by Mark McDermott
Project Verandas, a 79-unit apartment building proposed on
Rosecrans Avenue was administratively approved this week by the City of Manhattan Beach.
The approval had been pending since the project plan was submitted late last year, but was not unexpected, due to the project’s eligibility for non-discretionary, streamlined administrative review under the state’s housing density bonus laws.
On Monday, Community Development director Carrie Tai issued a two-page document permitting the project to proceed. The project proposal, Tai noted, “includes the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a new, 96,217 square-foot, four-story multifamily residential structure, 37 to 50-feet in height, containing 79 rental dwelling units, six of which will be set aside for ‘very low income’ households, with an attached 127-car, subterranean garage.” Tai also noted that state laws dictate the project be approved without the usual “discretionary” review by the Planning Commission, which typically has more latitude to reject or amend a project.
Project Verandas developer Frank Buckley issued a statement Monday in which he likewise said that the proposal met all requirements for approval.
“I am pleased that today’s letter of decision from the City of Manhattan Beach’s Community Development Director indicates that Project Verandas has complied with all State and local regulations,” Buckley said.
The project has faced community opposition since it was publicly noticed in early January, including a Change.org petition that has collected over 3,000 signatures, and opposing testimony during public comment at City Council meetings.
“This is a disaster in every sense of the word,” said resident Dan Finerly, in remarks to the Council on January 18. “Just imagine a four-story campus where Verandas currently is — it will be a complete blight on our community and have multiple adverse impacts.
“El Porto cannot handle any traffic increase,” said resident Jeremy Shelton. “I mean, can you imagine having another 150 to 200 cars clogging up that artery heading north?”
Buckley has established ProjectVerandas.com, in an effort to address some of the concerns, specifically that it will generate more traffic and take away parking in North Manhattan Beach. The opposite, Buckley said, is true.
“Project Verandas will accomplish some important goals for our community, including increasing available public parking in the area and generating less traffic than other potential uses,” Buckley said.
In an interview, Buckley said he was surprised at how quickly opposition formed given the fact that the project is located on a slope of the hill just below the Chevron oil tanks. But he also expressed optimism that when the details of the project are better understood that opposition might dissipate.
“We thought of every location in Manhattan Beach. This would be the most well-received, given that the only view you are blocking is of the refinery,” Buckley said. “And you are taking two buildings that are currently under-parked, and utilizing the Chevron parking lot, and the City parking lot for parking. By redeveloping this underutilized parcel, you are able to free up north of 200 spaces that are currently being used by existing commercial uses.”
The project exceeds parking requirements, providing 24 spaces beyond the 103 required by law. Buckley said it was important to him to go above and beyond to ensure Project Verandas actually improves neighborhood parking.
“It’s obviously a very difficult parking garage, because it’s irregular in size and shape, and it’s on a 30 foot slope, and it’s sand,” he said. “And so this is an expensive garage, but we decided to go ahead and overbuild the garage to make sure we had enough spaces for the anticipated occupancy. We think parking is going to be improved pretty dramatically.”
The developer also paid for a traffic impact study, which determined that the project would generate less traffic than the existing Verandas event space, and Tradewinds office (and bar) building. The study, conducted by traffic engineering firm Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, showed that existing uses generate 931 daily traffic trips while Project Verandas is projected to create 578, for a net reduction of 353 trips.
“The fact is that the proposed project yields less of an impact than the existing uses,” Buckley said.
City planning manager Talyn Mirzakhanian said that the City’s traffic engineer conducted an independent, peer review of the traffic study and arrived at the same conclusion. The study also contemplated a redevelopment of the site at its maximum allowable, which would be a 65,000 sq. ft. shopping center and would generate 541 more trips than current uses, or a more than 50 percent increase.
“I’ve been in this industry for a very long time, particularly in the government sector, and I’ve been doing these kinds of reviews and projects for a very long time,” Mirzakhanian said. “And these residential projects, it’s always the same — they produce less traffic than any commercial project ever would.”
In any case, the approval of a project such as Project Verandas, Mirzakhanian said, is not at the City’s discretion, so long as it complies with state law.
“The best way to put it is that when a project goes through a discretionary process, the decision making body in question — the Planning Commision, for example — can insert a level of discretion into the decision making,” she said. “It gives them room to be able to say, ‘No, we think there’s going to be an adverse impact, even though it meets all the code requirements…. In this circumstance, the City cannot exert that level of discretion. It has to be based purely on technical compliance with the law.”
Given existing opposition, an appeal of Project Verandas remains likely. At a cost of $500, any member of the public can appeal Tai’s ruling to the Planning Commission, and if two members of the City Council request it, the project could be subject to council review. ER
