SR-0 (67)P&Z:DxW:bz:r~ta93c Santa Monica, California
City CounciZ Mtg: February 23, 1993
Tfl: Mayor and City C~uncil
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Text Amendment 92-008 to Madify the Rl Qistrict Single
Family 5ection of the Zaning Ordinance and Create a Use
Permit Pracedure
Address: Citywide
INTRDQUCTION
Staff is proposing a Text Amendment ta the R1 Single family
district regulations, and the creat~on of a Use Permit procedure.
The proposed R1 ~ext Amendment would affect properties in al~ R1
Zoning Districts in tile City, while the Use Perm3t changes would
establish such a permit ta a1.~.ow consideration of certain uses
through this lower-level process instead of the more lengthy and
costly CQnditional Use Penait process. These proposed Rl changes
represent an evolution of preliminary amendments pre~iausly
circulated for public review in 1991. The Planning Ca~aission
conducted a public hearing and approved the R1 am~ndments. In
appro~ing the proposed R1 amendments, the Commission asked staff
to infarmally consu~t with local architects fami~iar with the
present requarements to help ensure that the amendiaents were
- 1 -
appropriate. Several revisions were ~ade in response to these
consultations.
The Com~ission previously conducted a hearing on antenna
Qrdinance recvmmendations, which included the creation of a Use
Permit process. The Use Permit process would allaw discretionary
approval of sgecif ied uses via a Zoning ~dministrator hearing,
with possible appeal to the Planning Cammissian, a~d wou~d al~ow
the imposition of special conditions, while at the same time
being a lower-level, more time~y, and less expensive process than
a Conditional Use Permit.
In its action on the proposed amendments, the Planning Commission
a~.so asked that the issue of second units in the R1 district be
re-examined. State law requires that second units be a~lowed in
the R1 district unless cities adopt specified findings precluding
such units. As adopted in 1988, the Zoning Ordinance prohibits
secand units in Santa Monica's R1 district. The Cammissian
recogized that thi5 was a significant matter and indicated that
y it should proceed on a separate track €rom the '~clean-up"
revisions presently before the Council. Sta~f will prepare
information on this issue for future consideration by the
Planning Commissaon.
Staff is recommending introductian and first ~eading of an
ordinance implementing the modifications approved by the Flanning
Commission. The recommended amendments are set forth in
- 2 -
Attachment A. Attaclvnent B~s uses bold/strike-out text to
illustrate the changes to the R1 standards.
B~CKGROUNQ
Obiectives of Revisi.ons
Tha proposed changes have several objectives:
1) To clarify requ.irements. Several existing paragraphs which
contain n~ore than one develapment standard have been broken up so
that most paragraphs deal with sepa~ate subjects. The order of
some paraqraphs has also been changed to group similar subjects.
in addition, some of the existing language has been modified for
the sake of greater clarity. For example, as the result of ~
suggestion from a member of the public, the revisions clarify the
distinction between standard yard setbacks and spe~ial setback
requirements for upper portions of buildings by designating the
special upper requirements as "stepbacks."
2) To add new requirea~ents. Restrictions on placement of
~ basements, roof decks, and severa3 ather sta~tdards have been
added. A~ additional street sideyard setback requirement has
been added for corner lots.
3) To modify existing requirenents. Several existing sections
establishing special setbacks have been significantly revis~d to
express these requirements in percentage, rather than absolute
te~-ms. This would make rec;uirements proportional to the size of
- 3 -
the lot and to the size af the allowab3e building. 5everal other
changes establish reduced requirements for substandard ~ots, so
as to recognize the canstraints ~nvolved in developing such lats,
and reducing the need to abtain variances. In addition, the net
effect of several of the changes is to samewhat reduce the
overal~ develapment envelope €or the typical pa~cel, responding
to resident c~neerns about the size and bulk of new homes, and
providing add~tianal liqht and sir Far ne3ghbors of new
structures.
