designations in the area surrounding the Project site are primarily commercial, with some multi-family residential. The current land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH is CC, which is intended to provide resident serving needs on land that is suitable for concentrated commercial activity but does not allow for the proposed bed and breakfast inn or reflect the existing overnight accommodation use that has existed on the site since the 1950s.

The parcel at 22762 PCH has an existing land use designation of CV-1 in the General Plan, which is intended for general commercial uses as well as for bed and breakfast inns and motels.

Therefore, the GPMA is proposed to change the land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH to CV-1 so that the Property has a consistent land use designation in the General Plan and to allow for a bed and breakfast inn use.

The GPMA is consistent with General Plan objectives and policies. General Plan Land Use (LU) OBJECTIVE 4.4 provides for successful businesses appropriate to Malibu. To fulfill this policy, 4.4.3 provides: “The City shall regulate design of new bed and breakfast inns to foster “country-inn type” establishments and regulate the size and design of other hotel development to ensure development compatible with a rural residential community and discourage convention hotel developments by limiting on the same site ancillary uses such as banquet and meeting rooms and limiting restaurants to a capacity necessary to serve guests of the hotel only.” In addition, the request for the GPMA to change the land use designation that allows for a bed and breakfast inn supports the General Plan's objective to permit the development of commercial visitor-serving facilities at suitable locations [LU Goal 3; LU Objective 3.2]. The bed and breakfast inn, including 36 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption, would contribute to the visitor-serving areas for use by visitors.

3. The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with the existing overnight accommodation use and the surrounding development. The existing commercial development at the Property can accommodate the proposed visitor-serving commercial use through the conversion of the existing motel use on the parcel at 22752 PCH and the expansion into the private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH to be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn on the Property. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood.

SECTION 6. Coastal Development Permit.

CDP No. 23-046 would authorize the change in use from motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and gym on the parcel at 22762 PCH to a bed and breakfast inn on the Property and the conversion of office space on the parcel at 22762 PCH into one net new guest suite for the bed and breakfast inn. CDP Amendment (CDPA) No. 25-002 would amend a condition of approval in previously issued CDP No. 13-066 for the parcel at 22762 PCH, related to swimming pool use for guests of the bed and breakfast inn only, as described in Condition No. 13 of this Resolution.

The City Council hereby makes the following findings and approves CDP No. 23-046 and CDPA No. 25-002:

1. The proposed bed and breakfast inn use is conditionally permitted in the CV-1 zoning district. With the approval and adoption of the proposed changes to the existing LCP land use designation and zoning, the proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 land use designation and zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provisions set forth in the LCP. The Project will conform to the LCP upon final LCPA certification by the CCC. All improvements to facilitate the bed and breakfast inn would occur within the footprint of existing structures onsite and no expansion of the building footprint is proposed.

Pursuant to LIP §12.10, the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH will contribute an in-lieu fee of $22,350 toward lower-cost visitor accommodations for the approval of one net new guest room associated with the proposed 17-room bed and breakfast inn. This amount is calculated pursuant to the methodology in LIP §12.10 ($2,990.97) and an additional voluntary contribution will be provided by the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH ($19,359.03). In 2013, the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH contributed an in-lieu fee of $33,801.55 for 16 guest rooms as part of the site’s conversion from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel authorized by CDP No. 16-004. These guest rooms would continue to be used as part of the proposed bed and breakfast inn use. Therefore, the Property Owners are not required to provide any further in-lieu fee payment for the 17 rooms included in the bed and breakfast inn use. 37 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
The Project site is located within the Appeal Jurisdiction of the CCC as depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map. This means that CDP No. 23-046 would be appealable to the CCC. However, since the Project would first require certification of LCPA No. 16-001, as conditioned, the CDP would not become effective until the CCC’s certification process is complete and the CCC appeal period has been exhausted. The CCC’s appeal period would commence upon the CCC’s receipt of the City’s Notice of Final Action that would be sent to the CCC upon completion of the LCPA certification process.

2. The Property is located between the first public road and the sea, and is located along a public road and immediately east of an existing public vertical access way between PCH and the beach. The Property has no trails on or adjacent to it according to the LCP Park Lands Map; however, the California Coast Trail is presumed to be sited parallel to and all along the coast.

As beachfront parcels, the California Coast Trail would traverse across the ocean portion of the Property. As part of previously issued CDP No. 13-004 for the Nobu Ryokan Motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and CDP No. 13-066 for the Malibu Tidepool Health Club on the parcel at 22762 PCH, OTD Nos. 13-001 (22752 PCH) and 15-003 (22762 PCH) were already provided by the Property Owners and recorded on the Property title. These contiguous OTDs already offer lateral easements for the general public on the Property from the most seaward building projection to the ambulatory mean high tide line (MHTL). Additionally, CDP No. 13-004 included other conditions in support of the LCP's public access policies, including an in-lieu fee to provide for lower cost visitor-serving accommodations as part of the motel conversion from 22 rooms (21 guest rooms and 1 manager unit) to 16 rooms, as previously described above, and a requirement to remove beach spotlights and “Private Beach” signage. No expansion of building footprints, exterior walls or shoreline devices is proposed or required as part of the subject CDP No. 23-046. Therefore, the Project is in conformity to the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.

3. By not approving the CDP, no change would occur to the legal nonconforming motel use or existing health club as previously authorized in CDP No. 13-004 and CDP No. 13- 066. The proposed bed and breakfast inn would convert the existing 16-room motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and include one net new guest room on the parcel at 22762 PCH. The Property would be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn. The existing kitchen facility, swimming pool, and gym on the parcel at 22762 PCH would be used exclusively for guests of the bed and breakfast inn. All improvements to facilitate the bed and breakfast inn would occur within the footprint of existing structures onsite and no expansion of the building footprint is proposed.

To effectuate the bed and breakfast inn use and ensure compliance with the land use designation and zoning in the LCP, LCPA No. 16-001 would amend the Property from CC to CV-1. The Project does not increase development onsite and utilizes existing buildings and amenities to accommodate the proposed bed and breakfast inn. As proposed and conditioned, the Project is considered the least environmentally damaging alternative.

4. The Property is not located in a designated Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) or ESHA buffer as shown on the LCP ESHA and Marine Resources Map and the Project is exempt from Environmental Review Board (ERB) review because the existing site contains commercial buildings, hardscaping and ornamental landscaping developed with approved permits. 38 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
Additionally, the Project does not involve the expansion of the existing building footprint or the expansion of the required fuel modification area. Nevertheless, staff forwarded the Project for ERB review because an IS/ND was prepared for the Project, as projects subject to CEQA review have typically been reviewed by the ERB. On January 26, 2022, the ERB considered the Project and had no recommendations to the Planning Commission or City Council for the Project.

SECTION 7. Conditional Use Permit Findings.

CUP No. 16-007 would permit the conversion of the existing, legal nonconforming motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and adjacent private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH into a conjunctive bed and breakfast inn use on the Property and authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages for onsite consumption on the Property by guests of the bed and breakfast inn only. The CUP applies to the entire Property due to Lot Tie No. 21-001.

The City Council hereby makes the following findings and approves CUP No. 16-007:

1. The proposed bed and breakfast inn is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 land use designation and CV-1 zoning district. Pursuant to MMC Section 17.24.030(A), onsite alcohol sales/consumption is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 zoning district. With the adoption of GPMA No. 16-001 from CC to CV-1 (22752 PCH) and zone change from CC to CV1 (22752 and 22762 PCH) via Ordinance No. 528, the proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the subject zone and complies with the intent of the Zoning provisions of the MMC (and the LCP subject to LCPA No. 16-001). The Project will conform to the General Plan and MMC upon approval by the City Council (and will conform with the LCP upon final CCC certification of LCPA No. 16-001). The Project has been reviewed and conditioned for conformance by the Planning Division, City Environmental Health Administrator, and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD). Based on submitted documentation, Project plans and site investigation, the Project, as conditioned, complies with all applicable provisions of the MMC (and the LCP) subject to the associated amendments to the General Plan and MMC (and the LCP).

2. The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the onsite and surrounding development and uses. All improvements to facilitate the bed and breakfast inn would occur within the footprint of existing structures onsite and no expansion of the building footprint is proposed. The Project, as designed and conditioned, will not have significant adverse visual impacts and will not impair the integrity and character of the CV-1 zoning district.

3. The Property is physically suitable for the proposed bed and breakfast inn use and allowance for onsite alcohol sales and consumption to guests of the bed and breakfast inn only.

The existing commercial development can accommodate the proposed visitor-serving commercial through the conversion of the existing motel use on the parcel at 22752 PCH and the expansion 39 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
into the private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH to be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn. The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family residential development. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the surrounding development. Vehicular access to Property will continue to be provided via two existing driveways on PCH (one on each parcel) and onsite parking areas. The Property currently has 25 parking spaces which complies with the parking requirements in LIP Section 3.14.3 to provide one parking space per guest room (17 spaces) and one parking space for the average, per-shift number of employees; however, in lieu of using an average, parking was set for the maximum per shift number of employees (8 spaces). The parcel at 22752 PCH currently has two active California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) licenses – Type 66 (Controlled Access Cabinet Permit) and Type 70 (On-Sale General Restrictive Service).

As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on the Property, the Applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. If approved, the Type 66 amendment would allow for minibar service for the proposed 17th guest room, and the Type 70 amendment would allow for onsite consumption within the premises on the parcel at 22762 PCH. The proposed bed and breakfast inn use on the Property is suitable for alcohol sales and onsite consumption to guests of the bed and breakfast inn.

4. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn. The current land use designation on the parcel at 22762 PCH is CV-1 which allows for overnight accommodations.

The Project is located within the commercial corridor of the City and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels, and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the surrounding development. The existing motel currently has two active ABC licenses. As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on the Property, the Applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. The proposed bed and breakfast use and allowance for alcohol sales and onsite consumption are compatible with the land uses presently on the Property and in the surrounding neighborhood.

5. The proposed bed and breakfast inn is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 land use designation and zoning district. With the approval and adoption of the proposed changes to the land use designation for the parcel at 22752 PCH (GPMA No. 16-001) and zoning for the Property (ZMA No. 15-001), the proposed use is one that is conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provision of the MMC. The Project is located within the commercial corridor and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development. Providing alcohol service is compatible with existing and future land uses and the proposed bed and breakfast inn is suitable for the consumption of alcoholic beverages. The restaurants in the surrounding zoning district also provide alcohol service; however, those uses are open to the general public while the proposed bed and breakfast inn would limit alcohol service to its guests only. The intensity and density of the proposed use is commensurate with that of the 40 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
surrounding development and is compatible with existing and future land uses within the zoning district.

6. Adequate public services and utilities are available to serve the Project and existing utilities already serve the existing motel and private health club on the Property. On December 14, 2017 and October 17, 2018, the City Environmental Health Administrator reviewed the Project and found it to meet the minimum requirements of the Malibu Plumbing Code, MMC and LCP.

Each parcel has an existing alternative onsite wastewater treatment system (AOWTS) that has been carefully designed and approved by the City Environmental Health Administrator as part of prior CDPs to handle the flow (with a substantial margin of safety) from the buildings. The proposed bed and breakfast inn would not increase wastewater demand beyond the AOWTS design flow on either parcel. The Project does not include the replacement or modification of the existing AOWTSs, and the Project can be supported by the existing AOWTSs.

The Project does not affect solar access or adversely impact existing public and private views. The Project can be accommodated by converting the use of the existing commercial development on the Property with limited physical modifications. The proposed bed and breakfast inn is located within a commercial corridor and the surrounding development is comprised of restaurants, motels and other commercial development, as well as multi-family beachfront residential development.

7. Adequate public services are available to serve the Project. Access to the Project is from PCH, an existing public highway. The existing vehicle access from two existing driveways on PCH will remain as is. A driveway on the east is used to access 15 parking spaces on the parcel at 22752 PCH. A driveway on the west is used to access 10 parking spaces on the parcel at 22762 PCH. Combined, the Property currently has 25 parking spaces which complies with the parking requirements in MMC Section 17.48.030 to provide one parking space per guest room (17 spaces) and one parking space for the average, per-shift number of employees; however, in lieu of using an average, parking was set for the maximum per shift number of employees (8 spaces).

8. The General Plan land use is currently CV-1 for the parcel at 22762 PCH and CC for the parcel at 22752 PCH. The Project includes GPMA No. 16-001 to change the land use designation of the parcel at 22752 PCH to CV-1, consistent with the parcel at 22762 PCH. The request for a conditionally permitted bed and breakfast inn with the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption on the Property is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and general land uses of the General Plan and with the CV-1 land use designation. The proposed bed and breakfast inn is a visitor-serving use and supports the General Plan's objective to permit the development of commercial visitor-serving facilities at suitable locations [Land Use (LU) Goal 3; LU Objective

3.2]. The bed and breakfast inn, including the sale of alcohol for onsite consumption, would contribute to the visitor-serving area for use by visitors. The existing motel currently has two active ABC licenses. As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on both parcels, the applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. The Property will not be physically altered by the conditionally permitted bed and breakfast inn use. Therefore, the proposed bed and breakfast inn, including the sale of alcoholic beverages for onsite consumption use is in alignment with the General Plan’s objective for visitor-serving facilities in suitable locations and to limit development impacts on the 41 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
City's natural and environmental resources by focusing the proposed use at a site that already operates an overnight accommodation use (referring to the parcel at 22752 PCH).

9. Bed and breakfast inns and alcohol service are conditionally permitted uses in the CV-1 zoning district. As conditioned, the proposed use complies with all applicable requirements of State and local law. The Project will comply with all applicable requirements of State and local law and is conditioned to comply with any relevant approvals, permits and licenses from the City and other related agencies such as the ABC and the LACSD.

10. Bed and breakfast inns and alcohol service are conditionally permitted uses in the CV-1 zoning district. The Project will comply with all applicable requirements of State and local law and is conditioned to comply with any relevant approvals, permits and licenses from the City and other related agencies such as the ABC and the LACSD. The existing motel currently has two active ABC licenses. As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on both parcels, the applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. As conditioned, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare.

11. The Project is not located in an area determined by the City to be at risk from earth movement, flooding or liquefaction. The Project will not involve new construction. The Property has been developed and is used for commercial purposes. The parcel at 22752 PCH has been used for visitor-serving uses since the 1950s, and the density and intensity of the proposed use on the Property is consistent with the development in the surrounding area. There are no specifications pertaining to geologic processes, conditions and building standards that differ between the land use designations and zoning under CC or CV-1. Implementation of the Project would not alter the existing seismic or geologic conditions present at the Property, nor would it expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects due to seismic related ground failure or landslides. Therefore, the Project is not at risk from earth movement, flooding, liquefaction or other potential hazards.

SECTION 8. Lot Tie.

LT No. 21-001 would hold the Property, comprised of two parcels identified as22752 and 22762 PCH as one parcel for the conjunctive use of the Property as a bed and breakfast inn. The Applicant is proposing to enter into a covenant and agreement to hold the Property as one parcel to guarantee that no portion shall be sold/transferred separately, including through the sale or transfer of interests in any entity owning or holding the Property, for the life of the use. This covenant and agreement shall also ensure that all ownership interests in the Property shall be jointly and severally liable for the use of the Property and any violations or actions taken on either parcel. Both parcels are under common ownership pursuant to two separate LLCs. The agreement is executed for the purpose of creating a legally unified site for the Project and its operation as a bed and breakfast. The agreement runs with the land and is binding and will continue in effect until released by the City. The City Council hereby authorizes the Community Development Department to facilitate LT No. 21-001 for the proposed bed and breakfast use. 42 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
SECTION 9. Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity.

According to the ABC, the Property is located within a census tract that has an overconcentration of licenses. Therefore, a Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity is required. The parcel at 22752 PCH currently has two licenses: Type 66 (Controlled Access Cabinet Permit) and Type 70 (On-Sale General Restrictive Service). As the bed and breakfast inn would operate as a conjunctive use on the Property, the Applicant has applied to ABC to amend their Type 66 and 70 licenses to extend the allowances onto the parcel at 22762 PCH. Based on CUP findings in Section 10, the City Council finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare and is compatible with the land uses presently on the parcel at 22752 PCH and in the surrounding neighborhood. The City Council hereby authorizes the Community Development Director to prepare and submit a Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity for the proposed use to ABC.

SECTION 10. Conditions of Approval
The following conditions of approval shall apply CDP No. 23-046, CDPA No. 25-002 and CUP No. 16-007.

