SR-8-B (86)J~~'v ~ y ~.._
PCD SF JT AB1f 1 lan~sharelmoratonumlccre ort doc ~
P P
Councd Mtg June 29. 1999 Santa Monica, California
TO Mayor and City Councd
FROM City Staff
SUBJECT Extension of Intenm Emergency Ordinance No 1944 of the City Councd of
the City of Santa Mornca Enacting a Moratonum on Multi-Family Residential
Development in the City's Multi-Famdy Residential Distncts
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Councd extend Interim Emergency Ordinance No
1944 enact~ng a moratonum on multi-family residential development ~n multi-famdy zones
for a penod of nine months This extension is necessary to provide su~cient time to further
evaluate the effects of substantial increases in the rate of development in multi-family
zones and develop appropriate requirements and programs to protect the City's multi-
family neighborhoods and preserve its affordable housing
BACKGROUND
Dunng the last six months, residents appeared before the Council on several occasions
expressing concern about rapid change in the community adversely impacting the City's
diversity, charm and quality of Irfe The council directed staff to evaluate the residents'
concerns and propose interim legislative solutions On May 25, 1999, the City Counal
adopied {nterim Emergency Ord~nance No 1944, which established a 45-day moratorium
on multi-famdy development in the City's multi-family residential districts with specific
exceptions. The purpose of the temporary moratorwm was to allow time for the City to
1
8~
JUN 2 g ~~y9
evaluate and develop requirements and programs to preserve the City's character,
diversity, and quality of life as they relate to multi-family neighborhoods and affordable
housing An extension of the moratorwm is necessary to properly evaluate these issues
and develop appropriate requirements and programs
DISCUSSION
Loss of Affordable Housing:
The loss of affordable housing described in the May 25"' staff report continues According
to the most recent Rent Control Board analysis of the impact of Costa-Hawkins (Exhibit B),
a total of 855 affordable housing units have been lost between January 1 and May 15,
1999 Moreover, the analysis "supports the pro~ection that 2,359 units that had been
affordable at 80°/a of inedian income will be lost by the end of 1999 " The loss of affordable
housing results, in part, from a significant increase in demolihon and construction actroities
within the multi-famdy residential distncts in the City Between 1994 and May 24, 1999,
demolition permits for 256 housing units in multi-family zones were approved or pending
approval More importantly, these demolition permits represent significant numbers of
affordable housmg units m Santa Mornca Between January 1997 and May 1999,
applications have been submitted to demolish approximately 157 housing units in multi-
family zones, replacing them with 236 housing units Whde this trend provides a net gain
in housing units, it continues to erode the City's stock of affordable housing The City
experienced a net loss of approximately 109 affordable housing units during the January
1997 to May 1999 penod, for example
2
Neighborhood Impacts:
As discussed in the staff report of May 25, which recommended adoption of an emergency
ordinance, there has been a significant increase in multi-unit construction over the last fve
years This accelerated construction brings with it increases in noise impacts, traffic
congestion, dust, loss of neighborhood character, loss of pedestnan scale, degradation of
neighborhood aesthetics and other adverse effects Consequently, it has exacerbated
neighborhood disruption and further limited the qwet en~oyment of residents' homes and
neighborhoods. Resident complaints and public testimony at the May 11 and May 25 City
Council meetmgs illustrate the breadth and scope of these impacts
Time Needed to Evaluate Effects & Develop Requirements and Programs:
The preliminary data evaluated by staff indicate that the substantial growth of construction
in multi-famdy zones not only undermines the character and quality of these
neighborhoods, it leads to a further erosion in the Cit~s stock of affordable housing These
data warrant further and more detatled analysis so that requirements and programs to
address the problems associated with the growth in construction, neighborhood impacts
and the loss of affordable housing can be developed To address these issues, staff
proposes to focus on four pnmary areas of concern and study including construction rate,
housing preservation incentwes, affordable housing fees, and evaluation of housing