CE~A STATUS
The proposed Text Amendment is categorically exempt fram the pro-
visions of the California Environmenta]. Quality Act pursuant to
Class 5{10) of the City of Santa Monica Guidelines for the Im-
plementation of CEQA.
ANALYSIS
Section-by-Section AnaZysis
s Brief descriptions of the rationale af the proposed chanqes are
' prav~ded below. Al1 references are to Attachment 8 showing the
existing code with revisions in bold or strike-out type.
Section 9.04.fl8.02.010. Changes to this sectioa are editorial
on~y.
- 4 -
section 9.D4.08.02.020. The cMange to this s~ction Wauld add
domestic violence shelters as a permitted use. This is
consistent with the Planning Commission's and Counci~'s actions
on the temporary affordable hausing ordinance approved by the
City Council in July Z992.
5ection 9.04.08.02.p40. This is a new section which wouid a~low
certain types of accessory buildings and duplexes on transitional
parcels s~b~ect to appraval of a Use Permit instead of a
Conditional Use Permit. A Use Permit appears to be a more
appropriate level of permit than a Conditional Use Fermit for
these uses.
Section 9.04.08.02.05Q. The changes in this section are the
result of moving certain uses from the Conditional Use Permit
section ta the IIse Pex-mit section.
Section 9.04_08.a2.070. Several types of changes would be made
ta this section. In subdivision (a)(I), the language would be
clarified to indicate that chimneys are the only building element
s which may exceed the height limit.
In (a){2), the language regard~ng lots which may exceed the
normal 28-foot height 2imit is c~arified.
In {b}, a Use Permit instead of a Conditional Use Per~it is
referenced for development of a duplex on a transitional lot.
- 5 -
In (d), higher lot caverage would be perm~tted for substandard
1ots, so as to reduce the need far variances to be obtained in
these situatians.
In {f), the ~ormula for the special stepbacks which apply on
front elevations above ~4 ~eet in height would be revised to bE a
percentaqe of lot depth instead af a fixed amount which applies
regardless of lot size. Thus, ~arger 3ots wvuld Y3e required to
provide more substantial stepbacks. The typical 150-foot deep
lot would be required to have a six-foot stepback (which is an
additional one-foot beyond the current five-foot require~ent).
In ( g), the rear yard setback require~nent would be supplemented
with an additional stepback requirement above 14 feet, similar to
the front yard stepback formuia. This would reduce the
deve~opment envelope somewhat. For eXample, fo~- a 15D-foot deep
lot, the reguirement would result in 25~ of the portion of the
building above 14 feet hav~.ng to be setback an additional average
of six feet beyond the standard 25-foot setback. This is a
revision from the version af the amendment reviewed by the
~
Planning Commissian, and is in response to cone~nents received from
several architects familiar with the present ordinance.
In (h), the minimum sideyard setback would be three and one-half
feet instead of four feet, to recogni2e the difficulties of
developing substar~dard lots and ta reduce the need for variances
to be obtained in such situations. Soth the Zaning Administrator
_ ~ _
and the Planning Commission have routinely granted such variances
on small lots. For standard 5v--foot wide parcels, the sideyard
setback would remain the same: five feet. Another change wou3d
set a cap of 15 feet on the maximum required s~deyard.
In (j}, an existing requirement is repl~cated.
In (k), an additionsi sideyard setback is created for corner
parcels equa~ to two percent of the parcel width. The intent is
to mitigate assthetic imp~cts in such sit~ations.
In (1), the existing language a~lowinq the Architectural Review
Board would be c~arified.
In {m), an exce~tien is created for s~a~l lots so that the need
to obtain variances is reduced.
In (o}, basements could not extend into any required yard area,
except underneath any permitted accessory structure. This wauld
replace the standards of an existing temgorary ordinanc~ limiting
the location of basements to beneath trie footprint of th~ hause.
' This is a change from the approach presented to the Planning
Commissi.on. one of the comments made as a consequence of the
informal review by architects requested by the Planning
Cammission was that the °fOpt~}Y'll'Itn approac~ i~ effect penalizes
owners who do not maximize the lot coverage of structures on the
parcel. Limiting basements via use of the setback standard
appears to be a more equitable approach.