Standard Conditions

1. The Property Owners, and their successors in interest, shall indemnify and defend the City of Malibu and its officers, employees and agents from and against all liability and costs relating to the City's actions concerning this Project, including (without limitation) any award of litigation expenses in favor of any person or entity who seeks to challenge the validity of any of the City's actions or decisions in connection with this Project. The City shall have the sole right to choose its counsel and Property Owners, and their successors in interest, shall reimburse the City’s expenses incurred in its defense of any lawsuit challenging the City’s actions concerning this Project.

2. Approval of the CDP and CUP is to allow for the Project described herein. The scope of work approved includes:
a. Conversion of a legal nonconforming motel on the parcel at 22752 PCH and adjacent private health club on the parcel at 22762 PCH to be operated conjunctively as a bed and breakfast inn with a total of 17 guestrooms with kitchen facilities, a 300 square foot gym, and a 600 square foot swimming pool exclusive to guests of the bed and breakfast inn only;
b. Sale of alcoholic beverages for onsite consumption by guests on the Property only; and
c. Conversion of the interior space on the second floor of the parcel at 22762 PCH into one guest room (17th guest room for bed and breakfast use).

3. Except as specifically changed by conditions of approval, the proposed use must be operated in substantial conformance with the approved scope of work, as described in 43 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
Condition No. 2 and depicted on plans on file with the Planning Division date stamped August 24, 2023. The proposed development shall further comply with all conditions of approval stipulated in this Resolution and Department Review Sheets attached hereto. In the event project plans conflict with any condition of approval, the condition shall take precedence.

4. The CDP, CUP and rights conferred in this approval shall not be effective until the Property Owners sign, notarize and return the Acceptance of Conditions Affidavit for each parcel accepting the conditions of approval set forth herein. The Applicant shall file this form with the Planning Division prior to the issuance of any building or development permits.

5. The Applicant shall digitally submit a complete set of plans to the Planning Division for consistency review and approval prior to plan check and again prior to the issuance of any building or development permits.

6. The CDP shall expire if the project has not commenced within three (3) years after the CDP becomes effective. For purposes of this condition, the CDP shall become effective on the date that the CCC appeal period is exhausted or in the event of an appeal, on the date when the appeal is decided by the CCC or the date when the appeal is withdrawn by the appellant. The CCC’s appeal period will commence upon receipt of the City’s issuance of a Notice of Final Action on the CDP that will be issued following final certification of the LCPA by the CCC. Extension of the permit may be granted by the approving authority for due cause. Extensions shall be requested in writing by the Applicant or authorized agent prior to expiration of the three-year period and shall set forth the reasons for the request.

7. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any condition of approval will be resolved by the Community Development Director (or designee) upon written request of such interpretation.

8. All development shall conform to requirements of the City Community Development Department, City Environmental Health Administrator, and LACSD, as applicable.

Notwithstanding this review, all required permits and approvals shall be secured.

9. Minor changes to the approved plans or the conditions of approval may be approved by the Community Development Director (or designee), provided such changes achieve substantially the same results and the project is still in compliance with the LCP and/or MMC. Revised plans reflecting the minor changes and additional fees shall be required.

10. Pursuant to LIP Section 13.20, development pursuant to an approved CDP shall not commence until the CDP is effective. See Condition No. 6 for the effective date of CDP No. 23-046.

11. The Property Owners must submit payment for all outstanding fees payable to the City prior to issuance of any building or development permits. 44 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
Site-Specific Conditions

12. Prior to the effective date of the CDP, the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH shall submit an in-lieu fee in the amount of $22,350 to the City toward lower cost overnight accommodations. This fee is in compliance with LIP Section 12.10 for the proposed increase of one net new room associated with the 17-room bed and breakfast and any voluntary contributions offered by the Applicant associated therewith. See Condition No. 6 for the effective date of CDP No. 23-046.

13. CDPA No. 25-002 requires that Condition No. 3 of CDP No. 13-066 is amended to read as follows:
“Use of the existing pool is restricted to guests of the proposed bed and breakfast inn. Use of the pool by any other person or for any other purpose is not authorized under this approval.”

14. The swimming pool may only be used by hotel guests no later than 10:00 p.m. All pool lights must be turned off for the night no later than 10:00 p.m.

15. Amenities of the bed and breakfast inn would be exclusively available to its guests1 and not to the general public.

16. Special events requiring authorization by a special permit, such as a temporary use permit, are prohibited with exception of filming permits subject to Condition No. 17.

17. The Property Owners and operator shall not use the parking lot for any use other than the uses and activities explicitly permitted for the subject parcel or as permitted by a filming permit. For any approved filming, Property Owners shall provide a parking plan to the satisfaction of the Community and Development Director that offsite parking, if required, has been secured. All parking for staff shall be provided onsite no matter what is occurring on the Property.

18. No live entertainment requiring authorization by a special permit, such as a temporary use permit, is permitted on the Property.

19. The Property Owners and operator shall adhere to a “good neighbor” policy, meaning that the operator and employees must respect the rights of neighboring properties and, to the best of their ability, shall ensure their patrons’ compliance with the City’s noise and smoking regulations and all conditions of approval for the subject use relating to parking, smoking, litter, noise, loitering, etc.
1 “Guest” means a customer of the bed and breakfast inn who is staying on the Property. 45 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________

20. No new signage is permitted under this application; a sign permit shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division prior to installation of any new sign.

21. The Planning Division shall inspect the Property (as needed) after approval of the CUP to verify compliance with the conditions of approval.

22. The Planning Division shall conduct a review of bed and breakfast inn operations and compliance with conditions of approval. The report shall be presented to the Planning Commission five years after CUP approval.

Conditional Use Permit

23. The CUP may be reviewed by the Community Development Director (or designee) and/or Planning Commission on an as-needed basis at the discretion of the Community Development Director (or designee) or Planning Commission. Should it be determined that a review is required, the Property Owners shall pay the Planning Division site inspection fee in effect at the time of request for a site inspection. A planner will conduct a site visit to verify compliance with the provisions set forth in this resolution. If necessary, the Community Development Director (or designee) will determine whether the CUP may be brought back to the Planning Commission for additional conditions to mitigate and/or prevent nuisances that were identified during the site inspection or made aware of by members of the public. Possible mitigation measures can include:
a. Modifying the hours of operation;
b. Incorporate noise mitigating measures / devices;
c. Traffic safety measures;
d. Land use intensification or reconfiguration of shared parking that would result in a parking demand greater than approved under this application; or e. Other measures deemed necessary by the Planning Commission.

24. The conditions under which this CUP may be modified by the City without the consent of the Property Owners or operator if the Planning Commission finds that the use is creating a nuisance.

25. A CUP that is valid and in effect and was granted pursuant to the provisions of the MMC, shall run with the land and continue to be valid upon change of ownership of the land or any lawfully existing building or structure on the land.

26. The CUP shall no longer be valid and in effect with the demolition of all buildings, including a major remodel constituting new development requiring a new CDP.

27. The CUP may be revoked if the Planning Commission finds that one or more of the following conditions exists:
a. The CUP was obtained in a fraudulent manner.
b. The use for which the CUP was granted has ceased or was suspended for at least six successive calendar months.
46 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
c. One or more of the conditions found within this resolution have not been substantially met.

28. The CUP is subject to Planning Commission revocation should the use for which the CUP was granted cease for six successive calendar months, except in the case of a natural disaster.

Trash Storage Areas

29. Trash container areas must have drainage from adjoining roofs and pavement diverted around the area.

30. Trash container areas must be screened or walled to prevent off-site transport of trash.

Outdoor Material Storage

31. Materials with the potential to contaminate storm water must be: (1) placed in an enclosure such as a cabinet shed or similar structure that prevents contact with runoff or spillage to the storm water conveyance system; or (2) protected by secondary containment structures such as berms, dikes or curbs.

32. The storage areas must be paved and sufficiently impervious to contain leaks and spills.

33. The storage area must have a roof or awning to minimize collection of storm water within the secondary containment area.

Food and Alcohol Service

34. The onsite kitchen may only serve food and beverages to guests of the bed and breakfast inn.

35. With exception to private, in-room minibar sales, the approved hours of operation for the sale or serving of alcoholic beverages on the Property are limited to 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday.

36. No offsite sale of alcohol shall be permitted. Alcohol shall only be served for room service and within the deck for guests of the bed and breakfast inn.

37. This CUP permits the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages. The Property Owners / operator shall obtain all necessary approvals from ABC. Once obtained, the Applicant is required to provide the Planning Division a copy of the issued ABC license(s).

38. A copy of the current ABC license(s) shall be kept on the premises of the establishment and be presented to City staff, including the City’s Community Development Director (or 47 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
designee) and Code Enforcement staff, law enforcement officers or their duly authorized representatives, upon request.

39. At all times during the conduct of the permitted use, the Property Owners / operator shall maintain and keep in effect valid licensing approval from ABC. Should such licensing be denied, expire or lapse at any time in the future, the approval of alcohol sale pursuant to this CUP is subject to modification or revocation pursuant to MMC Section 17.66.100(C).

40. The Property Owner / operator must adhere to all laws related to the sale of alcohol.

Violations of such laws may be cause for modification or revocation of this CUP pursuant to MMC Section 17.66.100(C).

41. No restaurant, food packager, retail food vendor, or nonprofit food provider shall provide prepared food to its customers in any food packaging that utilizes expanded polystyrene. “Expanded polystyrene” means and includes blown polystyrene and expanded and extruded foams (sometimes incorrectly called Styrofoam, a Dow Chemical Company trademarked form of polystyrene foam insulation) which are thermoplastic petrochemical materials utilizing a styrene monomer and processed by any number of techniques including, but not limited to, fusion of polymer spheres (expandable bead polystyrene), injection molding, foam molding and extrusion-blow molding (extruded foam polystyrene). Expanded polystyrene is generally used to make cups, bowls, plates, trays, clamshell containers, meat trays and egg cartons.

42. The Property Owners / operator shall comply with the requirements set forth in MMC Chapter 9.24 (Ban on Plastic Food Packaging and Other Plasticware). No retail establishment, restaurant, vendor or nonprofit shall provide plastic beverage straws, plastic stirrers or plastic cutlery to customers.

43. The Property Owners / operator shall comply with the requirements set forth in MMC Chapter 9.28 (Plastic Bag Ban). No retail establishment, restaurant, vendor or nonprofit vendor shall provide plastic bags or compostable bags to customers. This requirement applies to plastic or compostable bags provided at the point of sale for the purpose of carrying away goods.

Noise

44. Noise emanating from the Property shall not be audible at a distance of five feet of any residential unit between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as required by MMC Section

8.24.050(L).

45. Amplified sound outdoors is prohibited, except that ambient music is allowed in the swimming pool and deck areas, as long as it is not audible within five feet of any neighboring building, and the Property Owners prepare a noise study to demonstrate compliance with the City’s noise ordinance to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director (or designee).
48 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
Sheriff’s Department

46. Property Owners / operator must adhere to all laws related to the sale of alcohol. Violations of such laws may be cause for modification or revocation of this CUP pursuant to MMC Section 17.66.100(C).

Deed Restrictions

47. The Property Owners are required to execute and record a deed restriction on the Property which shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees against any and all claims, demands, damages, costs and expenses of liability arising out of the acquisition, design, construction, operation, maintenance, existence or failure of the permitted Project in an area where an extraordinary potential for damage or destruction from wildfire exists as an inherent risk to life and property. The Property Owners shall provide a copy of the recorded document to the Planning Division prior to final Planning approval.

Lot Tie Agreement

48. The Property Owners are required to execute and record a covenant and agreement on the Property to hold the parcels identified as 22752 and 22762 PCH as one parcel to guarantee that no portion of the bed and breakfast inn or the private health club shall be sold/transferred separately, including through the sale or transfer of interests in any entity owning or holding the Property, for the life of the use. All ownership interests in the Property shall be jointly and severally liable for the use of the Property and any violations or actions taken on either parcel. The covenant and agreement shall be in a form approved by the City Manager and City Attorney to effectuate the purposes of this condition and related permits. The Property Owners shall provide a copy of the recorded document to the Planning Division prior to final Planning approval and effective date of the conjunctive use.

Fixed Conditions

49. The CUP shall run with the land and bind all future owners of the Property.

50. Violation of any of the conditions of this approval may be cause for revocation of the CUP and termination of all rights granted there under.

SECTION 11. Effective Date.

LCPA No. 16-001, corollary GPMA No 16-001, CDP No. 23-046, CDPA 25-002, CUP No. 16-007 and LT No. 21-001 approved in this Resolution shall become effective only upon final certification of the LCPA by the CCC.
49 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________
SECTION 12. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _________, 2025. ____________________________
MARIANNE RIGGINS, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
Date: _______________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, City Attorney
Exhibit A: Amended Local Coastal Program Land Use Map (LCPA No. 16-001) Exhibit B: Amended General Plan Land Use Map (GPMA No. 16-001) 50 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________

EXHIBIT A
Amended Local Coastal Program Land Use Map
51 Resolution No. 25-51

__________________

EXHIBIT B
Amended General Plan Land Use Map
52 ATTACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO. 528

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MALIBU APPROVING LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 16-001 TO CHANGE THE

ZONING FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO COMMERCIAL

VISITOR SERVING-ONE IN THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LOCAL
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR 22752 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND 22762 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND DIRECTING THE FILING OF THE

AMENDMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR
CERTIFICATION, AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 15-001 TO

CHANGE THE ZONING FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO
COMMERCIAL VISITOR SERVING-ONE FOR 22752 PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY AND 22762 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY; AND FINDING THE

ACTION TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT AND CONSISTENT WITH NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 19-002 FOR THE PROJECT WITH NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL

REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

REQUIRED
The City Council of the City of Malibu does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Findings.

A. On November 2, 2015, an application for Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 15- 001, Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 16-001 and General Plan Map Amendment (GPMA) No. 16-001 (collectively, Project) was submitted to the Planning Division by Patrick Perry of Allen Matkins(Applicant), on behalf of North Broadway Ventures and LLC and Wavebreak, LLC (Property Owners). The application was routed to the City Environmental Health Administrator and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD) for review.

Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 23-046 was later added to the Project for the change in use from motel and gym to bed and breakfast inn.

B. On December 17, 2016, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 16-007 was added to the Project.

C. On March 10, 2021, Lot Tie (LT) No. 21-001 was added to the Project.

D. On December 2, 2021, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND) was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu. The 30-day public review period began on December 2, 2021 and ended on January 3, 2022. The State Clearinghouse public review period for agencies began on December 8, 2021 and ended on January 6, 2022 (SCH No. 2021120124). No public comments were received during the 30-day public review period.

E. On January 26, 2022, the proposed project was presented to the Environmental Review Board (ERB). The ERB did not have any recommendations regarding the proposed project.

F. On March 9, 2022, the CDP application was deemed complete for processing. 53 Ordinance No. 528

__________________
G. On July 19, 2023, the Applicant was changed from Patrick Perry to John Heintz of Allen Matkins, to act on behalf of the Property Owners.

H. On July 26, 2023, Planning Division staff conducted a site visit to document the site conditions at two parcels comprising the Project site located at 22752 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and 22762 PCH (collectively, Property), and the surrounding area.

I. On October 4, 2023, the applicant posted a Notice of Application for CDP on both parcels.

J. On October 12, 2023, a Notice of Planning Commission 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 Property.

K. On November 6, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Project and continued the Project to the December 18, 2023 Regular Planning Commission meeting.

L. On December 18, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, reviewed and considered the staff report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information in the record. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-46 recommending the City Council adopt the environmental analysis and approve the amendments and entitlements subject to additional conditions including a reduction in the requested rezoning from Commercial Visitor Serving (CV) CV-2 to CV-1 for the Property. The recommendation also included an amendment to Condition No. 3 in previously issued CDP No. 13-066 (22762 PCH Tidepool) related to swimming pool use (CDP Amendment (CDPA) No. 25-002).

M. On September 4, 2025, the Applicant posted updated Notices of Application for a CDP at the Property.

N. On September 18, 2025, a Notice of City Council Public Hearing and Notice of Availability of LCP Amendments was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Malibu and mailed to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the Property indicating that the City Council would a hold public hearing on October 13, 2025 to consider the proposed Ordinance.

O. On October 13, 2025, the City Council continued the Project date-certain to the October 27, 2025 hearing.

P. On October 27, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing and introduced on first reading the proposed Ordinance, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and related information.