policies Staff proposes to. (1) evaluate the growth in the rate of construction wiihin these
multi-famdy neighborhoods, mcluding establishment of a construction rate limii, or cap, (2)
assess the possibilities for providing incentives io encourage preservation of existing
3
affordable housing stock, (3) further analyze housing economics in relation to the City's
affordable housing fee, and, (4) evaluate housing poliaes in the context of SCAG's recent
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) pro~ections and related State legislation that
allows cities, under certain circumstances, to count rehabflitated urnts toward their fair
share (RHNA) allocation This further analysis and policy development is necessary to
understand the underlying problems and develop strategies that address them This work
effort wdl take approximately six to nine months to complete
Extension of Interim Emergency Ordinance:
Extension of the interim emergency ordmance is necessary to provide sufficient time to
analyze the issues outlined in this report The recommended term of the extension is nine
months, or untd March 28, 2000 The substance of the intenm emergency ordinance that
is recommended in this report (Attachment A) is identical to the ordinance adopted on May
25, 1999, with one exception The current ordinance provides an additional exemption for
uninhabitable units that cannot be rendered habitable in an economically feasible manner
BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT
Extension of the moratorwm and the subsequent analysis outlined above wdl reqwre re-
evaluation of housing poliaes, which may also require an environmental rewew pursuant
to the California Enwronmental Quality Act (CEQA) The housing and CEQA analysis wdl
cost approximately $125,000 Provision has been made for this expenditure in the
proposed FY 99/00 budget
4
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Councd adopt the proposed interim emergency ordinance
extending the moratorwm for nine months
Prepared by Suzanne Fnck, Director
Jay Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager
Art Bashmakian, Contract Planner
Planning and Community Development Department
Attachment A Proposed Intenm Ordinance
B Rent Control Board Memorandum Regarding Impact of Market Rate
Vacanaes From January 1 to May 15, 1999
C Public Notice
f \atty\muni\lawslbarrylmoratora 4 wpd
City Council Meeting 6-29-99 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER 1947 (CCS)
(City Councd Senes)
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ON MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTiAL
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY'S MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,
DECLARING THE PRESENCE OF AN EMERGENCY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS
SECTION 1 Findinqs and Purpose The Council finds and declares
(a) Drastic changes in state law and the local economy have propelled the City to
a crossroad m its history at which the City must now pause to ensure that its land use laws
and policies are adequate to ensure its future welfare
(b) The gravity of this situation is greatly intensified by the fact that Santa Monica
has much to lose Located at the westem edge of the Los Angeles basin, the City affords
a unique combination of natural splendors -- broad beaches, stunning views, mdd weather
and clean air -- together with sophisticated urban amenities and a community scale that
respects both the natural environment and individual needs All this exists in a very small
space -- ~ust eight square mdes
(c) In that small space, the City teems with activity It is home to 90,000 residents,
and its population density, 11,200 persons per square mile, is the highest among coastal
1
communitiesinLosAngelesCounty SantaMonicaisalsotheworkpiaceforapproximately
155,000 workers and a destination for as many as 400,000 dady visitors Thus, extreme
density complicates planning efforts and makes preservation ofthe quality of life a difficult
challenge
(d) Moreover, planning difficulties are exacerbated by the factthat the City is fully
budt-out and has been so for decades As of November 1995, there were only sucty-two
(62) vacant residential parcels out of approximately 6,132 multi-family zoned parcels in the
entire City Since then, even this limited number of vacant parcels has shrunk Thus,
plann~ng flexibdity is limded by the reality that residential development in the City's
residential distncts means change -- not expansion -- and virtually any new pro~ect or