- 7 - ~
In (p), driveways and other accessways to subterranean areas
wauld be prohibited in the frant yard setback a~ea. This is
intended to mitigate the adver~e aesthetic i~pacts which have
accurred in some projects where much of the front yard area has
been excavated far a driveway going down to a subterranean
parking area. One o€ the cancerns raised as part of the inforinal
review requested by the Planning Cammission concerned the dilemma
of ups~aping lots relative to this proposed standard, where
becanse of the ups].oping nature of the land, the most practical
design sa].ution may be to excavats into the hillside for a
garage. Staff is recommending that the Archit~ctural Review
Board be authorized to grant exceptions to this rule to address
such situations.
In (q}, roof decks would be required to be set back at least
three feet from the minimum sadeyard setback to protect privacy
of neighboring properties.
In 9.04-.08.02.090, the section referenced w~uld be the entire
parking standards subchapter rather than oniy the section
~
referencing the nun~ber of parking spaces required. In additian,
an exemption would be created for small additions (less than 500
sq. ft.).
Use Permit Process
Related to the R1 amendments is the re-creation of a Use Permit
process, which used to exist under the former Zoning Ordinance.
- 8 -
The Use Permit process would be ide~tical ta that of Var~ances
under the present code: notice to neighbors and property owners
within a 300-foot radius, a hearing before the Zoning
Administrator, and possib~e appeal to the Planning Commission.
The Use Permit pracess is intended to relieve the workload of the
Planning Cammission by allawing minor use permits ta be approved
by the Zoning Administrator; this process also reduces processing
time and costs far applicants (a CUP costs $1630; a Use Permit
wauld currentiy cost $G~O, and mailing lable preparatiQn casts
would also be lvwer). In later text amendments, staff intends to
propose that some uses in other distr~cts presently subject to a
Performance Standards Permit or a CUP be instead subject to a Use
Permit.
Fub~ic Comment
Prior to the Planning Commission deliberations on the proposed
changes, staff received two sets of com~uents on the proposed
changes. One, from an architect, expressed concern with the
~ proposed change to the special side~ard setback requirements
abave 1~ feet in height. The cancern was that the existing
graduated formula allows for the development o~ a sloping roof,
since the formula creates a stepback envelope that ~ncreases with
height. However, the new formula which was at that tim~ progosed
by staff wor~ld have established a fixed setback which would not
gradually increase with qreater height. After reviewing these
_ y _
concerns, staff recommended to the Commission that the original
farmula be retained, and the Commissian endorsed this approach.
A second set af comments were reaeived €rom Lewis Tibbits, a
resident of the R~ district (see Attachment C, the Planning
Cpmm~ssion staff report, to which Mr. Tibbits' letter is
attached). Mr. Tibbets n~mhered his comments and they are
responded to by nwnber below.
Under item 1, IKr. Tibraets suggested additians or changes to the
definitians section of the Zoning Drdinance. There is a
definitions revision project underway which is presently being
reviewed by the Pianning Commissian. Staff suggests that changes
to the definitions should be cansidered in that context.
Under item 2, Mr. T~.bbets suggested a caveat he added to the end
af Sectian 9.04.08.02.07b (d). Staff believes this change is
redundant.
Under item 3, a change to the wording af Section 9.04.08.02.070
~ (f) was suggested which staff concurs with and which is reflected
. in the reco~amendations.
Under item 4, Mr. Tibbets suggested the deletion of the word
"average" in Section 9.~4.08.02.070 (f). The averaging concept
was part af the original formula contained in the section when it
was adopted in 1988. Staff believes that the averaging concept
- 1Q -
was included to allow greater design flexibility, and does not
recommend deletion of the ward.
Under ite~ 5, alternative wording was Suggested for 5ection
9.04.D8.02.070 (j). Whi3e staff appreciates the concern about
ambiguity, staff bel~eves that the wording propased in the text
amendment accomplishes a better result than that recommended by
Mr. Tibbets. Staff recommends retention of the proposed
language, but with one change to keep part of the original
formula to allow for slaping ra~~s.