Q. On November 10, 2025, the City Council conducted a second reading and adopted 54 Ordinance No. 528

__________________
Ordinance No. 528.

SECTION 2. Environmental Review.

The proposed City Council actions, including without limitation, direction to prepare an Ordinance was adequately covered in Initial Study (IS) No. 17-002 and ND No. 19-002 for the project titled 22762 and 22752 Pacific Coast Highway General Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Map, and Local Coastal Program Land Use Map Amendments and Conditional Use Permits (SCH #2021120124), adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2025 (Resolution No. 25-51). The proposed City Council actions are not a separate “project” for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) purposes but rather a subsequent discretionary action related to a previously approved project (CEQA Guidelines § 15378(c)). Additionally, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, and based on the review of the entire record, including without limitation, the IS/ND, the City Council finds that the proposed actions do not require further environmental review as: 1) no substantial changes are proposed to the Project and no substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the IS/ND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or an increase in severity of previously identified significant effects; and 2) no new information of substantial importance has come to light that shows the Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the IS/ND. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15162(b), the City Council finds and recommends that no further analysis or environmental documentation is necessary. Accordingly, the proposed City Council actions are merely a step toward furtherance of the original Project for which environmental review was performed, no supplemental or subsequent CEQA has been triggered, and no further environmental review is required.

Moreover, the City Council finds that pursuant to CEQA, the amendment actions have been analyzed and determined to be Statutorily Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265 because CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals by a local government as necessary for the preparation and adoption of an LCPA for review and certification by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as set forth in Section 21080.9 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the certified City of Malibu LCP constitutes a plan for use in the CCC’s regulatory program as certified under Section 21080.5 of the Public Resources Code SECTION 3. Local Coastal Program Amendment Findings.

LCPA No. 16-001 will amend the zoning of the Property from CC to CV-1 on LCP Appendix 2 (Maps – Zoning Map 3: Dan Blocker to Malibu Pier) (Exhibit A).

The City Council hereby makes the following findings and approves LCPA No. 16-001 to the LIP:

The proposed bed and breakfast inn use is a conditionally permitted use in the CV-1 zoning district. A motel has continuously operated on the parcel at 22752 PCH for several decades and would continue to do so as a bed and breakfast inn. A private health club currently exists on the parcel at 22762 PCH and would cease in order to join as a conjunctive use with the proposed bed and breakfast inn. With the certification of LCPA No. 16-001 to amend the existing land use designation and zoning of the Property, the proposed bed and breakfast use is one that is 55 Ordinance No. 528

__________________
conditionally permitted within the proposed CV-1 zone and complies with the intent of the zoning provisions of the LCP. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that any new development must not impede or adversely impact public access to the beach, must protect marine resources and scenic views and must not significantly disrupt environmentally sensitive habitat areas. LUP Chapter 2 incorporates the public access policies set forth in the Coastal Act, including Public Resources Code Section 30210.

The proposed LCPA does not impede public access to the beach, impact coastal resources, impact scenic views or disrupt environmentally sensitive habitat areas as the Project does not involve any new construction or improvements outside of the existing building footprint and is not designated as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). Furthermore, pursuant to LCP Local Implementation Plan (LIP) §12.10, the property owner for 22762 PCH will contribute an inlieu fee of $22,350 toward lower-cost visitor accommodations for the approval of one net new guest room associated with the proposed 17-room bed and breakfast inn. This amount is calculated pursuant to the methodology in LIP §12.10 ($2,990.97) and an additional voluntary contribution provided by the property owner for the parcel at 22762 PCH ($19,359.03). In 2013, the property owner for the parcel at 22752 PCH contributed an in-lieu fee of $33,801.55 for 16 guest rooms as part of the conversion from the Casa Malibu Inn to the Nobu Ryokan Motel authorized by CDP No. 16-004. These guest rooms would continue to be used as part of the proposed bed and breakfast inn use. Therefore, the Property Owners are not required to provide any further in-lieu fee payment for the 17 rooms included in the bed and breakfast inn use.

The Project site is located along a public road and immediately east of an existing public vertical access way and the Property already has contiguous Offers-to-Dedicate (OTDs) for lateral easements for the general public to use the Property from the most seaward building projection to the ambulatory mean high tide line (MHTL). No expansion of building footprints, exterior walls or shoreline devices would be effectuated by the certification of LCPA No. 16-001. As such, the overall amendment is consistent with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.

The relevant Coastal Act policies regarding New Development are provided in LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Chapter 5. The following LUP policies and sections apply and provide in pertinent part as follows:
a. Section A.2: Visitor serving commercial uses shall be allowed in all commercial zones in the City and shall be given priority over other non-coastal dependent development. b. Policy 5.11: Recreational development and commercial visitor-serving facilities shall have priority over non-coastal dependent uses. All uses shall be consistent with protection of public access and ESHA.

The relevant Coastal Act policies regarding Public Access and Recreation, and visitor serving recreational facilities and commercial uses such as hotels and motels are provided in LUP Chapter 2. The following LUP policies and sections apply and provide as follows:
a. Policy 30222: The use of private lands suitable for visitor-serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation shall have 56 Ordinance No. 528

__________________
priority over private residential, general industrial, or general commercial development, but not over agriculture or coastal-dependent industry.
b. Policy 2.33: Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving and commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation.

On land designated for visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational facilities, priority shall be given to such use over private residential or general commercial development. New visitor-serving uses shall not displace existing low-cost visitor-serving uses unless an equivalent replacement is provided.
c. Policy 2.37: Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational uses that complement public recreation areas or supply recreational opportunities not currently available in public parks or beaches. Visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational uses may be located near public park and recreation areas only if the scale and intensity of the visitor-serving commercial recreational uses is compatible with the character of the nearby parkland and all applicable provisions of the LCP.

SECTION 4. Submittal to California Coastal Commission.

The City Council hereby directs staff to submit the LCPA to the CCC per Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 13544(c).

SECTION 5. Zoning Map Amendment.

ZMA No. 15-001 will amend the zoning of the Property from CC to CV-1 on the Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) Zoning Map (Exhibit B). The ZMA is necessary for the proposed LCPA and will only be approved if the LCPA is approved, and on the condition that the ZMA only take effect if the LCPA is certified by the CCC.

The City Council hereby makes the following findings and approves ZMA No. 15-001.

The ZMA is consistent with the objectives, policies and general land uses in the General Plan, as amended by LCPA No. 16-001 and GPMA No. 16-001 (Resolution No. 25-51). The ZMA will allow the MMC to be amended and be consistent with the amended LCP zoning map (LCPA No. 16-001) and is only a corollary of that action. The ZMA is necessary for the proposed LCPA and will only be approved if the LCPA is approved, and on the condition that the ZMA only take effect if the LCPA is certified by the CCC. The amendment is consistent with the following General Plan policies:

LU Objective 3.2: The City shall permit the development of commercial recreational and visitor servicing facilities at suitable locations which provide convenient public access, adequate infrastructure, convenient parking and, when feasible, are located where existing low cost recreational uses will be enhanced.

LU Policy 6.1.1: The City shall use development standards and procedures that protect the property owners’ reasonable use of their land consistent with the goals and policies of this General Plan.
57 Ordinance No. 528

__________________
LU Policy 6.1.2: The City shall allow a parcel legally created and existing as of March 26, 1993, regardless of size, to be used for any purpose permitted by right or, if permits obtained, any conditionally permitted use, in the zone district in which the parcel is situated, provided that such use or any new construction complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance.

SECTION 6. Effective Date.

LCPA No. 16-001 and corollary ZMA No 15-001 approved in this Ordinance shall become effective only upon final certification of the LCPA by the CCC.

SECTION 7. Severability.

If any section, subsection, provision, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be illegal or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall be severable, and shall not affect or impair any remaining section, subsection, provision, sentence, clause, phrase or word included within this Ordinance, it being the intent of the City that the remainder of this Ordinance shall be and shall remain in full force and effect, valid, and enforceable.

SECTION 8. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and enter it into the book of original ordinances.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2025. ____________________________
MARIANNE RIGGINS, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
Date: _______________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, City Attorney
Exhibit A: Amended Local Coastal Program Land Use Map (LCPA No. 16-001) Exhibit B: Amended MMC Zoning Map (ZMA No. 15-001)
58 Ordinance No. 528

__________________

EXHIBIT A
Amended LCP Zoning Map No. 3
59 Ordinance No. 528

__________________

EXHIBIT B
Amended MMC Zoning Map
60 22752 PCH_ SITE PLAN
SCALE 1/8" = 1'-00"
STUDIO PCH - 07.03.17
ATTACHMENT 3
61 22752 PCH_ 1st FLOORPLAN
SCALE 1/8" = 1'-00"
STUDIO PCH - 07.03.17
62 22752 PCH_ 2nd FLOORPLAN
SCALE 1/8" = 1'-00"
STUDIO PCH - 07.03.17
63 FEMA FLOOD
ZONE "D"

FEMA FLOOD
ZONE "X"

FEMA FLOOD
ZONE "AE"

FEMA FLOOD
ZONE "VE"
BUFFER
ZONE

LOW WAVE UPRUSH LINE

HIGH WAVE UPRUSH LINE

PACIFIC
COAST

HIGHWAY

PER DCWSE WAVE

UPRUSH REPORT

PER DCWSE WAVE

UPRUSH REPORT

NO PARKING
1 2
3 COMPACT
4 5 6 7 8
9 10
BEACH
1 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" N
SLOPE
5'-0"

PARKING LOT
EXIST. TWO STORY BLDG
11'-9-1/2" NAVD
83'-7 1/2"
24'-1 1/2"
27'-6 1/2"
76'-3"
EXIST. POOL & DECK

ENTRANCE

PROPERTY LINE

SETBACK LINE
FENCE

SITE PLAN LEGEND
3'-8"
(E) NEIGHBOR'S WALL TO REMAIN (E) BULKHEAD STRINGLINE
(E) BULKHEAD STRINGLINE

PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
(E) WOOD FENCE 42" SOLID
MATERIAL / 30" VIEW

PERMEABLE

BUILDING STRING LINE PER ALTA
SURVEY BY TAIT & ASSOC 06.10.15

DECK STRING LINE PER ALTA
SURVEY BY TAIT & ASSOC 06.10.15 (E) WOOD & METAL

GATE FOR EGRESS
(E) PLANTER
(E) DRAFT HYDRANT

PER FD DEPT
(E) FENCE
(E) WOOD FENCE 42" SOLID
MATERIAL / 30" VIEW

PERMEABLE
(E) PLANTER
(E) SIDE SETBACK
T.O. PLANTER
18'-9" NAVD
(E) GAS METER W/SOC TDL=70 FT @
1639 CFH + (N) 400 AMP ELEC PANEL

CONNECTED UNDERGROUND PER

PLUMBING DWGS SEE SHEETS
MP1.00 & E0.03
(E) WOOD FENCE 5'-0"

MIN PER LACDPH

LINE OF ROOF ABV

CALTRANS EASEMENT
(E) 1 1/2" WATER METER

LOCATED UNDER SIDEWALK,

SEE PLUMBING DWGS FOR INFO
(E) WOOD FENCE 5'-0"

MIN PER LACDPH
1/8" = 1'-0"

SITE PLAN
A1.00
-
DWG TO SCALE ONLY WHEN PRINTED ON 24"X36" SHEET
This drawing has been created by Studio PCH LLC,
which retain all copyrights to this document. This
drawing may not be reproduced, distributed,displayed,
modified, or used by any person for any purpose
without the express written consent of the Designer.
22762
-

PROJECT ADDRESS

AS-BUILT PLANS
22762 Pacific Coast Hwy
Malibu, CA 90265
A.P.N. 4451-004-034

DATE REVISIONS

SCALESHEET TITLESHEET NUMBER

PROJECT CODE
NO
OWNER

WAVEBREAK, LLC
101 YGNACIO VALLEY RD. #320
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596
925.627.2618

ISSUANCE
64 29'-11 1/4"
47'-8 1/2"
1 3 5
8 A
B
C
2 H
F.O.S.

FIN. WALL
C.L. OF
FRMG
F.O.S. FIN.

WALL
F.O.S. EXT. FIN. WALL
C.L. OF FRMG
F.O. EXT.

SHTHG
C.L. OF
6 FRMG 7 7.4 C.L. OF FRMG C.L. OF FRMG
36'-7 1/2"
18'-6" 10'-1 1/2"
19'-7 1/4"
6'-1 1/4"
5'-1"
10'-10 1/4"
F
23'-10"
4 F.O.S. FIN.

WALL
9 F.O.S. EXT. FIN. WALL
J
G
E
D
6'-0 1/4"
8'-0 1/2"
F.O. EXT.

SHTHG
1'-8 1/4"
7'-8 3/4"
5'-0 1/4"
11'-0 1/2"
4'-5 1/4"
-
(E) KITCHEN
-
(E) STORAGE
-
(E) WC
ENTRY
-
(E) WC
-
(E) KITCHEN
-
(E) STORAGE
-
(E) WC
ENTRY
-
(E) WC

PROPERTY LINE
-
(E) GARAGE &

STORAGE
-
(E) VESTIBULE

LINE OF (E) ROOF
(E) ELEC - GAS

METER PER

MEP DWGS
-
(E) FITNESS / GYM
1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" N
(E) WALL
EXISTING PLAN LEGEND 1/4" = 1'-0"
FIRST

FLOOR PLAN
A1.11
-
DWG TO SCALE ONLY WHEN PRINTED ON 24"X36" SHEET
This drawing has been created by Studio PCH LLC,
which retain all copyrights to this document. This
drawing may not be reproduced, distributed,displayed,
modified, or used by any person for any purpose
without the express written consent of the Designer.
22762
-

PROJECT ADDRESS

AS-BUILT PLANS
22762 Pacific Coast Hwy
Malibu, CA 90265
A.P.N. 4451-004-034

DATE REVISIONS

SCALESHEET TITLESHEET NUMBER

PROJECT CODE
NO
OWNER

WAVEBREAK, LLC
101 YGNACIO VALLEY RD. #320
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596
925.627.2618

ISSUANCE
65 28'-3"
47'-8 1/2"
5 8
B
H
6 7

7.4 19'-7 1/4"
6'-1 1/4"
5'-1"
10'-10 1/4"
F
4 9
J
G
E
6'-0 1/4"
7'-8 3/4"
5'-0 1/4"
11'-0 1/2"
4'-5 1/4"
7'-9" VIF
13'-11 1/2" VIF
1'-7 1/2"
2'-0"
1'-11 1/2"
4'-4"

SLOPE SLOPE SLOPE
DN
-
(N) GUESTROOM
(E) ROOF OVERHANG
(E) MECHANICAL

EQUIPMENT
(N) PER MEP
DWGS
(E) COPPER ROOF
(E) LINE OF ROOF

PROPERTY LINE
(E) LINE OF
SOFFIT
1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" N
(E) WALL
EXISTING PLAN LEGEND 1/4" = 1'-0"
SECOND

FLOOR PLAN
A1.12
-
DWG TO SCALE ONLY WHEN PRINTED ON 24"X36" SHEET
This drawing has been created by Studio PCH LLC,
which retain all copyrights to this document. This
drawing may not be reproduced, distributed,displayed,
modified, or used by any person for any purpose
without the express written consent of the Designer.
22762
-

PROJECT ADDRESS

AS-BUILT PLANS
22762 Pacific Coast Hwy
Malibu, CA 90265
A.P.N. 4451-004-034

DATE REVISIONS

SCALESHEET TITLESHEET NUMBER

PROJECT CODE
NO
OWNER

WAVEBREAK, LLC
101 YGNACIO VALLEY RD. #320
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596
925.627.2618

ISSUANCE
66 CITY OF MALIBU PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 13-32

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MALIBU APPROVING COAST AL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 13-004, MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 13-001, DEMOLITION PERMIT NO. 13-005 AN]) OFFER TO DEDICATE NO. 13-001 FOR A LESS THAN FIPTY PERCENT

INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR REMODEL OF A LEGAL NONCONFORMING
MOTEL WHICH WILL REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ROOMS FROM 22 (21 ROOMS AND ONE MANAGER APARTMENT) TO 16, AN UPGRADE OF THE

EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM TO AN ALTERNATIVE ONSITE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM, H.EPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF THE EXISTING BULKHEAD AND PILE FOUNDATION, REPLACEMENT Olr

HARDSCAPE, NEW TRELLISES, WATER FEATURES, LANDSCAPING, AND

ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING A MINOR MODIFICATION
FOR A 50 PERCENT REDUCTION IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, A

DEMOLITION PERMIT, AND AN OFFER TO DEDICATE A PUBLIC

LATERAL ACCESS EASEMENT, IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 22752 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
(NORTH BROADWAY VENTURES, LLC)

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DOES HEREBY FIND, ORDER AND R.ESOL VE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals.