construction replaces an existing structure or improvement
(e) Planning difficulties are most acute m the multi-famdy districts which are the
largest and densest in the City Santa Monica has the highest percentage of land zoned
multi-famdy residential among westside/south bay ~unsdictions Permitted densities in
these zones range from approximately 29 units to approximately 48 units per acre As
a result ofthese standards, the vast ma~onty of City residents live in multi-family dwellings
Most of them Iroe in the City's 37,000 apartment units
(~ In the past, the dynamic created by competmg demands for use of a small,
choice space has brought the City to crossroads on other occasions In the late 1970's,
the City faced a severe shortage of rental housmg precipitated in part by a"Demolition
Derby" -- a fifteen (15) month period dunng which over 1,300 rental housmg units were
demolished and hundreds of others were converted into condominiums These housing
2
-~
units were removed from the market at ten (10) times the rate of removal (relative to
population) of Los Angeles
(g) The City Councd wrestled with the policy issues raised by the Demolition Derby
but could not resolve them So the voters took controi. They amended the City Charter by
adopting a stringent Rent Control Law The law imposed stnct controls on rents, which
applied even when units were vacated, and restncted the demolition or conversion of
controlled units Legal challenges ensued, but the courts upheld the law as a legitrmate
exercise of the City's police power to provide for the health, safety and welfare of its
residents
(h) The Rent Control Law had the effect of limiting change in the multi-famdy areas
of the City In the years following its adoption of the Rent Control Law, the City maintamed
a stable and diverse residential population, and the multi-family neighborhoods retained
their basic character and scale Most structures in these neighborhoods are one or two
stones high Many have gardens, lawns or courtyards Thus, despite their density, these
neighborhoods retained a unique sense of space, greenery and light conducive to human
interaction and quietude The streets in the residential neighborhoods were "pedestria~
friendly" A City survey showed that walking 6ecame City residents' favorite recreational
activity
(i) Meanwhile, in the years following the adoption of the Rent Control Law, the rest
of the City developed and changed rapidiy In the single famiiy distncts, housmg pnces
skyrocketed By the early 1980's even older, very small homes in the R-1 Distnct were
selling for ~250,000 or more Pnces dipped in the early 9990's, and shot upwards again,
3
*
mak~ng dv~rtually impossible for low or mnderate incomefamdies to purchase homes in the
R-1 Distnct
~) At the same time, the numbers of workers commg to the City each day swelled
as multi-story office parks were budt in the central aty. Moreover, commuter numbers will
increase dramatically as new multi-story office buildings are completed dunng the nexttwo
years Additionally, as the City shifted its revenue base to hotel taxes, many large new
hotels were bwlt, and the City became an mternationally acclaimed vacation spot hosting
approximately 2,355,000 visitors in 1997
(k) Thus, the City boomed and be~ame ncher and more crowded, but the mutti-
family residential neighborhoods remained relatively quiet and stable considenng their
density Accordingly, foryears, a balance was struck between residential and commercial
interestswhich preserved the characterofthe City's multi-family residential neighborhoods
but allowed the City to flourish economically
(I) In 1994, natural disaster swept the City into a penod of transition On January
17th, the City suffered widespread damage to both its residential and commercial distncts
as a result of the Northndge earthquake The earthquake rendered approximately 3,100
dwelling units uninhabitable and damaged thousands ofotherproperties thus necessitating
substantial rebwiding However, the balancing of residential and commeraal mterest
remamed unchanged
(m) Recent changes in state iaw destroyed this balance In 1996, in response to
intense lobbying efforts by landlords and real estate developers, the State Legislature
drasticaliy restricted local control of housing policy by adopting the Costa-Hawkins Rentai
Housing Act of 1995 ("Costa-Hawkins") Costa-Hawkins weakens local rent control by
4
~
phasing m mandatory vacancy decontrol, which became fully effective in January of this