General Plan ConformanCe
The proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan, in
that they would be within the maximum development envelope far
this zone discussed in the Land Use Element, and because they
would enhance the quality of ].ife in the 5ingle family areas by
providing for greater light and air ta residents of the area as
compared to current regulations.
~ PUBLIC NOTIFTCATION
Because this proposal is not site-specific, no radius map,
signage or mailing notification is required. A lega3. notice was
published in the Dutlook and staff has natified the Neighborhood
Support Center of the proposed text amendment. Copies of the
proposed amendments were aZso sent to several neighborhood groups
- 11 -
and local architects and have been made available at the planning
public caunter. -
BUDGET/FINANCIA~ IMPACT
The proposed amendments have no budget or £i.nancial impact.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Te~ Amendment is an improvement af the Zoning Or-
dinance and is cansistent with the objectives of the General P].an
and therefore warrants adoption.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council adoption of the proposed Text Amendment set forth in
Attachment A bas~d on the followi.ng findings:
FINDINGS
l. The proposed Text Amendment is consistent a.n principal
with the goals, objectives, pola.cies, land uses, and pro-
~
grams specified in the adopted General P~an, in that it is
consistent with Land Use and Circulation Element Objective
1.10, to protect the scale and character of residentia~
neighborhoods, since the amendments would~ by reducing the
development envelope, provide greater 3ight and air in
con~unction with new development as compared to current
standards. In addition, the Use Parmit pracedure would
- 12 -
provide a less costly and less time-cansuming process for
certain types af uses wh~ch requi~e discretionary review,
but whieh do not necessitate a Conditional Use Pe~it.
2. The public health, safety, and qenera~ we~fare requires
the adoptian of the proposed amendment, in that th~ amend-
ment represents an impra~ernent over existing regu~atians,
by improving the sesthetic character of new development,
and by facilitating greater amounts of light and air ta
residents as campared to current standards. In addition,
the Use Permit proc~ss wonld provide a suitab~e le~vel of
discretionary review for certa~n types of project~.
Prepared by: D. Keny~n Webster, Plannir~g Manager
Attachments:
A. Ordinance for Introduction and First Reading
B. Bold/Strike-Out Version of R1 Standards ~llustrating Changes
C, Planning Commiasion Staff Report
~
PC/rlta93c
02/Z7/93
- 13 -
A~"TACHIV~E~' A
o~0i~
CA:MHS:rlta/hp/pc
City Cauncil Meeting 2-23-93 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER
(City council Series)
A13 ORD~NANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY aF SANTA MONICA AMENDING PART 9.04.08.02
QF THE SANTA iK4NICA MUNZCIPAL CC3DE REGARDING
REQUIREMENTS F~R THE R]. SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT AND ADDING
PART 9.04.20.36 TO THE MUNICIPAL CDDE
CFtEATING A USE PERMIT PROCEDURE
WHEREAS, the Planning C~mmission of the City of Santa
Manica adopted a Reso~ution af Intention concerning proposed
amendments to Part 9.04.08.02 of the Santa Monica Mnnicipa~ Code
regarding the requirements of the R~ Single Family Residential
Zaning District on September 30, ~992; and
wHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a pub~.ic hearing
regarding the proposed amendments on January 6, 1993 and made
recommendatians to the City Council regarding the proposed
amendments; and
WHEREP,S, the City Cauncil finds that the following
amendment~ to the requirements of the R1 Single Family
Residential Zoning District are consistent in princzple with the
gaals, ~bjectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in
the adapted General Plan, and the public health, safety and
general weZfare require the adoptifln of the proposed amendments
in that the amendments will clarify existing requirements by
rearganizing and rewording the R1 development standards, will add
~~~~~s
-~-
new requireme~ts to mitigate the impact Qf new deve~opment by
providing greater 3ight and air to neighboring properties, and
will modify existing requirements by praviding far more equitable
applicaticn of the standards; and
WHEREAS, the Planning CG~m15Sl~n held a public
hearing regardi~g tha proposed addition of a use permit pracedure
to the Municipal Code cn June 26, 1991 and made recamm~ndations
to the City Council regarding the proposed creation af a use
permit pracedure; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the creation of a use
permit procedure is eansistent in principl~ with the g~al~,
objectives, p~licies, land uses~ and programs specified in the
adopted General Plan, and the public health, safety and general
welfare require the adoptian of the proposed amendments in that
the use permit procedure provides a legal mechanism to review
minor modificatians ta specific regulations in an expeditious
manner, with opportunzty for pub].ic re~iew and comment, and with
application fees that are commensurate with the nature af the
physical improvement,
}
NOW, THEREFDRE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 4F SANTA
MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Applicabilitp. This ordinance shall appl.y to
all projects approved 60 days or more after the effecti~e date of
the Ordinance. All projects for which plans have been submitted
to the City far plan check priar to the effective date of the
Ordinance shall he subject t~ the provisions of this Part as they
exi~ted at the time the plans were submitted.