A. On December 18, 2012, an application for Administrative Plan Review (APR) No. 12-072 was submitted to the Planning Department by applicant Studio PCH, LLC, on behalf of property owner North Broadway Ventures, LLC, for remodel of the Casa Malibu Inn motel and repair and maintenance of tJ1e existing bulkhead. The application was routed to the City Geologist, City Coastal Engineer, City Environmental Health AdminL-;trator, City Biologist and City Public Works Department for review.

B. On January 14, 2013, an application for Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 13-004 was submitted to the Planning Department by the applicant on behalf of the property owner for an Upbrrade of the existing Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) to an alternative onsite wastewater treatment system (AOWTS). The application was routed to the City Geologist, City Coastal Engineer, City Environmental Health Administrator, City Biologist and the City Public Works Department for review.

C. On February 4, 2013, the Planning Director determined the projects proposed under APR No. 12-072 and CDP No, 13-004 were functionally related and required to be combined under a single application pursuant to Malibu Local Coastal Program (LCP) Local Implementation Plan (LIP) Section 13.6.l(C). On February 6, 2013, APR No. 12-072 was closed and the scope of work added to CDP No. 13-004. The combined project was re-routed to the City Geologist, City Coastal Engineer, City Environmental Health Administrator, City Biologist and the City Public Works Department for review.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32
Page J of30
ATTACHMENT 4
67 D. On february 15, 2013, a notice of CDP application was posted on the subject property.

E. On February 19, 2013, a courtesy notice for the proposed project was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500 foot radius of tbe subject property.

F. Also on February 19, 2013, the property owner signed a substantial remodel agreement acknowledging that at least 50 percent of the exterior wall of the buildings must be maintained during the remodel.

G. On February 20, 2013, Planning Department staff conducted a site visit and took photos to document site conditions. Also during February and March, the Planning Department staff obtained input from the Building Safety Divfaion on the scope of the project remodel and structural plans.

H. On March 14, 2013, the CDP application was deemed complete for processing.

I. On March 21, 2013, 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.

J. On March 29, 2013, the Planning Department received a comment letter on the project from the California Coastal Commission (CCC). The CCC letter questions the project's consistency with the intent of the LCP policies pertaining to nonconforming structures and protection of lower cost visitor-serving accommodations, and calls for a California State Lands Commission (CSLC) determination· to confinn the project does not encroach on sovereign lands.

K. On April 1, 2013, the Planning Commission continued the project to its regular meeting on May 6, 2013 to allow time for the applicant to respond to the CCC letter.

L. On April 24, 2013, the applicant requested to update the project description to voluntarily include an offer to dedicate a public lateral access easement and a payment to subsidize lower cost visitor serving accommodations as requirements of the project.

M. On May 6, 2013, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, reviewed and considered the staff report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information in the record.

Section 2. Environmental Review.

Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission has analyzed the proposal as described above. The Planning Commission has 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, and therefore, is exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Accordingly, a CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION will be prepared and issued pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities. The Planning Commission has further determined that none of the six exceptions to the use of a categorical exemption applies to this project Planning Commission Resolution No, 13-32

68 (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2).

Section 3. Coastal Development Permit Approval and Findings.

Based on substantial evidence contained within the record and pursuant to UP Sections l 3.7(B) and

13.9, the Planning Commission adopts the analysis in the agenda report, incorporated herein, the findings of fact below, and approves CDP No. 13-004, Minor Modification (MM) No. 13-001, Demolition Permit (DP) No. 13-005, and Offer to Dedicate (OTD) No. 13-001 for a less than fifty percent interior and exterior remodel of a legal nonconforming motel which will reduce the number of rooms from 22 (21 rooms and one manager apartment) to 16, an upgrade of the existing wastewater system to an AOWTS, repair and maintenance of the existing bulkhead and pile foundation, replacement of hardscape, new tTellises, water features, landscaping, and associated development, including a minor modification for a 50 percent reduction in the front yard setback, a demolition permit, and an offer to dedicate a public lateral access easement, located at 22752 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH).

The project has been reviewed for conformance with the LCP by Planning Department staff, the City Biologist, City Geologist, City Coa5tal Engineer, City Environmental Health Administrator and the City Public Works Department. Subject to the conditions of approval, the project is consistent with all applicable LCP codes, standards, goals and policies.

A. General Coastal Development Permit (LIP Chapter 13)
LIP Section 13.9 requires that the following four findings be made for all CDPs.

Finding Al. That the project as described in the application and accompanying materials, as modified by any conditions of approval, conforms with the certified City of Malibu Local Coastal Program.

The property owner's objective is to update the l 950s-era Casa Malibu Inn motel. The existing motel is a nonconforming use in the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district; however, Los Angeles County Assessor records show the structures were built in 1950. They can also be seen in a 1972 aerial photo. Since the use was established long before the City of Malibu incorporated, it is unknown why the property was not zoned Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV), whlch is the only City zoning category that allows motels. The existing development/structures on the property are also nonconforming as to setbacks, view corridor, parking space size/number, stringlines, floor area ratio (FAR), landscape/open space and wall/fence height. Under the nonconforming use and structure policies found in LIP Section 13.5, nonconfonning uses and structures can be repaired and maintained, but cannot be expanded or increased. Furthermore, to be considered a remodel, at least 50 percent of existing exterior walls of each structure must be maintained, and by definition, no new or altered foundation is allowed. The property owner ha~ signed a substantial remodel agreement for the project acknowledging that exceeding these parameters results in a new structure and forfeiture of existing nonconfom1ities.

The proposed project will remodel the interior and exterior of the three existing buildings while maintaining at least 50 percent of the exterior walls of each structure. The existing 22 rooms (21 motel rooms and one manager's apartment) will be reconfigured into 16 rooms, within the existing Planning Commission Resolution No. J 3-32

69 development envelope. No new or altered foundation is required; rather, the project will repair and maintain the existing pile foundation. The minor modification to reduce the front yard setback will allow construction of a second floor exterior walkway required for egress by the Building Code, and the required findings are made later in Section B. The parking lot will be restriped to provide a codecompliant Americans with Disability Act (ADA) parking space while ·maintaining the same total of 16 spaces. New trellises in compliance with required front and side yards will replace the existing nonconforming solid parking cover. Nonconforming site walls and decking will be maintained and resurfaced. The existing bulkhead will also be repaired and maintained in order to adequately protect the new AOWTS. The new AOWTS will be located in approximately the same location as the existing onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS), in the existing parking area, which is the most landward feasible location given the existing onsite development. All new construction will comply with current LCP standards and a water quality mitigation plan is required.

As demonstrated in the analysis of the agenda report and in the findings herein, the proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the commercial development standards set forth in the LCP applicable to legal nonconforming beach.front development, and with LUP policies for protection and enhancement of existing visitor-serving uses.

Finding A2. If the project is located between the first public road and the sea, that the project cor!f'orms to the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976 (commencing with Sections 30200 of the Public Resources Code).

The project is located between the first public road and the sea; however, the project includes the remodel of an existing motel, repair of an existing bulkhead and installation of a new AOWTS in the landward portion of the property. No trails, parks or recreation areas are shown on or adjacent to the subject properly according to the LCP Park Lands Map, and no lateral access casement has previously been recorded on the property per the LCP Public Access Map. To support public access to coastal resources, the applicant has elected to include recordation of an offer to dedicate a public lateral ac9ess easement along the shoreline as a component of the project. The offer has been memorialized as a condition of project approval that must be implemented prior to issuance of building permits. A condition of approval has also been included to require the removal of existing "Private Beach" signage from the seaward decks. No potential project-related or cumulative impact on public access and/or recreation is anticipated to result from the proposed project. The proposed project conforms to the public access and recreational policies in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976.

Finding A3. The project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

As discussed in Section 2, the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. The proposed project would not result in significant adverse effects on the environment, within the meaning of CEQA, and there are no further feasible alternatives that would further reduce any impacts on the environment.

The project complies with the beachfront commercial development standards of the LCP and is legal nonconforming with the CC zoning classification of the subject parcel.

Three alternatives were considered to determine which was the least environmentally damaging.

I. No Project - The no project alternative would not meet the property owner's objectives for Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

70 updating the existing 1950s motel. Necessary repair and maintenance of the pile foundation and the bulkhead would not be completed and the environmental benefits of upgrading the existing OWTS to an AOWTS with disinfection would not be realized. The no project alternative is not a feasible alternative.

2. Demolition and Reconstruction - The existing nonconforming motel structures could be demolished and replaced with a new use allowed in the CC zone and structures that comply with current LCP development standards, such as FAR, view corridor and setbacks. However, the property owner's objectives include maintaining the existing legal motel withjn the constraints of the LCP's nonconforming use and structure policies. ·n1is alternative docs not meet the project objectives and is inconsistent with the LC P's goals of protecting existing visitor-serving uses.

3. Proposed Project - The project proposes to remodel the interior and exterior of the three existing motel buildings by reconfiguring the existing 21 rooms and manager's apartment into 16 rooms within the existing development envelope. The project will maintain at least 50 percent of the exterior walls of each structure, and will not increase the height, square footage or bulk of the project, and will not result in any seaward expansion of existing development. The pitched roof of the two-story Building 1 will be replaced with a new flat roof, and with the inclusion of the minor modification to reduce the front yard setback, building access will be reconfigured to meet current Building Code requirements. As shown in the detailed pile evaluation and repair plan prepared by the project coastal and structural engineer, David C. Weiss (DCWSE), 49 of the 52 piles are in good condition and no new or altered foundations are required. The prescribed repafr and maintenance will be implemented to remove rot and fill voids with epoxy, wrap specified piles, repair or replace portions of the concrete grnde beam, timber cap beam and straps and reinforce one damaged pile wi1h steel pipe.

The parking lot will be restriped to provide a code-compliant ADA parking space whlle maintaining the same total of 16 spaces. Since the project results in six fewer rooms onsite, the parking requirement is also reduced by six spaces (from 26 to 20), thereby decreasing the project's parki11g deficit. All new construction will comply with current LCP requirements. The existing bulkhead will also be repaired and maintained in order to adequately protect the new AOWTS. Based on the bulkhead evaluation and repair plan by DCWSE, less than 20 percent of the existing bulkhead structure will be affected by the work which will remove rot on identified piles and sheathing and fill voids with epoxy, reinforce three piles with a 10 by 10 member, and replace portions of existing cap beam and connections. The new AOWTS will provide the property with disinfection and will be located in approximately the same location as the existing OWTS, in the existing park.jng area, which is the most landward feasible location given the existing onsitc development and siting and sizing requirements. To support the LCP's public access policies, the applicant has also volunteered to record a lateral access easement and submit a payment to subsidize lower cost visitor-serving accommodations as conditions of the project.

Conditions of approval also require removal of beach spotlights and "Private Beach" signage.

The project, as conditioned, is consistent with applicable provisions of the LCP pertaining to nonconforming uses and structures, and those encouraging protection of existing visitor-serving uses. The project has been approved by the City Biologist, City Public Works Dep~tment,. City Geologist, City Environmental Health Administrator and City Coastal Engineer.

The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the LCP and has been determined to be the Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

71 least environmentally damaging feasible alternative.

Finding A4. If the project is located in or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat area pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Malibu LIP (ESHA Overlay), that the project conforms with the recommendations of the Environmental Review Board, or if it does not conform with the recommendations, findings explaining why it is notfeasible to take the recommended action.

The subject parcel is not located in environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA), an ESHA buffer zone or adjacent to any streams as designated in the LCP. Pursuant to LIP Section 4.4.4, the City Biologist determined the proposed project is exempt from providing a detailed biological study of the site and review by the Environmental Review Board.

B. Minor Modification for Reduction of the Front Yard Setback (LIP Section 13.27) The LCP requires that the City make three findings in the consideration and approval of a minor modification to reduce the required front yard setback by up to 50 percent. The project proposes to reduce the front yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. The required findings for MM No. 13-001 are made below.

Finding Bl. That the project is consistent with policies and provisions of the Malibu LCP.

As previously discussed in Finding A 1, the project has been reviewed for conformance with all relevant policies and provisions of the LCP. The existing motel buildings to be remodeled pre-date the Coastal Act. The large L-shaped building (Building l) has a nonconforming front yard setback of 11 feet. To comply with current Building Code egress requirements, the project incorporates a new exterior walkway a:t the northwest corner of the second floor. This new +/- IO square feet of walkway would project further into the required 20 foot front yard setback than allowed by LIP Section 3.5.3. MM No. 13-001 will allow the walkway to be constructed in line with existing building fai;:ade and as required by the Building Code.

Finding B2. That the project does not adver~·ely affect neighborhood character.

The front yard setback for beachfront commercial properties is determined by the average of the two adjacent neighbors, or is 20 feet, whichever is less. In this case, the required setback is 20 feet.

However, the existing motel has been in place since 1950, according to Los Angeles County Assessor records. The 10 square foot extension of exterior walkway at the northwest comer of Building 1 will be in line with the existing fai;:ade. The proposed project is similar in height and bulk to surrounding development. Other buildings in the vicinity (upcoast and across the street) have similar reduced front yard setbacks. The proposed project docs not adversely affect neighborhood character.

Finding BJ. The proposed project complies with all applicable requirements of state and local !aw. 111e project complies with aJl requirements of State and local law. Construction of the proposed improvements will comply with all Building Code requirements and will incorporate all recommendations from applicable City departments.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

72 C. Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Arca Overlay (LIP Chapter 4) As discussed in Finding A4, the project site does not contain ESHA or ESHA buffer. The project is consistent with ESHA standards and the supplemental findings of LIP Section 4.7.6 are not required.

The City Biologist has reviewed and approved the proposed landscape plan for LCP conformance.

D. Native Tree Protection (LIP Chapter 5)
The project area does not contain any protected native trees. 1nerefore, the native tree protection findings of LIP Chapter 5 are not applicable.

E. Scenic, Visual and Hillside Resource Protection (LIP Chapter 6) The Scenic, Visual and Hillside Resource Protection Chapter governs those CDP applications concerning any parcel of land that is located along, within, provides views to or is visible from any scenic ,u-ea, scenic road, or public viewing area. · LCP-designated scenic roads and public viewing areas near the project site include PCB and the beach. The proposed work will be visible from both locations and the required findings of LIP Chapter 6 are made as follows.

Finding El. The project, as proposed, will have no significant adverse scenic or visual impacts due to project design, location on the site or other reasons.

The project is a remodel of an existing nonconfonning three-building motel complex on the beach that has been on the site since 1950, according to the County Assessor. Staff conducted a visual analysis of the project which included a site visit to photograph existing conditions, and review of aerial photographs and project plans. The property currently offers no bluewater views of the ocean from PCH, and views of the Santa Monica Mountains from the beach are blocked by the existing buildings.

The project will remodel the existing nonconforming structures while maintaining at least 50 percent of existing exterior walls. As such, the project is consistent with LIP Section 6.5(E)(3), which only requires a view corridor for substantial remodels that replace more than 50 percent of the structure.

The project will not change the existing building footprints but will replace the existing pitched roof of Building l to a new flat roof. Exterior finishes of the buildings and decks will be updated using colors and materials that comply with the development standards of LIP Chapter 6 which call for neutral tones and materials that will blend with the surrounding environment, with no reflective, light or bright tones. Onsite landscaping will be updated in compliance with the LCP and Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance (Malibu Municipal Code (M.M.C.) Chapter 9.22). The project will have no significant adverse scenic or visual impacts and is consistent with LIP Chapter 6.

Finding E2. The project, as conditioned, will not have significant adverse scenic or visual impacts due to required project modifications, landscaping or other conditions.

As discussed in Finding El, the proposed project will not have significant adverse scenic or visual impacts. A condition of approval is included to require the removal of existing beach spotlights.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

73 Finding E3.
alternative.

The project, as proposed or as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging As discussed in Finding AJ, the proposed project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Finding E4. There are no feasible alternatives to development that would avoid or substantially lessen any significant adverse impacts on scenic and visual resources.

