Planning commission approves 305 Beacon hotel after removing rooftop pool

The Avalon Planning Commission on a split decision approved a conditional use permit, site plan and several variances for a proposed two‑story hotel at 305 Beacon Street after commissioners amended the proposal to remove a rooftop pool.

Staff described the phased project as demolition of a long‑vacant single‑family house and construction of a two‑story hotel with nine guest rooms and one employee housing studio. The project would share operations with a nearby hotel at 301 Beacon Street and requires variances for lot coverage (requested 93% vs. 80% allowed), floor area (166% vs. 140%) and height. Staff recommended approval, subject to conditions including a recorded 10‑foot shared access easement and a requirement that phase‑2 occupancy not proceed until an additional written water allocation from Southern California Edison (SCE) is confirmed.

Neighboring residents urged denial. Tina Conover Hayden, who lives at 310 Metropole and backs onto the site, argued the topographic basis for the height variance no longer exists because recent permitted grading and shoring work have flattened portions of the lots. "The natural slope and natural surface that previously existed have now been eliminated by the permitted grading," she told commissioners, and said the rooftop additions "increase height and bulk" with no public benefit.

Developer representative Mike Flynn said the buildings are structurally separate but designed to operate together and defended the elevator and rooftop structures as needed for accessibility and operations. "If you don't permit a rooftop deck, the elevator does not have to go that high," Flynn said, adding that the elevator height is driven by accessibility and gurney readiness.

After extended discussion, an initial motion to approve the project as submitted failed (3 yes, 2 no, 1 abstain). Commissioners then considered a revised motion to adopt staff recommendations but exclude the rooftop pool; the applicant indicated willingness to proceed without the pool, and the commission approved the amended motion (vote recorded as 5 yes, 1 no).

Conditions of approval require the shared access easement be recorded before issuance of construction permits, and no phase‑2 finish‑out or occupancy can occur until Edison confirms the additional water allocation in writing. Staff also reiterated that any future amplified sound or special events would require separate permits under the city's special event rules.

The commission's action resolves the project's entitlements as conditioned; the applicant may proceed with phase‑1 construction and the limited rooftop deck (without the pool) consistent with the conditions.