_ z _ - ~ ~-~ 1 r
SECTI~N 2. Part 9.04.~8 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code
is amended to read as follows:
Part 9.04.08.02 &1 Single Familp Residential
District.
9.04.08.02.010 Pu~po9e.
The R1 District is intended to pra~ide a single
family residential area free of dist~rbing noises,
excessive traffic, and hazards created by maving
automQbiles. The R1 district is designed to prevent
burdens on the public facilities, ine~uding sewer,
water, electricity and schoels by an inf~ux and
increase of people to a degree larger than the C~ty•s
geographic Zimits, tax base or financial capabilities
can reasanably and responsibly accomm4date. The R1
district affords pratection fram deleterio~s
an~ironmental effects and serves ta maintain and
protect the existing character of the residential
neighbarhaod. (Prior code 90~0.1)
9.04.Q8.02.020 Permitted uses.
The fallowing uses shall be permitted in the R1
Bistrict:
{a) Hospice facilities.
(b) One single family dwelling per parcel
piaced an a permanent foundation {including
manufactured hausing).
(c) One-story accessory buildings and
structures up to •14 feet in height.
~.~~~ ~
- 3 - -
(d) Public parks and playgrounds.
(~) Sma13 family day care homes.
(f) State auth~rized, licensad, ar certified
uses to the extent requi.red to be permitted by State
law.
(g) Yard sales, limited to two per ca~endar
year, for a ~naximum of two days each. (Prior code
9010.2)
(hy Dono~estic violence shelter.
9.04.08.02.030 O$es 8ubject to Performance
S~andards Permft.
The fo3lowing uses may be germitted in the R1
District subject to the approval of a Performance
Standards Permit:
(a) Large Family Day Care hames,
(b) ane-stary accessory ~iving quarters, up to
14 feet in height, on a parcel having a n~inimum area
~f 10, ~00 square feet.
~ (c) Private tennis courts. (Prior code 9~10.3)
9.04.08.OZ.040 Q~es Bubject to IIse Permit.
The following us~s may be permitted in the R1
District subject to the approval of a Use Permit:
{a) One-story accessory buildings over 14 feet
in height or two story accessor~ buildings up to a
max~.mum height of 24 feet.
{b) Dup3exes on a parcel having not less than
5,000 square feet of area, a side parcel line of
` r
_ 1~ ~_ ~1 ~ E
- 4 - ~
which abuts or is separated by an alley from any R3,
ar R4 District. _
9.04.Q8.02.050 Cond~tionally Permittad ~9es.
The following uses may be permitted in the R1
District subject to the approval af a Conditional Use
Permit:
(a) Schools. (Prior code 9a10.4)
9.04.48.02.050 Prohib~ted IIses.
(a) Boarding houses.
(b} Raoftop parking.
(c) Second dwelling units pursuant to Section
6585z.2(c) of the Go~ernment Code, State of
California.