As discussed in Findings A3 and El, no significant adverse scenic impacts an: expected and the project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Finding E5. Development in a specific location on the site may have adverse scenic and visual impacts but will eliminate, minimize or otherwise contribute to conformance to sensitive resource protection policies contained in the certified LCI'.

As discussed in Findings A3 and El, the proposed project will not have significant adverse scenic impacts and is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative.

F. Transfer of Development Credit (LIP Chapter 7)
According to LIP Section 7.2, transfer of development credits applies to land divisions and multifamily development in specified zones. The proposed project does not include a land division or multi-family development; therefore, the findings in LIP Chapter 7 do not apply.

G. Hazards (LIP Chapter 9)
Pursuant to LIP Section 9.3, written findings of fact, analysis and conclusions addressing geologic, flood and frre hazard.<;, structural integrity or other potential hazards must be included in support of all approvals, denials or conditional approvals of development located on a site where it is detennined that the proposed project causes the potential to create adverse impacts on site stability or structural integrity. The project was analyzed by staff for the hazards listed in LIP Section 9.2(A)(l-7).

As part of the subject CDP application, the applicant submitted a structural review assessing the condition of the existing pile foundation prepared by David C. Weiss Structural Engineer, Inc. (DCWSE) on March 11, 2013, and indicating that only repair and maintenance will be required. Due to the fact that no improvements are proposed or required for the remodel which require new or altered foundations, the City Geologist and City Coastal Engineer have not required additional geotechnical or coastal engineering studies for the proposed remodel. However, geotechnical review and a coastal engineering (wave uprush) study were required for the new AOWTS.

In summary, the proposed development is suitable for the intended use provided that the certified engineering geologist and/or geotechnical engineer's and coastal engineer's recommendations and applicable building codes are followed. The findings required by LIP Chapter 9 are made as follows.

Finding GI. The project, as proposed will neither be subject to nor increase in.~tability of the site or structural integrity from geologic, flood or fire hazards due lo project design, location on the site or other reasons.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

74 Analysis of the project hazards included review of the project plans and the following docwnents/data, which are available on file with the City, including existing City Geologic data maintained by the City; Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report of Findings (Relative to the Proposed AOWTS Upgrades) prepared by Earth Systems Southern California dated January 9, 2013; Preliminary AOWTS Plan prepared by Ensitu Engineering, Inc., dated January 9, 2013; Coastal Engineering Report prepared by DCWSE dated November 20, 2012, and responses dated January 16, 2013 and February 14, 20 l 3; Pile Investigation and Repair Plan submitted March 11, 2013 and Bulkhead Investigation and Repair Plan submitted February 20, 2013 prepared by DCWSE; and Survey prepared by Civic Engineering Group updated January 23, 2013.

Based on staffs review of the above-referenced reports, City GIS and associated information, it has been determined that:

1. The project site is subject to wave uprush and tsunami inundation.

2. The project site is located in a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) identified flood hazard area.

3. The project site is located within an extreme fire hazard area.

The City Geologist, City Coastal Engineer and City Public Works Department have revkwed the project and found that there were no substantial risks to life and property related to any of the above hazards provided that their recommendations and those contained in tl1e associated consultant reports arc incorporated into the project design.

Wave Uprush/Tsunami Hazard - The City Coastal Engineer has reviewed the subject application and determined the development does not increase the site's susceptibility to tsunamis or wave uprush damage. According to the coastal engineering report, maximum wave uprush will occur approximately 67 feet seaward of the PCH right of way line, at an elevation of 18.49 feet (NA VD) 1 above sea level, with a critical breaking wave elevation of 14.34 feet. Regarding tsunami hazards, the coa'ltal engineering report indicates the uprush from storm waves would exceed tstmami uprush.

Consequently, the storm wave uprush elevations govern in the overall design for the subject property.

The existing bulkhead is located approximately 79 feet seaward of PCH and the elevation at the top of the bulkhead is 16.75 feet. The new AOWTS will be located in the landward portion of the site, within the parking area, and has been sited as far landward as feasible, given sizing and siting requirements, and the constraints of existing site development. The wave uprush limit extends to this location and the project coastal engineer determined a shoreline protection device is required to protect the AOWTS. The project will utilize the existing bulkhead. In the coa5tal engineering response dated February 14, 2013, the project coastal engineer states, "There is no need for new foundations for the bulkhead or its returns. The uprush limit is no further landward than the extent of the returns. Additionally, the depth of the bulkhead is well below the elevation of the design beach profile at the location of the bulkhead ... No overtopping (of the bulkhead] is anticipated." The existing finished floor and deck elevations of approximately 18.19 feet and the elevation of the timber cap beams below are all above the critical breaking wave elevation of 14.34 feet. The project will implement the bulkhead repair and maintenance in accordance with the above-referenced plans 1 NA VD means North American Vertical Datum and is the vertical datum referenced in the coastal engineering report and recommendations. All elevations in this resolution are NA VD.

Planning Commission Resolntion No. 13-32

75 and recommendations prepared by DCWSE.

Flood Hazard - The proposed site was evaluated for flood hazards by the City Public Works Department. The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map for the project area (Map Nwnber 06037Cl541F, Panel 1541 of2350) designates the parcel as containing Zone AE (EL 14) and Zone VE-14, both of which are defined as a Special Flood Hazard Zone, and Zone X, which is not. The base flood elevation is the water surface elevation of the one percent annual chance flood. Zone VE is a coa<;t.al flood zone with velocity hazard. The City Public Works Department has determined that the project meets base flood elevation requirements and will be able to attain compliance with the City's Floodplain Ordinance and the LCP. Pre- and post-construction elevation certificates will be required.

Fire Hazard - The entire city limits of Malibu are located within the fire hazard zone. The City is served by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD), as well as the California Department of Forestry, if needed. In the event of major fires, the County has mutual aid agreements with cities and counties throughout the st.ate so that additional personnel and firefighting equipment can augment the LACFD. As such, the proposed project as conditioned will not be subject to nor increase the instability of the site or structural integrity involving wildfire hazards. A standard condition of approval is included that requires that the property owner to record a deed restriction to indemnify and hold harmless the City against claims related to wildfire.

The project will incorporate all conditions required by the City Coastal Engineer, City Geologist and City Public Works Department. As such, the proposed project will not increase inst.ability of the site or structural integrity from geologic, flood or any other hazards. Final plans shall be reviewed and approved by these departments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The project is consistent with all relevant policies and regulations regarding potential hazards.

Finding G2. The project, as conditioned, will not have significant adverse impacts on site stability or structural integrity from geologic, flood or fire hazards due to required project modifications, landscaping or other conditions.

As stated in Finding G 1, the proposed project, as designed, conditioned and approved, will not have any significant adverse impacts on the site stability or structural integrity from geologic, flood or fire hazards. However, pursuant to LIP Sections 9.4(Y) and 10.6(A), as a condition of approval, the property owner will be required to record deed restrictions acknowledging and assuming the hazard risk of development at the site. The deed restriction shall state that the proposed project site is subject to wave action, erosion, flooding, landslides or other hazards associated with development on a beach or bluff~ and that the property owner assumes said risks and indemnifies the City against liability related to such hazards.

Finding G3. The project, as proposed or as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

As discussed in Findings A3 and GI, the project will not result in potentially significant impacts and the proposed project is the least environmentally damaging alternative relative to hazards.

Finding G4. There are no alternatives to development that would avoid or substantially lessen impacts on site stability or structural integrity.

Planning Commission Resolution No. I 3-32

76 As discussed in Findi.ngs A3 and G l, no adverse impacts on site stability or structural integrity are expected and the proposed project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

F'inding G5. Development in a specific location on the site may have adverse impacts but will eliminate, minimize or otherwise contribute to conformance to sensitive resource protection policies contained in the certified Malibu LCP.

As discussed in Finding G 1, no adverse impacts pertaining to hazards are expected. As discussed in Sections C, E and H, the project will not conflict with LCP sensitive resource protection policies related to ESHA, scenic resources and shoreline and bluff development.

H. Shoreline and Bluff Development (LIP Chapter 10)
The project includes development on a parcel located along the shoreline as defined by the LCP.

Therefore, in accordance with LIP Section 10.2, the requirements of LIP Chapter 10 are applicable to the project and the required findings are made as follows.

Finding HJ. The project, as proposed, will have no significant adverse impacts on public access, shoreline sand supply or other resources due to project design, location on the site or other reasons.

The project is proposed on a beachfront parcel; however, the property has been developed since 1950 and the proposed project and related construction activities are not anticipated to interfere with the public's right to access the coast as the site offers no direct or indirect public beach access. The subject propctty is served by an existing timber pile-supported bulkhead situated approximately 79 feet seaward of the PCH right of way line, beneath the parking area, courtyard and a portion of the i · two-story motel building. The applicant intends to repair and maintain this existing bulkhead for protection of the new AOWTS, as detailed in Finding A3. As discussed in Finding Gl, the detailed structural investigation and repair and maintenance plan prepared by DCWSE indicate the bulkhead will adequately serve the property with the proposed non-substantial repairs. According to a January 16, 2013 response letter by DCWSE, the total bulkhead repair will involve less th.an 20 percent of the existing bulkhead structure. Should further investigation or work in the field indicate that substantial repairs are necessary, a new CDP or amendment to this CDP and evaluation of new bulkhead conformance with current LCP requirements will be required.

The timber piles supporting the two one-story motel buildings, the seaward portion of the two-story building, and the seaward deck and parking area will also be repaired and maintained under the proposed project, as described in Finding A3. The detailed plans by DCWSE (date-stamped March 11, 2013) document that 49 of the 52 piles are in· good condition and prescribe repair and maintenance. New or altered foundations are not required. Repair and maintenance will involve fewer impacts to coastal resources than new construction. The existing structures encroach the building and deck stringlincs; however, the structures pre-date the Coastal Act and are allowed to be maintained and repaired in compliance with LCP policies for nonconforming structures. The only work on the beach will be to repair the piles am.I bulkhead. The project will result in no increase in footprint or seaward expansion. The only impacts to the beach would be temporary and associated with the pile and bulkhead repairs. Sta.ndard conditions have been included to protect coastal resources during the bulkhead and pile repairs in accordance w-ith LIP Section 10.4(C). Furthermore, the applicant will record an OTD for a public lateral access easement along the shoreline as a Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

77 condition of project approval.

Six surveyed mean high tide line (MHTL) alignments have been identified in the coastal engineering report. The most landward MHTL identified in the report is the 1961 lv1HTL. 111e existing development exceeds the minimwn 10 foot setback to the most landward MHTL as required by LIP Section 10.4(G), Specifically, the most seaward projecting strncture (deck dripline) is located 146 feet from the PCH right of way line, while the 1961 MHTL is 182 feet seaward of the PCH right of way line. The existing bulkhead is located well landward of the building and deck driplines, under the existing buildings and parking area, and the proposed project will not extend the seaward footprint of the existing development. Nevertheless, a condition of approval hac; been included to require the applicant to obtain a detem1ination letter from the CSLC to confirm no encroachment into sovereign lands prior to issuance of project building permits.

The project bas been reviewed and approved by the City Coastal Engineer and was determined to be consistent with all applicable requirements of LIP Chapter I 0. As designed and conditioned, the project will not result in any new significant adverse impacts on public access, shoreline sand supply or other resources.

Finding Jl2. The project, as conditioned, will not have significant adverse impacts on public access, shoreline sand supply or other resources due to required project modifications or other conditions.

As stated in Finding HI, as designed, conditioned, and approved by City departments, the project will not have any significant adverse impacts on public access or shoreline sand supply or other resources.

Finding HJ. The project, as proposed or as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

As discussed in Finding A3, the proposed project, as conditioned, is the least environmcntaJly damaging alternative.

Finding }14. There are no alternatives to the proposed development that would avoid or substantially lessen impacts on public access, shoreline sand supply or other resources.

As stated in Finding Hl, as designed, conditioned, and approved by City departments, the project will not have any significant adverse impacts on public access or shoreline sand supply or other resources.

Finding J!5. In addition, if the development includes a shoreline protective device, that it is designed or conditioned to be sited as far landward as feasible, to eliminate or mitigate to the maximum feasible extent adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply and public access, that there are no alternatives that would avoid or lessen impacts on shoreline sand supply, public access or coastal resources and that it is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

As discussed above, the project will utilize the existing bulkhead, with the repairs and maintenance involving less than 20 percent of tbe existing bulkhead structure as recommended by the project coastal engineer, DCWSE. DCWSE determined that the bulkhead is required for protection of the AOWTS and that there will be no adverse impact on shoreline sand supply or coastal resources. The proposed AOWTS and the existing bulkhead are located as far landward as possible, given the sizing Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

78 i
l
and siting requirements for the AOWTS and the constraints of existing site development. It is not feasible to resite the AOWTS or bulkhead whj!e maintaining the legal nonconforming motel use and structures. A condition of approval has been included in Section 5 as required by LIP Section I 0.6 which requires the property owner to record a deed restriction acknowledging that no future repair or maintenance, enhancement, reinforcement or any other activity affecting the shoreline protection structure which extends the seaward footprint of the shoreline protection structure shall be tmdertaken. The project has also been conditioned to ensure the applicant records the lateral access easement dedication prior to issuance of building permits for tl1e project. As discussed in Finding A3, the proposed project is the least environmentally damaging alternative. No significant adverse impacts to coastal resources or public access will result from the project.

I. Public Access (LIP Chapter 12)
The subject site is located between the first public road and the sea, on the ocean-side of PCH, just a third of a mile east of the Malibu Pier. The subject property has been fully developed with a motel since 1950 and does not offer any opportunity for new public vertical access. No proposed or existing public trails, parks or recreation areas are shown on or adjacent to the subject property on the LCP Park Lands or Public Access Maps, and the property does not contain a bluff. Whlle lateral public access exists along the State of California's "wet sand right of way" which allows public use of lands seaward of the MHTL and provides public access along and parallel to the sea and shoreline, the applicant has elected to further support the LCP's public access policies by recording a lateral public access easement along the shore a, a condition of project approval. The enscment will allow public passive recreational use between the driplinc of the deck and the ambulatory MHTL. Vertical public access points to the shore are located approximately 270 feet downcoast at the Yonker Harris accessway near 22706 PCB and 1,200 feet upcoast at the Malibu Pier.

As previously discussed in Finding A2, no potential project-related or cumulative impact on public access and/or recreation is anticipated to result from the proposed remodel and repair and maintenance of the existing structures, or from installation of the new AOWTS, and the project conforms to the public access and recreational policies in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976. No legitimate governmental or public interest would be furthered by requiring vertical access at the project site because: I) existing access to coastal resources is adequate; and 2) the proposed project will not impact the public's ability to access the shore.line or other coastal resources. Therefore, in accordance with LIP Section 12.6(B)(2), no conditions or findings for trail, lateral, vertical, bluff-top or recreational access are required. A condition of approval in Section 5 requires "Private Beach" signage to be removed from the existing decks.

Policies 2.33 through 2.36 of Chapter 2 of the LUP (Public Access and Recreation) call for protection of existing visitor-serving uses and encouragement of new uses, including lower cost accommodations. The provisions are listed in italics below, followed by a response describing how the project is consistent with each policy. Nevertheless, to ensure the project supports lower cost visitor-serving policies, the applicant has elected to add to the project description a voluntary payment consistent with the provisions found in LIP Section 12.10 which call for providing lower cost accommodations for 15 percent of the luxury accommodations that are approved, as described in more detail below.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

79 LUP 2.33 Priority shall be given to the development of visitor-serving and commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation. On land designated for visitor-serving commercial and/or recreational facilities, priority shall be given to such use over private residential or general commercial development. New visitor-serving uses shall not displace existing low-cost visitor-serving uses unless an equivalent replacement is provided.

The project is consistent with LUP 2.33 in tl1at it maintains and improves an existing visitor-serving commercial use.

LUP 2.34 Existing, lower cost visitor-serving and recreation facilities, including overnight accommodations, shall be protected to the maximum feasible extent. New lower cost visitor and recreation facilities, including overnight accommodations, shall be encouraged and provided, where designated on the LUP Map. Priority shall be given to developments that include public recreational opportunities. New or expanded facilities shall be sited and designed to minimize impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and visual resources.

The project is consistent with LUP 2.34 in that the project objective is to enhance existing visitorserving dvemight accommodations, rather than replace them with a conforming use.