year This signaled the end of local rent control as it had existed for almost twenty years
in Santa Monica It also threw the community into a penod of extreme uncertainty as the
potential for radical change loomed large
(n) Costa-Hawkins has already had a dramatic impact on the City's housing stock
Between January 1 and May 15, 1999, thiReen hundred and forty-four (1344) vacancy
registrations have been processed by the Rent Control Board i hese registration forms
set forth the new rent for umts decontrolled by Costa-Hawkins The vacancy increases
have resuited in the loss of 855 units affordable to low income households If vacancy
registrations continue to be filed at the same rate, it is estimated that almost 2400 units that
had been affordable to low income households wdl be lost This figure represents, in one
year, a citywide loss of approximately 10°/a of the units that had been affordable to low
income households
(o) This loss of affordabdity has a number of senous repercussions At a time when
the demand for affordable housmg already exceeds supply, the additional loss of
affordable housing will only serve to exacerbate this problem Low income households
will face almost insurmountable odds in securing affordable housing and such housing wdl
not be available to new low income households seeking to move mto the City Individuals
presently working in the City wdl find it increasingly difficult to find affordable housing. The
new~obs that will be created bythe additional commercial developmentongoing m the City
will only serve to aggravate this housmg cnsis by generating additional demands on this
limited supply of housing The result wdl be that these workers will be forced to live in more
distant communities and commute to Santa Monica This trend will add to the already
5
•
heavy burden on the region's congested streets and overtaxed transportation system The
loss ofthis fiousing will also result in mcteased over-crowding for those individuals who are
unable to secure larger affordable urnts as their need for such units develop
(p) At the same time as Costa-Hawkins was phasing in, the City was expenencmg
a time of unprecedented economic boom Land values were skyrocketing again In the
smgle famdy neighborhoods, small lots sold for sums ranging from hundreds ofthousands
of dollars to a million or more Dunng the six month penod from November 1998 through
May 1999, the average two-bedroom house sold foralmost $566,000.00 whilethe average
three bedroom house sold for over $756,000 The burgeoning economy impacted the
multi-famdy development as weil Between 1996 and 1997, the number of multi-family
housing urnts approved for construction almost tripled Pnor to that time, the three year
average was under 80 new units peryear In 1997 the number~umped to 234 (excluding
one enormous and highly unusual pro~ect of 351 units)
(q) Along w~th the economic boom and acceleration in bwiding came a dramatic
shift m demographics The vast ma~onty of new, pnvately budt units were for upperincome
purchasers These new housing developments have committed scarce land resources to
providing luxury housing which is unaffordable to most residents of the City Moreover,
market conditions, including the high cost of residential land, construction costs, and the
availability and cost of financmg, make the development of affordable housing in the City
extremeVy difficult
(r) Without a continuation of the moratorwm, plannmg approvals for multi-family
construction wouid substantially exceed the rate approved last year Accelerated
development impacts the City as a whole and also impact the daily lives of residents who
6
-•
must cope with the noise and interference caused by construction undertaken in a
crowded, fully developed community. Construction matenals and equ~pment are oRen
placed in the roadway and/or on sidewalks, thereby obstructing both vehicular and
pedestnan traffic Neighborhood aesthetics suffer
(s) A significant amount of the City's residential housing stockwas bwlt pnor to the
1960's Parcels developed with older structures tend to be developed at densities and
heights that are lower than what is currently allowed by zoning Gwen these conditions
and the booming economy, there is a high likelihood that without a continuation of the
moratorwm, a significant amount of construction would occur in the City with i1s attendant
disruption to residents' peace and quiet en~oyment
(t) The redevelopment of these currently underdeveloped properties at greater
height and densities would also result in the loss of views and iight and could pose a threat