(d) Any uses not specifically authorized.
(Prior code 90~.0.5)
9.04.08.02.070 Prapertg Development Standards.
A~.1 property in the Itl District shall be
y develaped in accardance with the fol~Qwing standards:
(a) Masimum Buildinq Seiqht.
(~} Two stories, not to exceed 28 feet,
which includes all building elements except chimneys.
(2) On lots of mare than 20,000 square
feet with a minimum front parcel line dimension of
200 feet, the height shall not exceed 35 feet for a
pitched roof or 28 feet for ather types af roofs.
_ ~ ~' ~'+ ._ t~
- 5- -
(b) Ma$imum ~nit Density. One dwelling unit
per parcel, except where a Use Permit has been
approved far a dup~ex as permitted by 5ectian
9.04.08.02.044 (b).
(c} Minimum Lot Bi~s. 5,OQ0 square feet.
Each parcel sha~~ contain a minimum depth of l00 ~eet
and a minimum width of 50 f~et except that any parcel
existing on the effective date af this Chapter shal~
nat be subject to this requirement.
(d] Masimum Faresl coveraqa. 40 percent
excapt that parcels 3000 square faet or smaller may
have a parcel coverags of 6o percent.
(e) Froat Yard Setback. As shown on the
Official Districting Map of the City, or, ~.f na
setback i.s specif ie~i, 24 feet.
(f) Additional Front Stepback Abave ll Feat in
Heiqht. Far new structures or additions to existing
structures which are over 14 feet in height, 25
percent of the maximum alZawable front elevation
~
shall be stepped-back an additianal average amount
eq~al ta faur percent of parcel depth, fram the
required front s~tback, but in no case greater than
ten feet. As used in this Chapter, "maximum
allowab~e elevation" sha11. a~ean the maximum
theoretical 3inear length of a given facade, which
inc~udes the parcel width, minus required miniroum
setbacks.
(g) Rear Yard Setback. 25 feet.
~~OZ~
_ ~__ -
(h) Additsonal Rea= Btepback Above 1~ Feet in
HQiqht. For new structures or additions to existing
structures having a building height in excess of 14
feet in height, 25 percent of the maximum allawable
rear elevation 6ha11 be stepped-back an additional
average amount equal to four percent of parcel depth
from the required rear satback, but in no case
greater than ten feet.
(iy 8ida Yard 8athack. Ten percent of the
parcel width or a minimum of three feet six inches,
whichever is greater, but in na case greater than 15
feet. (See alsa Section 9.04.14,0~.190)
{jj Additional Side Stepbacks Above t4 feet ia
Heigbt. Fifty percent of the maximum allowable side
building elevatians in excess of 14 feet in height
above the required side yard setback shal~ be
stepped-back an additional 3 foot for every 2 feet 4
inches above ~4 feet ~f building height td a maximum
height of 21 feet.
}
{k) Additional Side stepback Above 21 Feet in
Height. No portion of the building, except permitted
prajectians, sha21 intersect a plane commencing 21
feet in height at the minimum sideyard setback and
extending at an angle of 45 degrees from the vertical
toward the interior of the site. This requirement
may be modified by the A,rchitectural Review Board
under the provisions of Section (nj belaw.
~t~~1~~
_ Z _ -
(1} Additicnal Side Setback for Corner
Parcels. An additional sideyard setback equal to two
percent of the parcel w~dth~ but in no cas~ equaling
more than an additional two feet, shall be provided
along the street sideyard for carner parcels.
(m} Front Yard Pavfng. No more than 50
percent of the required frant yard area including
driveways shall be paved, e~cept that ~ots with a
width of 25 feet or less may have up to 60 percent of
the front yard area paved.
(n) MoQifications to Stepbavk~ above 14 Fset
in Heiqht. The frai~~ and side yard stepback
requirements for the portion af a structure above 14
feet in height may be modif ied suhject to tha review
and approval of the Architectural Review Board ~f the
Board finds that the madification will not be
detrimental to the property, adjQining progerties~ or
the general area in which the property is lacated.