LUP 2.35 New development of luxury overnight visitor-serving accommodations shall be designed to provide for a component of lower cost overnight visitor accommodations (e.g. campground, RV park, hostel, or lower cost hotel/motel). The lower-cost visitor accommodations may be provided on-site, off-site, or through payment of an in-lieu fee into a fund to subsidize the construction of lower- cost overnight facilities in the Malibu-Santa Monica Mountains Coastal Zone area of Los Angeles County or Ventura County. The applicant shall be required to provide lower-cost overnight accommodations consisting of 15 percent of the number of luxury overnight accommodations that are approved.

LUP 2.35 (and the associated standards found in LIP Section 12.10 (New Luxury Overnight Accommodations)) does not apply in that the project is a remodel of existing accommodations, not new development.

LUP 2.36 Coastal recreational and visitor serving uses and opportunities, especially lower cost opportunities, shall be protected, encouraged, and where feasible, provided by both public and private means. Removal or conversion of existing lower cost opportunities shall be prohibited unless the use will be replaced with another offering comparable visitor serving or recreational opportunities.

The project is consistent with LUP 2.36 in that the existing motel use is not being removed or converted, but will be updated and reconfigured. The property owner is entitled to remodel and maintain a nonconforming use/structure that was established prior to the Coastal Act within the constraints of the LCP's nonconforming use and structure policies.

Furthem1ore, Policy 30213 of the Coastal Act states:

Section 30213
Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

80 provided. Developments providing public recreational opportunities are preferred.

The Commission shall not: (1) require that overnight room rentals be fixed at an amount certain for any privately owned and operated hotel, motel, or other similar visitor-serving facility located on either public or private lands; or (2) establish or approve any method for the identification of low or moderate income persons for the purpose of detennining eligibility for overnight room rentals in any such facilities.

The voluntary payment offered by the applicant will be consistent with LIP Section 12.1 O(B), which specifies $10,419 per unit, plus an additional amow1t for inflation from January 2000 to the present.

Based on the 16 rooms in the proposed project and using the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics online inflation calculator, the applicant will pay 16 x 0.15 x ($10,419 + 3,664.98) = $33,801.55. A condition of approval has been included in Section 5 to memorialize the applicant's agreement to remit the payment prior to issuance of building permits. Such funds are to be deposited into a fund to be used by the City to subsidize the construction of lower cost overnight facilities in the MalibuSanta Monica Mountains Coastal Zone, unless the City transfers the funds to another public agency or non-profit organization for that purpose pursuant to a memorandum of understanding or contractual agreement, as specified in LIP Section 12.1 0(C).

The project is consistent with LIP Chapter 12, the public access provisions of the LUP, and the Coastal Act.

J. Land Division (LIP Chapter 15)
This project does not include a land division; therefore, the findings in LIP Chapter 15 do not apply.

K Demolition Permit (M.M.C. Section 17.70.060)
M.M. C. Section 17. 70 requires that a demolition permit be issued for projects that result in the demolition of any building or structure. The project involves partial demolition of existing structures associated with the proposed remodel. The required findings for DP No. 13-005 are made as follows.

Finding Kl. The demolition permit is conditioned to assure that it will be conducted in a manner that will not create significant adverse environmental impacts.

Section 5 includes conditions of approval to ensure that the project will not create significant adverse environmental impacts. Specifically, conditions regarding Best Management Practices (BMPs) have been included to manage the effects of the demolition on surrounding properties and on the environment.

Finding K2. A development plan has been approved or the requirement waived by the City.

CDP No. 13-004 is being processed concurrently with DP No. 13-005. Therefore, approval of the demolition pennit is subject to the approval of CDP No. 13-004. The project scope includes the remodel of legal nonconforming structures. The property owner ha<; signed a substantial remodel agreement acknowledging the requirements of LIP Section 13.5 to maintain at least 50 percent of the linear footage of exterior walls and that should more than 50 percent of exterior walls be removed, all Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

81 nonconfonnities will be forfeited.

Section 4. Planning Commission Action.

Based on the foregoing findings and evidence contained within the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves Coastal Development Permit No. 13-004, Minor Modification No. 13-001, Demolition Permit No. 13-005 and Offer to Dedicate No. 13-001, subject to the following conditions.

Section 5. Conditions of Approval.
l. The property owners, and their successors in interest, shall indemnify and defend the City of Malibu and its officers, employees and agents from and against all liability and costs relating to the City's actions concerning this project, including (without limitation) any award of litigation expenses in favor of any person or entity who seeks to challenge the validity of any of the City's actions or decisions in connection with this project. The City shall have the sole right to choose its counsel and property owners shall reimburse the City's expenses incurred in its defense of any lawsuit challenging the City's actions concerning th.is project.

2. Approval of th.is application is to allow for the following:
a. Remodel interior and exterior of Buildings l, 2 and 3 while maintaining at leac;t 50 percent of each building's exterior walls, and reducing total number of rooms from 22 to 16:
1) Building 1
a) Replace pitched roof with new flat roof23 feet, 5 inches high b) Relocate access hallways to building perimeter and extend balcony at northwest corner of second floor to provide additional egress per Building Code requirements c) Modify existing courtyard walkways to create patios and courtyards for rooms, and create second floor wrap around balcony
d) Resurface existing electrical closet in the front yard setback e) Reconfigure 14 rooms into 11 rooms, including one ADA accessible room 2) Building 2 - Reconfigure 2 rooms into one 2-bedroom sttite 3) Building 3 - Reconfigure 6 rooms into 4 rooms
4) Repair and maintain pile foundation to remove pile rot, refill voids/cracks with epoxy grout, wrap piles, repair or replace portions of concrete grade beam, timber cap beam and straps, and reinforce damaged pile with steel pipe
b. Repair and maintain bulkhead to remove pile and sheathing rot and refill voids with epoxy grout, reinforce 3 damaged piles with 10 by 10 members, and replace portions of existing cap beam and connections
c. Remove existing carport covers and dividing walls, landscaping, stairways, and portions of existing site walls, and remove planter encroachments from PCH right of way d. Restripe existing 16 space parking area to create one ADA-compliant space e. Install trellises over parking area
t: Resurface existing fences/walls, decks, balconies and patios and replace railings g. Install new landscaping, site walls and courtyard water features h. DP No. 13-005 for partial demolition of the existing buildings and site improvements

1. MM No. 13-001 ·fora 50 percent reduction in the front yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet to accommodate extension of the existing balcony at the northwest corner of Building I.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

82 J. OTD No. 13-001 for a lateral public access easement along the shore. k. Payment of $33,801.55 to support lower cost visitor serving accommodations. !. Upgrade the e)cisting OWTS to an AOWTS.

3. Subsequent submittals for this project shall be in substantial compliance with plans on-file with the Planning Department, date-stamped February 26, 2013 (Architectural Plans), March 11, 2013 (Pile Repair), February 20, 2013 (Bulkhead Repair), and January 11, 2013 (Landscape Plan approval date by the City Biologist). In the event the project plans conflict with any condition of approval, the condition shall take precedence.

4. Pursuant to LIP Section 13.18.2, this pennit and rights conferred in this approval shall not be effective until the property owner signs and returns the Acceptance of Conditions Affidavit accepting the conditions set forth herein. The applicant shall file this form with the Planning Department within 10 days of this decision and prior to issuance of any development permits.

5. The applicant shall submit three (3) complete sets of plans to the Planning Depattment for consistency review and approval prior to the issuance of any building or development permits.

6. This resolution, signed Acceptance of Conditions Afiidavit and all Department Review Sheets attached to the agenda report for this project shall be copied in their entirety and placed directly onto a separate plan sheet behind the cover sheet of the development plans submitted to the City of Malibu Environmental Sustainability Department for plan check.

7. This CDP shall be null and void if the project has not commenced within two (2) years after issuance of the permit, unless a time extension has been granted, or work has commenced and substantial progress has been made (as determined by the Building Official) and the work is continuing under a valid building permit. If no building permit is required, the CDP approval shall expire after two years from the date of final planning approval if construction is not completed. Extension of the permit may be granted by the approving authority for due cause.

Extensions shall be requested in writing by the applicant or authorized agent prior to expiration of the two-year period and shall set forth the reasons for the request.

8. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any condition of approval will be resolved by the Planning Director upon written request of such interpretation.

9. All development shall conform to requirements of the City of Malibu Environmental Sustainability Department, City Geologist, City Biologist, City Environmental Health Administrator, City Coastal Engineer and City Public Works Department, as applicable.

Notwithstanding this review, all required permits shall be secured. l 0. Minor changes to the approved plans or the conditions of approval may be approved by the Planning Director, provided such changes achieve substantially the same results and the project is still in compliance with the Malibu Municipal Code (M.M.C.) and the Local Coastal Program. Revised plans reflecting the minor changes and additional fees shall be required.

11. Pursuant to LIP Section 13 .20, development pursuant to an approved CDP shall not commence until the CDP is effective. The CDP is not effective until all appeals, including Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32
Pagel7of30
83 those to the California Coastal Commission (CCC), have been exhausted. In the event that the CCC denies the permit or issues the permit on appeal, the CDP approved by the City is void.

12. The applicant must submit payment for any outstanding fees payable to the City prior to issuance of any building or grading permit.

Cultural Resources

13. In the event that potentially important cultural resources are found in the course of geologic testing or during construction, work shall immediately cease Wltil a qualified archaeologist . can provide an evaluation of the nature and significance of the resources and until the Plamung Director can review this information. Thereafter, the procedures contained in LIP Chapter 11 and those in M.M.C. Section l 7.54.040(D)(4)(b) shall be followed.

14. If human bone is discovered during geologic testing or during construction, work shall immediately cease and the procedures described in Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code shall be followed. Section 7050.5 requires notification of the coroner. If the coroner determines that the remains are those of a Native American, the applicant shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission by phone within 24 hours. Following notification of the Native American Heritage Commission, the procedmes described in Section 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code shall be followed.

Sire-Specific Conditions

15. A minimum of 50 percent of the linear footage of each building's exterior walls as shown on the approved demolition plan (First and Second Floor Overlay Plans) shall be maintained at all times. Removal or demolition of more than 50 percent of any building's exterior walls shall result in forfeiture of the existing nonconformities and shall require removal of the nonconforming structure.

16. This approval allows repair and maintenance of the existing timber pile foundation and existing bulkhead in substantial conformance with the approved structural plans referenced in Condition No. 3. New foundations or substantial repai.rs are not included in this approval.

17. The "Private Beach" signs and beach spotlights shall be removed from the seaward decks prior to final inspection.

18. Any new (or relocated) fences and walls sha11 comply with LIP Section 3.5.J(A).

19. Rooftop equipment shall be screened from view and shall not exceed allowed building height.

Colors and Materials

20. 'The project is visible from scenic roads or public viewing areas and shall incorporate colors and materials that are compatible with the surroundfog landscape.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

84 Lighting
a. Acceptable colors shall be limited to colors compatible with the surrounding environment (earth tones) including shades of green, brown and gray, with no white or light shades and no bright tones. Colors shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and clearly indicated on the building plans.
b. The use of highly reflective materials shall be prohibited except for solar energy panels or cells, which shall be placed to minimize significant adverse impacts to public views to the maximum extent feasible.
c. All windows shall be comprised ofnon-glare glass.

21. Exterior lighting shall be minimized and restricted to low intensity features, shielded, and concealed so that no light source is directly visible from public viewing areas. Permitted lighting shall conform to the following standards:
a. Ligl1ting for walkways shall be limited to fixtures that do not exceed two feet in height and are directed downward, and limited to 850 lumens (equivalent to a 60 watt incandescent bulb);
b. Security lighting controlled by motion detectors may be attached to the residence provided it is directed downward and is limited to 850 lumens; c. Driveway lighting shall be limited to the minimum lighting necessary for safe vehicular use. Tne lighting shall be limited to 850 lwnens; d. Lights at entrances as required by the Building Code shall be permitted provided that such lighting does not exceed 850 lumens;
e. Site perimeter lighting shall be prohibited;
f. Outdoor decorative lighting for aesthetic purposes is prohibited; g. Night lighting for sports courts or other private recreational facilities in scenic areas designated for residential use shall be prohibited;
h. No permanently installed lighting shall blink, flash, or be of usually high intensity or brightness. Lighting levels on any nearby property from artificial light sources on the subject property shall not produce an illwnination level greater than one foot candle; and
i. Lighting of the shore is prohibited.

22. Night lighting from exterior and interior sources shall be minimized. All exterior lighting shall be low intensity and shielded so it is directed downward and inward so that there is no offsite glare or lighting.

Water Features

23. Onsite noise, including that which emanates from water feature and air conditioning equipment, shall be limited as described in M.M.C. Chapter 8.24 (Noise).

24. The discharge of the water contained in a decorative water feature such as a fountain or fish pond is an illegal discharge unless it is discharged to a sanitary sewer system. Malibu has no sanitary sewer system near your property so your property cannot legally discharge the contents of the proposed pool, spa or water features to the street without violating the Clean Water Act or the Malibu Water Quality Ordinance. Provide information on the plans Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

85 regarding the type of sanitation that proposed for these structures.

25. The discharge of chlorinated and non-chlorinated water from a water feature into streets, storm drains, creeks, canyons, drainage channels, the ocean or other locations where it could enter receiving waters is prohibited.

26. A sign stating "It is illegal to discharge water feature waters to a street, drainage course, or storm drain per M.M.C. Section !3.04.060(D)(5)" shall be posted in the filtration and/or pumping equipment area for the property.

27. Pursuant to M.M.C. Section 9.20.040(B), all ponds, decorative fountains shall require a water recirculating/recycling system.

Geology

28. All recommendations of the consulting certified engineering geologist or geotechnical engineer and/or the City Geologist shall be incorporated into all final design and construction including foundations, sewage disposal, and drainage, as applicable. Final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Geologist prior to the issuance of construction permits.

29. Final plans approved by the City Geologist shall be in substantial conformance with the approved CDP relative to construction, sewage disposal and drainage. Any substantial changes may require amendment of the CDP or a new CDP.

Coastal Engineering

30. All recommendations of the consulting coa-,tal engineer and/or the City Coastal Engineer shall be incorporated into all final design and construction including foundations, sewage disposal, and drainage, as applicable. Final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Coastal Engineer prior to the issuance of construction permits. 31 . Structural repair plans shall reflect elevations relative to the NA VD88 vertical datum.

32. Final plans approved by the City Coastal Engineer shall be in substantial conformance with the approved CDP relative to construction, sewage disposal and drainage. Any substantial changes, such as but not limited to substantial repair to the bulkhead or timber piles, may require amendment of the CDP or a new CDP.

Storm Water Management I Drainage I Water Quality
33 . A digital drawing (AutoCAD) of the project's private storm drain system, public storm drain system within 250 feet of the property limits, and post-construction BMPs shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of building pennits. The digital drawing shall adequately show all storm drain lines, inlets, outlets, post-construction BMPs and other applicable facilities. The digital drawing shall also show the subject property, public or private streets, and any drainage easements.

Planning Cornm.ission Resolution No. 13-32

86 34. The approved project scope includes no non-exempt grading. In no case shall non-exempt grading exceed 1,000 cubic yards.

35. A Wet Weather Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is required, and shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of construction permits as grading or construction activity is anticipated to occur during the rainy season. The following elements shall be included in this plan:
a. Locations where concentrated runoff will occur;
b. Plans for the stabilization of disturbed areas of the property, landscaping and hardscape, along with the proposed schedule for the installation of protective measures; and c. Stabilized construction entrance and a monitoring program for the sweeping of material trncked offsite.

36. A local Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permits. This plan shall include, but not be limited to:
a. Designated areas for the storage of construction materials that do not disrupt drainage patterns or subject the material to erosion by site runoff; b. Designated area for the construction portable toilets that separates them from storm water runoff and limits the potential for upset; and
c. Designated areas for disposal and recycling facilities for solid waste separated from the site drainage system to prevent the discharge of runoff through the waste.

37. The proposed project is a commercial development. All commercial development<; shall be designed to control the rw.ioff of pollutants from structures, parking and loading docks. The following measures shall be implemented to minimize the impacts of commercial developments on water quality:
a. Properly designed parking lots (5,000 square feet of impervious surface or 25 parking spaces)
l) Minimize impervious surfacing for parking area.
2) Infiltrate runoff before it reaches a storm drain system. 3) Treat to remove oil and petroleum hydrocarbons at parking lots that are heavily used. 4) Ensure adequate operation and maintenance of treatment systems particularly sludge and oil removal and system fouling and plugging prevention control. b. Trash storage areas
I) Trash container areas must have drainage from adjoining roofs and pavement diverted around the area.
2) Trash container areas must be screened or walled to prevent offsite transport of trash.