to the existmg character of neighborhoods and the City's unique natural environment
(u) There is also a significant shortage of reasonably avadable and convenient
parking spaces in these residential distncts This is demonstrated m part by the large
number of preferential parking districts that have been established by the City and the
continued demand forthe creation of new preferential parking districts. Given the growmg
afFluence of the community, mcreased development may exacerbate an already
unacceptable level of parking probiems
(v) In order to address the changes resultmg from Costa-Hawkins and from the
economic boom, in part, the City undertook a revision of its housing policies through the
process of amendmg the City's Housing Element This was a difficult process State
Housmg Element law purports to require cities to continually prowde new housing
7
-
However, Santa Monica is fuliy built out and committed to neighborhood preservation
Despite this problem and an additional problem caused by the State's failure to supply
RHNA numbers, Santa Monica completed the amendment process last summer, and the
State approved its amendment The Housing Element establishes the City's fair share at
3,219 housing units and its quantified ob~ective at 1,542 housing units These ob~ectives
are based exclus+vely on the construction ot new housing
(w) Afterthe City completed revisions, the State again changed the law This time,
the State amended the Housmg Element law to allow cities to count rehabditated units in
meeting their °fair share" of housmg opportunities. This change has ma~or signrficance for
Santa Monica because the City has an aging housmg stock and a strong commitment to
neighborhood preservation Accordingiy, consistent with local poliaes favonng
preservation, the City needs the opporturnty to evaluate whether this change in state law
affords new opporturnties for the City to fulfill its own goals This process will take some
time because the state law which allows the counting of rehabditated units is complicated
and difficult to utilize
(x) Maintainmg the unique characterof Santa Monica's neighborhoods is important
for many reasons First, City residents value their neighborhoods The preservation of
neighborhoods promote a sense of place and loyalty from residents It provides residents
with qwet en~oyment in their homes and a community which exists on a pedestnan friendly
scale Design and development standards which are sensitive to existing neighborhood
conditions can further environmental and social goals Preservation of existmg
neighborhoods can serve to maintain the City's supply of affordable housmg and its
architecturaf d~versity Meanwhde, workers need good traffic circulation, adequate parking
8
r
i
and perhaps even places to live Tounsts expect to recreate m an aesthetically appealing
community which combines entertainment opportunities with small town warmth and
charm
(y) The City must address the very difficult question of how to balance these
competing demands and fulfill its legal responsibdity to prowde affordable housing in new
ways The method which worked for twenty years has been eviscerated by State action
Time is needed to expeditiously evaluate the new option for rehabditation supplied by state
law
(z) In light of the above-mentioned concems, the City Counal adopted Ordmance
Number 1944 (CCS) on May 25, 1999 which established a moratonum on multi-famtly
development in the City's multi-family residential distncts with specifc exceptions
However, that ordinance will expire on July 9, 1999
(aa) For the reasons descnbed above, the City Councd finds that another intenm
ordinance is necessary because the contmwng development of multi-famdy housmg in the
City's residential zones pnor to the comprehensive review of the City's housing and land
use policies and regulations presents a current and immediate threat to the public peace,
health, safety, and welfare If urgent action is not taken, irreversible development actiwty
wdl continue unabated, thereby committing scarce land resources to development that is
not in the best interests ofthe residents ofthe City The approval of additional multi-famdy
housing development m the City's multi-family housing districts, with limited exception,
pending the City's review of its housmg and land use policies and regulations would result
in a threat to the pubiic health, safety, and welfare Consequently, this ordinance extends
the prowsions of Ordinance 1944 up to and including March 28, 2000 to provide the City
9
.