38. A water quality mitigation plan (WQMP) is required for the project. This document is also commonly known as a standard urban stormwater management plan (SUSMP). The WQMP shall be supported by a hydraulic study that analyzes the pre-development and postdevelopment drainage of the site. The WQMP shall include the following elements:
a. Site design BMPs
b. Source control BMPs
c. Treatment control BMPs
d. Drainage improvement<;
e. Methods for oosite percolation, site revegetation and an analysis for offsite project Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

87 impacts
f. Measures to treat and infiltrate runoff from impervious areas g. A plan for maintenance and monitoring of the proposed treatment BMPs for the expected life of the structures.

39. The WQMP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to approval of grading, drainage or building plans and pennit issuance. The Public Works Department shall tentatively approve the plan and keep a copy of the plan until the completion of the project. Upon project completion, the applicant shall verify the installation of the BMPs, make any revisions to the plan, and resubmit to the Public Works Department for approval. The original signed and notarized document shall be recorded with the County Recorder against the property to serve as constrnctive notice to future property owners of their obligation to maintain the water quality measures installed during construction.

40. Geology and geotechnical reports shall be submitted with all applications for plan review to the Public Works Department. Approval by Geology and Geotechnical Engineering shall be provided prior to the final acceptance of the Public Works Department. 'The developer's consulting engineer shall sign the final plans prior to the issuance of permits.

41. The proposed improvements are located within a Special flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and were evaluated as a substantial improvement. Any structure being substantially improved/repaired is considered new construction and must meet all the rcquirement'l of the City of Malibu Floodplain Management Ordinance. A copy of the Elevation Certificate approved in the past for these buildings or a new Elevation Certificate based on the construction drawings for proposed improvements is required. A survey map shall be attached to this certificate showing the location of the proposed building(s) in relation to the property lines, and to the street centerline. The survey map shall delineate the boundary of the SFHA zone(s) based on the FIRM flood maps in effect and provide i:nfonnation for the benchmark utilized, the vertical datum and any datum conversion.

Onsite Wastewater Treatment System

42. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Building Official, compliance with the City of Malibu's Onsite Wastewater Treatment regulations including provisions of LIP Section 18.9 related to continued operation, maintenance and monitoring of onsite facilities.

43. Prior to final Environmental Health approval, a final AOWTS plot plan shall be submitted showing an AOWTS design meeting the minimum requirements of the Malibu Plumbing Code (MPC) and the LCP, including riec_essary construction details, the proposed drainage plan for the developed property and the proposed landscape plan for the developed property.

The AOWTS plot plan shall show essential features of the AOWTS and must fit onto an 11 inch by 17 inch sheet leaving a five inch margin clear to provide space for a City applied legend. If the scale of the plans is such that more space is needed to clearly show construction details and/or all necessary setbacks, larger sheets may also be provided (up to a maximum size of 18 inches by 22 inches).

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

88 44. A final design and system specifications shall be submitted as to all components (i.e. alarm system, pumps, timers, flow equalization devices, backflow devices, etc.) proposed for use in the construction of the proposed AOWTS. Final design drawings and calculations must be signed by a California registered civil engineer who is responsible for the design. The designer must also be a registered OWTS designer with the City of Malibu. The final AOWTS design report and drawings shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Administrator with the designer's wet signature, professional registration number and stamp.

45. Prior to final Environmental Health approval, the following design issues must be resolved:
a. Waste Discharge Requirements - The City of Malibu may retain lead permitting responsibility for the existing discharge pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Malibu and the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Regarding Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems (MOU).

Under the MOU, the City of Malibu is obligated to issue pennits for small flow (up to 2,000 gallons per day) non=food related .commercial facilities' OWTS in accordance with RWQCB General Waste Discharge Requirements for Small Commercial and Multifamily Residential Subsurface Sewage Disposal Systems (Order No. 01 -131 ). b. Treatment System Design - The AOWTS final design must address the treatment objectives expressed iJ1 the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) Order No. 01-131, unless the RWQCB specifies another WDR order. Please note that while the wastewater system renovation project has been approved in-concept for the CDP, the final design of the treatment train may need to be modified from what has been shown in the Conformance Review submittal (Ensitu Engineering report and preliminary plan dated 1-9-2013) in order to meet all applicable WDR requirements.

46. Final plans shall clearly show the locations of all existing OWfS components (serving preexisting development) to be abandoned and provide procedures for the OWTS' proper abandonment in confonnance with the MPC.

47. The following note shall be added to the plan. drawings included in the OWTS final design. "Prior to commencing work to abandon, remove, or replace existing onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS) components an 'OWTS Abandonment Pem1it' shall be obtained from tbe City of Malibu. All work performed in the OWTS abandonment, removal or replacement area shall be perfonned in strict accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental and occupational safety and health requirements. The obtainment of any such required permits or approvals for this scope of work shall be the responsibility of the applicant and their agents."

48. All proposed reductions in setback from the OWTS to structures (i.e., setbacks less than those shown in MPC Table K-1) must be supported by a letter from the project structural engineer and a letter from the project soils engineer (i.e., the geotechnical engineer or civil engineer practicing in the area of soils engineering). Both engineers must certify unequivocally that the proposed reduction in setbacks from the treatment tank and effluent dispersal area will not adversely affect the structural integiity of the OWTS, and will not adversely affect the structural integrity of the structures for which the Table K-1 setback is reduced.

The wastewater plans and the construction plans must be specifically referenced in all certification letters. The construction plans for all stn1cturcs and/or buildings with reduced Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

89 setback must be approved by the Building Safety Division prior to Environmental Health final approval. The architectural and/or structural plans submitted for building plan check must detail methods of construction that will compensate for the reduction in setback (e.g., waterproofing, concrete additives, etc.). For complex waterproofing installations, submittal of a separate waterproofing plan may be required. TI1e architectural/structural/waterproofing plans must show the location of OWTS components in relation to those structures from which the setback is reduced, and the plans must be signed and stamped by the architect, structural engineer, and geotcchnical consultants (as applicable).

49. Proof of ownership of subject property shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Administrator.

50. An operations and maintenance manual specified by the AOWTS designer shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Administrator. This shall be the same operations and maintenance manual submitted to the owner and/or operator of the proposed AOWTS following installation. The AOWTS designer shall include recommended minimum operator qualifi cations in the manual.

51. Prior to final Environmental HealtJ1 approval, a maintenance contract executed between the owner of the subject property and an entity qualified in the opinion of the City of Malibu to maintain the proposed AOWTS after construction shall be submitted. Only original wet signature documents are acceptable and shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Administrator.

52. Prior to final Environmental Health approval, a covenant which runs with the land shall be executed between the City of Malibu and the holder of the fee simple absolute as to subject real property and recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office. Said covenant shall serve as constructive, notice to any future purchaser for value that the OWTS serving subject property is an alternative method of onsite wastewater disposal pursuant to the City of Malibu Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix K, Section 1 (i). Said covenant shall be provided by the City of Malibu Environmental Health Administrator and shall be submitted to the City of Malibu with proof of recordation by the Los Angeles County Recorder. 53 . Prior to final Environmental Health approval, a covenant running with the land shall be executed by the property owner and recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office.

Sajd covenant shall serve as constmctive notice to any successors in interest that ( 1) tJ1e private sewage disposal system serving the development on the property does not have a 100 percent expansion effluent dispersal area (i.e., replacement disposal field(s) or seepage pit(s)) and (2) if the primary effluent dispersal area fails to drain adequately, the City of Malibu may require remedial measures including, but not limited to, limitations on water use enforced through an operating permit and/or repairs, upgrades or modifications to the private sewage disposal system and, therefore, any building(s) served by the private sewage disposal system may become non-habitable during any required future maintenance and/or repair. Said covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and approved by the Environmental Sustainability Department.

54. Final approval by the City Geologist and Geotechnical Engineer, City Coastal Engineer, and City Planning Department shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Administrator.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

90 55. ln accordance with M.M.C. Chapter 15.14, an application shall be made to the Environmental . and Building Safety Division for an OWTS operating permit.

Biology/Landscaping

56. Prior to final Planning approval, if the property is serviced by Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 29, submit to the City Biologist the landscape water use approval from that department. For approval, contact Jonathan King, at Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, 23533 Civic Center Way, Malibu, CA 90265, or at (310) 317- 1388, or (preferred) JKing(a),DPW.LACOUNTY.GOV.

57. Invasive plant species, as determined by the City of Malibu, are prohibited.

58. Vegetation shall be situated on the property so as not to significantly obstruct the primary view from private property at any given time (given consideration of its future growth).

59. Vegetation forming a view impermeable condition (hedge), serving the same function as a ence or wall, occurring within the side or rear yard setback, shall be maintained at or below six (6) foet in height. View impenneable hedges within the front yard setback serving the same purpose as a fence or wall shall be maintained at or below 42 inches in height.

60. The landscape plan shall prohibit the use of building materials treated with toxic compounds such as copper arsenate.

61. Prior to final landscape inspection, submit a signed copy of the Certificate of Inspection certifying the u-rigation installation and operational efficiency are consistent with approved plans.

62. Grading/excavation/construction shall be scheduled only during the dry season from April 1 to October 3 I. lf it becomes necessary to conduct construction activities from November l to March 31, a comprehensive erosion control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to issuance of a construction permit and implemented prior to initiation of vegetation removal and/or construction activities.

Water Service

63. ,, Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a Will Serve letter from Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 29 indicating the ability of the property to receive adequate water service.

Demolition/Solid Waste

64. The applicant/property owner shall contract with a City approved hauler to facilitate the recycling of all recoverable/recyclable material. Recovernble material shall include but shall not be limited to: asphalt, dirt and earthen material, lumber, concrete, glass, metals, and drywall.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

91 65. Prior to the issuance of a building/demolition permit, a Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan (WRRP) shall be submitted to the Environmental and Sustainability Department for review and approval. 'The WRRP shall indicate means and measures for a minimum of 50 percent diversion goal.

66. Upon plan check approval of demolition plans, the applicant shall secure a demolition permit from the City. The applicant shall comply with all conditions related lo demolition imposed by the Deputy Building Official.

67. No demolition permit shall be issued until building pem1its are approved for issuance.

Demolition of the existing structure and initiation of reconstruction must take place within a six month period. Dust control measures must be in place if construction does not commence within 30 days.

68. The project developer shall utilize licensed subcontractors and ensure that all asbestoscontaining materials and lead-based paints encountered during demolition activities are removed, transported, and disposed of in full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local regulations.

69. Any building or demolition permits issued for work commenced or completed without the benefit of required permits are subject to appropriate "Investigation Fees" as required in the Building Code.

70. Upon completion of demolition activities, th~ applicant shall request a final inspection by the Planning Department and Environmental and Sustainability Department to ensure compliance with the signed Substantial Remodel Agreement and approved project plans.

Construction I Framing I Shoreline Protection

71. Construction hours shall be limited to Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. No construction activities shall be permitted on Sundays or City-designated holidays.

72. Constmction management techniques, including minimizing the amount of equipment used simultaneously and increasing the distance between emission sources, shall be employed as feasible and appropriate. All trucks leaving the construction site shall adhere to the California Vehicle Code. In addition, construction vehicles shall be covered when necessary; and their tires will be rinsed off prior to leaving the property.

73. When framing is complete, a site survey shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer or architect that states the centerline elevation of Pacific Coast Highway, the existing finished floor elevation and the highest roof member elevation for the landside and oceanside portions of the project. Prior to the commencement of further construction activities, said document shall be submitted to the assigned Building Inspector and Planning Department for review and sign off on framing.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

92 74. The following construction management measures to protect coastal resources shall be implemented for the project:
a. All construction debris shall be removed from the beach daily and at completion of development.
b. No stockpiling of dirt or construction materials shall occur on the beach. c. Measures to control erosion, runoff, and siltation shall be implemented at the end of each day's work.
d. No machinery shall be allowed in the intertidal zone at any time unless necessary for protection of life and/or property.
e. The application shall not store any construction materials or waste where it will be or could potentially be subject to wave erosion and dispersion. f. Construction equipment shall not be cleaned on the beach. g. Construction debris and sediment shall be properly contained and secured on site with BMPs to prevent the unintended transport of sediment and other debris into coastal waters by wind, rain or tracking.

Deed Restrictions

75. Prior to grading permit issuance, the property owner is required to sign and record at the County of Los Angeles Recorder's Office, and submit to City geotechnical staff a certified copy of an "Assumption of Risk and Release" for geotechnical hazards.

76. The property owner is required to acknowledge, by recordation of a deed restriction, that the property is subject to wave action, erosion, flooding, landslides, liquefaction or other hazards associated with development on a beach or bluff, and that the property owner assumes said risks and waives any futme claims of damage or liability against the City and agrees to indemnify the City against any liability, claims, damages or expenses arising from any injury or damage due to such hazards. The property owner shall provide a copy of the recorded document to Planning Department staff prior to fmal Planning approval.

77. The property owner is required to execute and record a deed restriction which shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees against any and all claims, demands, damages, costs and expenses of liability arising out of the acquisition, design, construction, operation, maintenance, existence or failure of the permitted project in an area where an extraordinary potential for damage or destruction from wildfire exists a5 an inherent risk to life and property. The property owner shall provide a copy of the recorded document to Planning Department staff prior to final Planning approval.

78. lbe property owner is required to acknowledge, by the recordation of a deed restriction, that no future repair or maintenance, enhancement, reinforcement, or any other activity affecting the shoreline protection structure which extends the seaward footprint of the subject structure shall be undertaken and that he/she expressly waives any right to such activities that may exist under Coastal Act Section 30235. Said deed restriction shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to recordation. The deed restriction shall also aclmowlcdge that the intended purpose of the shoreline protection structure is solely to protect existing structures located on the site, in their present condition and location, including the septic disposal system and that any futme development on the subject site landward of the subject shoreline protection structure including changes to the foundation, major remodels, relocation Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

93 or upgrade of the septic disposal system, or demolition and construction of a new structure shall be subject to a requirement that a new coastal development permit be obtained for the shoreline protection structure unless the City determines that such activities are minor in nature or otherwise do not affect the need for a shoreline protection structure.

79. Prior to final planning approval, the applicant shall be required to execute and record a deed restriction reflecting lighting requirements set forth in the Lighting conditions above. The property owner shaJl provide a copy of the recorded document to Planning Department staff prior to final Planning approval.

Prior to Occupancy

80. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department a post-construction SFHA Elevation Certificate to certify building elevations after construction is complete.

81. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall provide the Environmental and Sustainability Department with a Final WRRP for review and approval. This report shall designate all materials that were land filled and recycled, broken down into material types.

82. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the City Biologist shall inspect the project site and determine that all planning conditions to protect natural resources are implemented in compliance with approved plans, and that the project complies with the landscape docWJ1entation package and the Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance.

83. The applicant shall request a final Planning inspection prior to final inspection by the City of Malibu Environmental and Sustainability Department. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued until the Planning Department has determined that the project complies with th.is CDP. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be granted at the discretion of the Planning Director, provided adequate security has been deposited with the City to ensure compliance should the final work not be completed in accordance with this permit.

84. A certified copy of the final approved and recorded WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

85. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall obtain a sight distance approval from Caltrans at the existing driveway into Pacific Coast Highway. The applicant shall submit the approval to the Public Works Department.

86. Any construction trailer, storage equipment or similar temporary equipment not permitted as part of the approved scope of work shall be removed prior to final inspection and approval, and if applicable, the issuance of the certificate of occupancy.

Fixed Conditions

87. This coastal development pem1it shall run with the land and bind all future owners of the property.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32
Page28 of30
94 88. Violation of any of the conditions of this approval may be cause for revocation ofthis permit and ten:nination of all rights granted there under.

Additional Conditions

89. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shaJl submit to the Planning Department for review a determination letter from the California State Lands Commission.

90. In order to implement the property owner's proposal of an offer to dedicate an easement for lateral public access and passive recreational use along the shoreline as part ohms project, the property owner agrees to complete the following prior to final Planning approval: the property owner shall execute and record a docwnent, in a form and content acceptable to the Planning Director and California Coastal Commission (CCC), irrevocably offering to dedicate to a public agency or private association approved by the City and CCC an easement for lateral public access and passive recreational use along the shoreline. The document shall provide that the offer of dedication shall not be used or construed to allow anyone, prior to acceptance of the offer, to interfere with any rights of public access acquired through use which may exist on the property. Such easement shall be located along the entire width of the property from tl1c ambulatory mean high tide line landward to the dripline of the deck.