su~cient time to further evaluate the effects of the substantial increase in the rate of
development in the City's multi-famdy zones and the City's loss of affordable housing and
to develop appropnate requirements and programs to preserve the City's character,
diversity, and quality of life in this penod of drastic change
SECTION 2 Moratonum
(a) Sub~ect to the exemptions set foRh in Section 3 of this Ordmance, a moratorwm
is hereby placed on the acceptance for processing of any applications for approval of
tentative tract maps, tentative parcel maps, administrative approvals, development review
permits, and conditional use permits, for any residential building orstructure, includmg any
hotel or motel, on properties located m multi-family residential districts in the City For
purposes of this Ordmance, the mulii-family residential distncts in the City are R2R, R2,
R3, R4, RVC, RMH, OPDuplex, OP2, OP3, OP4, NWOverlay, R2B, and R3R
(b) Sub~ect to the exemptions set forth in Section 3 of this Ordmance, the Planning
Commission and City staff are hereby directed to disapprove all applications which have
not been deemed complete as of May 25, 1999, for tentative tract maps, tentative parcel
maps, administrative approvals, development review permits, and conditional use permits
for any residential buiiding or structure, including any hotei or motel, on properties located
m multi-family residential districts in the City
10
SECTION 3. Exemptions. The following appl~cations are exempt from the
provisions of Section 2 of this Ordinance
(a) Applications for approval of permits involvmg the erection, construction,
enlargement, demolition or mowng of, and excavation and grading for any multiple
dwelling development intended for rental housing for persons of low and moderate income
and which development is financed by any federal, state or City housing assistance
program or owned by any non-profit organization, provided the Director of Planning
determines that such development is in conformance with the General Plan and theZoning
Ordinance and provided a deed restriction is recorded restncting the developmentto such
purpose
(b) Applications for approval of permits involving the erection, construction, and
excavation and grading for an additional residential dwellmg unit on a site, which as of May
25, 1999, was developed with and wdl maintain an existing smgle family home
(c) Applications for approval of permits involvmg the erection, construction,
enlargement of, and excavation and gradmg for, a pro~ect which wdl be developed on a site
that was vacant as of May 25, 1999
(d) Applications for approvai of permits involving the erection, construction,
enlargement, demolition or moving of, and excavation and grading for a pro~ect which will
be developed on a site which contains structures that are uninhabitable and which cannot
be rendered habitable in an economically feasible manner
SECTION 4 This ordinance is declared to be an urgency measure adopted
pursuant to the provision of Section 615 of the Santa Momca City Charter As set forth
11
in the findings above, this ordinance is necessary for preserving the public peace, heaith,
safety, and welfare.
SECTION 5 This Ordmance shall be of no furtherforce and effect after March 28,
2000, unless pnor to that date, after a public heanng, noticed pursuant to Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 9 04.20 22.050, the City Council, by ma~onty vote, extends this
intenm Ordinance
SECTION 6 Any prowsion of the Santa Monica Murnapal Code or appendices
thereto mconsistent with the prowsions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such
inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to
effect the provisions of this Ordinance
SECTION 7 if any section, subsection, sentence, ciause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be mvalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent ~unsdiction, such deasion shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions ofthis Ordinance The City Council hereby declares that itwould have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordmance
would be subsequently decfared invaf~d or unconsiitutional
SECTION 8. The Mayor shall sign and the Cdy Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
12
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption This Ordinance shall become effective upon
its adoption
APPROVED AS TO FORM
1 `
~ ~ 1~ ~-~:~ /ZP,D'tic~~e-C
MARSHA JON~S MOUTRIE
City Attorney
Adopred and approved this 29~' day of June, 1999
N41. ~~ J
P O'Connor, Mayor
State of Californ~a )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
Cit} of Sania Momca )
I. D4aria M Ste~vart, City Clerk of the City of Santa Momca, do hereby certif}• that the
foregomg Ordmance No 1947 (CCS) had us miroduction and adopnon on 7une 29. 1999.
y bp the followma vote
Ayes Council members McKeown. Femstem, Bloom.
Mavor Pro Tem Genser, Mavor O'Connor
Noes Council members Rosenstem
Abstam Council members None
Absent Council members Holbrook
~ ATTES~° , • -+~
Mana M S[ewart. Crtv ~ er~
ATTACHMENT A
"'" - t I (, ~:
ATTACHMEi~1'T B
~~ ~-U~:":
ATTACHMENT B
SANTA MONICA RENt CONTROL BOARD ADMINISTRATION MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 20, 1999
TO: Rent Control Commissioners
FROM: STAFF
FOR BOARD MEETING OF . May 20, 1999
RE• Impact of Market Rate Vacancies Janucry 1 to May 15, 1999
On April 15, 1999 staff reported on the impact of market vacancy increases
from January 1, 1999 through March 31, 1999. Th~s report updates that
informcrtion through May 15, 1999.
Filtng Rate. By the end of March 1,034 vacancy increases had been filed; of
those, 915 had been processed on 910 units, including frve unrts on which two
X-registrations had been filed. By May 15, 1,477 have been filed, of which
1,392 have been processed on 1,367 units, including 23 units with 2 X-
registrations arxl one unit w~th three X-registrations. However, these numbe~s
have been qdjusted for this report to remove the increases filed on 1001 3rd
St, which operates some units as a hotel rather than apartment building. The
adjusied numbers are 1,015 increases filed and 895 unffs processed by
March 31 and 1,433 increases filed and 1,344 units processed by May 15.
The filing rate has remained steady since the first report. Filings iwd
averaged 338 per mo~th; through May 15 they are 318 per month. Nowever,
the number of units impacfed by one or more increases has remained
virtualiy unchanged. It was 298.3 per month and is now 298.6 per month.
The consistency of ihese numbefs indicates that ihe sfiories obout thousands
of units being held off the market in anticipotion of market rates were effher
untrue or greatly exaggerated.
The first report projected that if the filing rate remained the same, 3,600 X-
registrations would be fifed during the year. The latest information supp~rts
the projection.
Afiordability. The loss of units that were affordable to households with
incomes at 50%, 60% 80X and 100°h continues.
The flrst report pro)ected that 2,359 units that had been affordable at 80°16 of
median income would be lost in one year. 582 units had been last at the
80°l6 of inedlan Income level as of March 31. By May 15, 855 had been lost~
The loss rate was 19d units per month in March; it was 190 by May 15.
At the end of March the Ioss rate of unffs at 50~ of inedlan income was 54 per
month; as of May l5 it is 55 per month.
The latest infortnation supports the projectton that 2,359 untts that had been
affordable at 8096 of inedian income will be lost by the end of 1999.
t~.~x.~ R.K updau - r~ay 20, ~~s i
. . ~ LI ~ i
The graph below shows the progressive erosion of affordable units on the
1,344 units that had received at least one vacancy increase by May 15 The
distribution on 12l31 /98 shows affordability levels of the units pnor to any market
mcreases.- The distnbution on 3/31 /98 shows the ~mpact of the 910 units that
had market increases by Morch 31 The 5/15/99 distr~but~on shows the
dramatic loss of affordability among the 1,344 units with at least one market
~ncrease as of the May 15
rn
~i
~
~,
m
~ w
a ~
N ~
~ ~
tm,7 ~
G
m
L~
e0
~
L
~
m
~
~
Units Affordable at Income Levels ~
impact ot Market Increases
12/31/98 3/31/98 5/15/99
^ very bw income (0-50%of inedan)
~ very bw mcome (51-609;)
^ bw InCOm9 (61$0%)
0 moderate meome (81-100~ )
~ over t 00%
Rent Increases. This update analyzes the 1,344 units that rece~ved vacancy
increases between January 1 and May 15, 1999. It compares these units to
units of the city as a whole, and details the impact of those increases on rents
and affordability.
The chart bebw summarizes median rent information.
Vucanc.w Increases 1/1 - 5/15/9Q (1,344 UA~s)
Pre- Post
increose -Increase Dollar
No. of Median Median Amount °k
Bedrooms MAR's MAR's ~hanae Ch°n°e
o s~ae sn5 s22~ a~%
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2 m i.sso s~s ~ ~
3 or more 471 1,800 829 85
r~.nc.4 a.,x +iacau - *~y 20. ~ ~
2
~itywide
CI8,246 tmtls)
12/31/98
Median
MAR's
ssoa
~
~~
~
x . -l!~~
The median rents of units receiving vacancy increases have not changed
significantly. Post-increase median MAR's are sl~ghtly lower than in the
earl~er report. The combinaticn of these factors leads to sl~ghtly lower
dollar amount and percentage changes between the prior MAR and
new MAR in all bedroom s¢es except 0-bedrooms The ~ncrease ~s slightly
higher for 0-bedroom units, but the percentage increase continues to be
substanhally iower that for the larger units.