The document shall be recorded free of prior liens which the Planning Director and/or CCC determines may affect the interest being conveyed, and free of any other encumbrances which may affect said interest. The offer shall run with the land in favor of the People of the State of California, binding all successors and assignees, and the offer shall be irrevocable for a period of 21 years, such period running from the date of recording. The recording document shall include a formal legal description and graphic depiction, prepared by a licensed surveyor, of both the property owner's entire parcel and the easement area.

91. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City the voluntary payment for lower cost visitor-serving accommodations referenced in Condition No. 2(k).

92. Any lane closures of Pacific Coast Highway necessary during project construction shall be in accordance with Caltrans requirements.

93. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a site lighting plan for review and approval by the Planning Director.

94. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit a sign permit application for the project site for review and approval by the Planning Director.

95. Prior to issuance of demolition or building permits, the applicant shall submit a construction management and parking plan for review and approval by the Planning Director.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32

95 Section 6. Certification.

The Planning Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May 2013.

ATTEST:

LOCAL APPEAL - A decision made by the Planning Commission may be appeal.ed 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 filing fee, as specified by the City Council. Appeal forms may be found online at www.malibucity.org, in person at City Hall, or by calling (310) 456-2489, ext. 245.

COASTAL COMMISSION AJ)PEAL- An aggrieved person may appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the Coastal Commission within 10 working days of the issuance of the City's Notice of Final Action. Appeal forms may be found online at www.eoastal.ea.gov or in person at the Coastal Commission South Central Coast District office located at 89 South California Street in Ventura, or by calling (805) 585-1800. Such an appeal must be filed with the Coastal Commission, not the City.

I CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION NO. 13-32 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Malibu at the Regular meeting held on the 6th day of May 2013 by the following vote:

A YES: COMMISSIONERS: BROTMAN, MAZZA, STACK, AND PIERSON NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT: COl\1MISSIONERS: JENNINGS
Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-32
Page JO of30
96 ·1
l
... 1

CITY OF MALIBU PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 15-64

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MALIBU DETiLRMINING THAT THE PROJF,CT IS ·

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND APPROVING COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 13-066 TO ALLOW THE REMOVAL
OF AN EXISTING 800 SQUARE FOOT DECK AND SHORELINE
PROTECTION DEVICE, AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,290 SQUARE
FOOT DECK WITH A 600 SQUARE FOOT SWIMMING POOL ON 17

PILES, A SEAWALL WITH TEN PILES, LANDSCAPING, AN
ALTERNATIVE ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATl\lfENT SYSTEM

AND LEACH FIELD, REPAIR OF A SEAWALL RETURN ON THE
ADJACENT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22752 PACIFIC COAST
IDGHWAY, OFFER TO DEDICATE NO. 15-003 FOR A LATERAL
ACCESS EASEMENT, AND VARIANCE NO. 15-014 FOR THE

PROPOSED SEAWALL STRINGLINE IN THE COMMUNITY
COMl\lfERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 22762 AND 22752 PACIFlC COAST HIGHWAY (WAVEBREAK, LLC AND NORTH

BROADWAY VENTURES, LLC)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DOES HEREI;3Y FIND, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals.

A. On December 17, 2013, the application for Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 13- 066, Variance (VAR) No. 15-014, and Offer to Dedicate (OTD) 15-003 was submitted to the Planning Department by applicant, Studio PCH, on behalf of the property owner, Wavebreak, LLC. The application was routed to the City Biologist, City Environmental Health Administrator, City Coastal Engineer, City geotechnical staff, City Public Works Department and the Los Angeles County Fite Oepartment (LACFD) for review.

B. On November 12, 2014, the applicant submitted revised plans due to a change in project scope.

C. On Febnrary 24, 2015, the Planning Department staff conducted a site visit to document existing site conditions.

D. On February 26, 2015, a Notice of CDP Application was posted on the subject . property.

E . On March 2; 2015, a Coµrtesy Notice of Proposed Project was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500-foot radius of the subjeot property.

Planning Commission Resolution No, 15-64
Page I of21
ATTACHMENT 5
97 _J
F. On May 18, 2015, the project was deemed complete for processing.

G. On June 11, 2015, 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.

H, On July 6, 2015, the Planning Commission continued to the item to the August 3, 2015 Regular Planning Conunission Meeting.

I. On August 3, 2015, the Planning Commission continued the item to a date uncertain in order to address concerns raised by staff related to the use of the property and the proposed pool as an allowable accessory structure in the Community Commercial zoning district.

J. On August 13, 2015, a Notice of Public Hearing was published iri 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.

K. On September 8, 2015, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, reviewed and considered the agenda report, reviewed and considered written reports, public testimony, and other information in the record, and directed staff to prepare a resolution approving the application with the inclusion of condition number three pertaining to use of the pool.

Section 2. Environmental Review.

Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission has analyzed the proposed project The Planning Commission has found that this project is listed among the classes of projects that have been determined not to have significant adverse effect on the environment. Therefore, the project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 (!)( 4) ~ Existing Facilities and 15303(e) - New Construction, The Planning Commission has further determi,ned that none of the six exceptions to the use of a categorical exemption apply to this project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2).

Section 3. Coastal Development Permit Findings.

Based on substantial evidence contained within the record and pursuant to Sections 13.7(B) and 13,9 of the Malibu Local Coastal Program (LCP) Local Implementation Plan (LIP), the Planning Commission adopts the analysis in the agenda report, incorporated herein, the findings of fact below, for CDP No, 13-066 to allow the removal of an existing 8.00 square foot deck and shoreline protection device, and construction of a 2,290 square foot deck with a 600 square foot swimming pool on 17 piles, a seawall with ten piles, landscaping, an alternative ons.ite wastewater treatment system (AOWTS) and leach field, repair of a seawall return on the adjacent property located at 22752 Pacific Coasty Highway (PCH), OTD No. 15- 003 for a lateral access easement, and VAR No. 15-014 for the proposed seawall string line, Pl anning Commission Resolution No, l 5-64

98 l
located in the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district located at 22762 (Wavebreak, LLC) and 22752 PCH (North Broadway Ventures, LLC).

The project is consistent with the LCP's zoning, grading, cultural resources, water quality, and onsite wastewater treatment requirements.· With the inclusion of the proposed variance, the profect, as conditioned, has been determined to be consistent with all applicable LCP codes, stands, goals, and po'iicies. The required findings are made herein.

A. . General Coastal Development Permit (LIP Chapter 13)

1. The project consists of the demolition of an existing deck and shoreline protection device, abandonment of the existing onsite wastewater treatment system, and construction of a new larger deck with a swimming pool, AOWTS, and a new seawall at 22762 PCH (known as the Tide Pool property), and repairs to the existing downcoast return wall at 22752 PCH (known as the Nobu Ryokan property) to which the new seawall will tie in.

Evidence in the record demonstrates that the project, as conditioned, confom1s to the certified Malibu LCP,

2. The project conforms to the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976 (commencing with Section 30200 of the Public Resources Code) as it would not impede access opportunities to the shore, and includes a voluntary offer to dedicate a lateral easement to the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority which supports the proposed California Coastal Trail alignment shown in the pending LCP Parklands and Trails System Map,

3. Based on reports and analyses submitted by the applicant and reviewed and approved by City staff, as conditioned, the project will not result in impacts to coastal resources and has been designed to minimize grading. rfbere is no evidence that ?-ll alternative project would substantially lessen any potential significant adverse impacts of the development on the environment. The project is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative. ·

4. Evidence in the record demonstrates that the project site does not contain ESRA, does not require a biological inventory and that review by the Environmental Review Board is not required.

B, Variance for a Seawall Stringline (LIP Section 3,6(J))

1. A variance is requested for the proposed seawall to be constructed seaward of the string line drawn between the nearest adjacent corners of the protection structures on adjacent Jots. Due to the location of the existing Tide Pool building, the proposed new seawall cannot be located any further landward. Substantial alteration to the building's foundation would be required in order to accommodate the new seawall further landward under the building. Additionally, the proposed leach field is specifically Sized to accommodate the new AOWTS, A new seawall any further landward would deprive the property of an appropriately sized dispersal field and system to provide sufficierit sewage treatment for the existing commercial building.

Planning Commission Resolution No. 15•64

99 : 1 ':,, i

2. The objective of the project is to replace the existing shoreline protection device with a new seawall that will protect the existing Tide Pool structures and the new AOWTS that will serve it. The project wave uprush report and responses prepared by David C. Weiss demonstrate that as proposed and conditioned the project will not be detrimental to the public interest, safety, health or welfare, and will not adversely affect adjacent property improvements.
. 3. · The proposed new seawall is fill upgrade to the current rock revetment and is necessary to protect the new AOWTS that will serve the existing building and its uses which the owner is entitled to maintain. As such, the variance will not constitute a special privilege.

4. The analysis presented in the agenda report, and the record as a whole, reveals that the project is in compliance with the general purposes and intent of LIP Chapter 13, as well as the goals, objectives and policies of the LCP.

5. The new seawall will be situated below the proposed new deck, which complies with the deck stringline, and does not interfere with public access to the shoreline. Further, the applicant has elected to include recordation of an OTD for lateral access in the project, and the offer has been memorialized as a condition of approval in Section 5 of this resolution. The project provides maximum feasible protection to public access.

6. The proposed seawall is needed to protect the AOWTS and existing building foundation. The stringline variance does not allow a use or activity not expressly authorized . by the zoning regulations.

7. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed variance in that there is no feasible alternate location or configuration which would be less environmentally damaging or that would eliminate the need for the variance request. In addition, the proposed project has been reviewed and approved by the City Coastal Engineer, City geotechnical staff, and the City Public Works Department as being physically suitable for the proposed variance. 8, The seawall, as conditioned, will comply with the requirements of state and local law in that construction will be issued subject to compliance with building code requirements and incorporation of all recommendations from ·applicable City and County departments,
C. Scenic, Visual apd Hillside Resource Protection (LIP Chapter 6)

1. · The project consists of demolition of the existing shoreline protection device and removal of the onsite wastewater treatment system, and construction of a seawall, deck with a pool and foundation, AOWTS and leach field, and landscaping, With the inclusion of the conditions set forth in Section 5 of this resolution, the structures will blend with the surrounding environment. No scenic views are blocked and the project will not have significant adverse scenic or visual impacts.

Planning Commission Resolution No , 15-64

100

2. · The project, as conditioned, will not have adverse scenic or visual impacts.

3. The project, as conditioned, is the least envirorirnentally damaging alternative.

4. There are no feasible alternatives to development that would avoid or substantially lessen any significant adverse impacts on scenic and visual resources.

5. As conditioned, development on the site will not have significant adverse impacts on scenic or visual resources,
D. Hazards (LIP Chapter 9)

1. The project consists of improvements to an existing developed beachfront property. The project has been reviewed and conceptually approved with conditions by the City geofochnical staff, City Public Works Department and the City Coastal Engineer, as well as the LACFD. The proposed project will incorporate the recommendations of the project consulting geotechnical and coastal engineers to meet the LCP requirements for wave uprush, FEMA and geotechnical hazards. The record demonstrates that the project as proposed and conditioned will not increase instability of the site or structural integrity from geologic, flood, fire, wave upru.sh or other hazards.

2. TI1e project has been conditioned to require implementation of a Shoreline Protection Device Monitoring Program, consistent with the City's Floodplain Management Ordinance contained in Malibu Municipal Code (M.M.C.) Chapter 15.20, and recordation of an "Assumption of Risk and Release" for liquefaction and coastal hazards; and an indemnification of the City from wildfire hazards.

3. The project, as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

4. The record demonstrates that there are no alternatives that would avoid or substantially lessen impacts on site stability or structural integrity.

5. No adverse impacts to sensitive resources are expected.

E. Shoreline and Bluff Development (LIP Chapter 10)
1, The proposed project will have no significant adverse. impacts on public a~cess, shoreline sand S11pply or other resources due to the design of the project, its location on the site and existing conditions. The City Coastal Engineer has determined that the new seawall will protect the new AOWTS and existing development only, with no impacts to beach access or shoreline sand supply, and the new deck and swimming pool will rely on their own pile foundations in accordance with recommendations by the project coastal engineer, and will not extend past the deck strlngline nor into the ten foot setback from the most landward mean high tide line. ·
Planning Commission Resolution No. 15-64

101

2. The project, as conditioned, will not have significant adverse impacts on public access, shoreline sand supply or other resources due to conditions of approval requiring recordation of the voluntary offer to dedicate lateral access along the shore and the owner's acknowledgement that no future repair or maintenance, enhancement, reinforcement, or any other activity affecting the shoreline protection structure which extends the seaward footprint of the subject shoreline protection structure will be allowed.

3. The project, as proposed or as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

4. There are no alternatives to the proposed development that would avoid or substantially lessen impacts on public access, shoreline sand supply or other resources, 5, The project coastal engineer and City Coastal Engineer have determined that the proposed seawall is located as far landward as feasible to protect the new AOWTS and the existing site development. Further, the project will replace an existing rock revetment with a seawall that meets the intent of LIP Section 10.4(N) and will be in a more landward location.

No impacts to shoreline sand supply or public access are expected, and a new lateral access OTD will be recorded as a condition of the project. The proposed project, as designed and conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

F. · Public Access (LIP Chapter 12)
The applicant has elected to support the LCP's public access policies by recording a lateral pubUc access easement along the shore as a condition of project approval. The easement will allow public passive recreational use between the proposed deck and the ambulatory mean high tide line (MHTL), No potential project-related or cumulative impact on public access and/or recreation is anticipated to result from the proposed new seawall and deck, or from installation of the new AOWTS, and the project confonns to the public. access and recreational policies in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976. No legitimate governmental or public interest would be furthered by requiring vertical access at the project site because: 1) existing access to coastal resources is adequate; and 2) the proposed project will not impact the public's ability to access the shoreline or other coastal resources.

Section 4. Planning Commission Action.

Based on the foregoing findings and evidence contained within the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves CDP No. 13-066, VAR No, 15-014 and OTD No. 15-003, subject to the following conditions.

Section 5. Conditions of Approval.

1. The property owner/applicant or their successor shall indemnify and defend the City of Malibu and its officers, employees and agents from and against all liability and costs relating to the City's actions concerning this project, including (without limitation) any award of litigation expenses in favor of any person or entity who seeks to challenge the Planning Commission Resolution No. 15-64
·

102
:. ) l..J
validity of any of the City's actions or decisions in connection with this project, The City shall have the sole right to choose its counsel and property owners shall reimburse the City's expenses incurred in its defense of any lawsuit challenging the City's actio�s concerning this project.

2. Approval of this application is to allow for the following:

Demolition of:
.a. Existing 800 square foot deck, bulkhead and rock revetment; and b. Existing onsite wastewater treatment system.

Construction/Installation of:
c. 2,290 square foot deck with 17 foundation piles;
d. 600 square foot swimming pool;
e. 11 '-6" tall, 65 feet wide seawall with 10 foundation piles; f, 5.3 foot long return wall along the west side of property; g. Repair of22752 PCH return wall, including removal of 14 feet in length; h. Landscaping; and
i. 3,000 gallon AOWTS and 1,825 square foot subsurface dispersal field Offer to Dedicate
j. OTD No. 15-003 for a lateral access easement to allow public access between the dripline of the structure and the MHTL.

Variance
k. VAR No. 15-014 for the proposed seawall to be located seaward of the shoreline protection stringline as drawn from the two adjacent properties.

3. Use of the pool is restricted to the occupants of the existing office building. Use of the pool by any other person or for any other purpose is thus strictly prohibited unless or until any necessary approvals are obtained from the City that would allow use of the pool by individuals other than the occupants of the office building.

4. No residential use of the building is allowed.

5. The offices in the garage shall be removed once the building permit for the construction of the motel at 22752 Pacific Coast Highway is finaled. The garages cannot be used as offices W1!ess or until any necessary approvals are obtained from the City for 6,
conversion of the garage into office space.

Subsequent submittals for this project shall be in substantial compliance with the plans on file with the Planning Department; date-stamped July 17, 2015. The project shall comply with all conditions of approval stipulated in the referral sheets attached to the agenda report for this project. In the event the project plans conflict with any condition of approval, the condition shall take precedence.

Planning Commission Resolution No, 15-64