Although it may be too early to tell, there is a trend toward the m~ddie. If
this is true, the percentage change for o-bedroom units will move higher,
while for the larger un~ts, the change w~ll become somewhat smaller.
Arecs of the Ctfy. The percentage of controlled rental urnts varies in the
seven areas of the City.
March 3l , 1949 May 15, 1949
A~r g q, pf Rentai ~nits 9'0 of X-oetitions % of X-oetitions
A 17°b 13 1 d°b
B 12 12 125
C 5 4 5.5
D 10 8 8
E 18 17 19
F 17 21 18
G 21 25 23
Since March 31, there are sfight changes in the areas of the ciry tt-e
petitions were coming from. In March some areas appeared to be
over-rep~esented by vacancy increases. The new 8gures i~dlcate that
representation of increases is becoming more like the proportions of
units in the city as a whole.
Size ot Unit -- Number of Bedrooms. The percentage of controlled units
also vanes by the number of bedrooms in the unit. Singies and 1-
bedrooms are 55.6~ of the atywide urnts. However, 69% of X-pet~tions
were for units of this s¢e.
The variation mcry be the result of higher tumover among the smaller units.
On the otMr hand, larger units may not be rented as quickly if owners
expect to coilect higher rents than tenants are wiiling to pay. fiis factor will
continue to be watched for future trends.
No. of ~ of X of
0 9.096 13.0°X~
1 46.5 5b.0
2 34.5 28.0
3 or more l0A 3.0
~,~a~ a.~ u~a,e• - t~ar zo. ~~
ATTACHMENT C
n . .,~jL r
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: A Public Hearing will be held by the City Council on the following request
A proposed Interim Emergency Ordinance extending the City Counal enacted Moratonum
on Multi-famdy Residential Development in the City's Multi-family Residential Districts for
an additional nine months
APPLICANT: City of Santa Monica
WHEN: Tuesday, June 29, 1999
700pm
WHERE: Counal Chambers
Room 213
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, California
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City Counal will conduct a public hearing to consider extending the term of Ordinance
1944 (ccs), the current Moratorium on Multi-family Residential Development in the City s
Multi-family Residential Districts, for nine additional months The current Moratorium
enacted on May 25, 1999 is to expire July 9, 1999 unless the City Council extends the
Ordinance
HOW TO COMMENT
You may comment at the City Council public hearing, or by wntmg a letter Written
information received before 3 00 p m on the Wednesday before the hearing wdl be given
to the City Counal in their packet Information received after that time will be given to the
City Council prior to the meeting
Address your letters to City Clerk
Moratorium Ordmance
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
MORE INFORMATION
If you want more information about this pro~ect, please call Art Bashmakian, at (310) 458-
8341 Santa Monica Bus Lines #1, #2, #3, #7 and #8 serve City Hall The meeting facility
is handicapped accessible If you have any speaal needs such as sign language
interpreting, please contact the Office of ihe Disabled at (310) 458-8701
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if this matter is subsequently
challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues raised at the Public
Hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa
,_
-lic,.r
Monica at, or prior to, the Public Hearing
ESPAIVOL
EI Concilio Muniapal de la ciudad de Santa Monica tendra una audenaa publica para
revisar applicaciones proponiendo desarrollo en Santa Monica Para mas mformacion,
Ilame a Carmen Gutierrez al numero (310) 458-8341
APPROVED AS TO FORM
~~1~'~
JA`Y TREVINO
Rlanning Manager
F `•PLAN`SHARE`•COUNCID.NOTICES'•-M1~tORATORIUh1 N,~PD
n ~
_ " ~ ,