(Prior cade 9D10.6; amended by Ord. No. 1475 CCS,
~
adopted 4/25(89J
(a) Ciraular Driveways. No circular driveways
shall be permitted on parcels less than ~(]a feet in
width.
(p) 8asements and Bulsterranean Garaqes. No
basement or subterranean garage shall extend into any
required yard setback area, except for any base~ent
ar garage ~ocated beneath an accessory bu.ildinq which
is fltherwise permitted within a yard area.
- 8 - - 7~~~ ~
{q} Access to Subterranea~ Garages and
8asements. No driveway, stairway, doorway,
lightwell. window or vther such element to a
subterranean ar semi-subterranean garage or basement
shall be located in the front yard setback area.
This requir~ment may be modified by the Architectural
Review Baard if it finds that tapagraphic condition~
or the placement af existing buildings on the site
necessitate that such ac~ess be permitted.
(r) Roof Decks. Roof decks shal.l be set back
at least three ~eet frcm the ~ninimum sideyard
setback.
9.o~.as.oa.aso Architectura]. Rev~e~.
No build~ng or structure in the R1 District
shall be subject to architectural review pursuant to
the provisions of Chapter 9.32 of the Municipal Code
except:
(a) R1A Iats develaped for surface parking
lots, properties installing parabolic antennae {only
~ with respect to the antennae and screening).
(b) Dupiexes.
(c) Any structure abave 14 feet in height that
doss not conform to the required yard stepbacks for
structures above 14 feet in height. (Prior code
9b14.7)
_ g-_ - '1~~'?~
(dy Any structure that does nat conform to the
limitatians on access to_ subterranean garages and
basements.
9.04.08.02.094 Bubstantial Remode2.
Parking shall be provided in accordance with
the provisions cf Part 9.04.10.08, Off Street Parking
Requi~ements, if the principal hui3ding on the parcel
is substantially remodeled or, if 50 percent or more
addit~onal square factage is added to the principal
bui~ding at any one time, cr incrementally, after
September 8, 1988, provided the aggregate addition is
500 square feet or ~ore. (Prior code 9010.8).
SECTION 3. Part 9.04.20.3b is added to the Santa Monica
Munic~pal Code to read as follows:
Part 9.44.20.36 IIse Permits.
Section 9.a4.20.36.aio Purpase, A Use Permit
is intended to allow the estab~ishment af those uses
~
which have same special imgact or uniqueness such
that their effect on the surrounding environment
cannot be determined in advance of the use being
proposed for a particu~ar lacation, but which are
generally considered to be less significant in
potential effects than those uses subject to a
Conditional Use Permit. The permit application
process al~ows for the review of the location of the
proposed use, design, configuration of improvements,
- ~0-- - :'l~~~r~
and potential impact on the surraunding area from
propased use, and the evaluatian of the use based an
fixed and established standa~ds.
Section 9.04.20.35.020 Applicatson. An
app3ication for a U~e Psrmit shall be filed in a
manner consistent with the requirements contained in
Part 9.04.20.20, Sectians 9.04.20.2d.010 through
9.04.20.2Q.D60.
Section 9,Ok.~p.3~.fl30 Searinq and ~atioe.
Upon receipt in proper form of a Use Permit
applicatian, a public hearing be€ore the Zoning
Admin~strator shal~ be set. Notice vf such hearing
shall be sent ta all pr~perty owr3ers and tenants
within 3D0 feet of the praperty in a manner
consistent with Part 9.04.2~,22, Sectians
9.04.20.22.010 through 9.04.20.Z2.140.
Sectian 9.04.20.35.040 Findinqs. Following a
~ review of the application and public hearing, the
Zoning Administrator shal~ prepare a written decision
which shall cantain the findings af fact upon which
such decision is based. The Zoning Administrator or
Planning Cvmmission on appeal, may approve a Use
Permit app~ication in whole or in part, with vr
without conditions, provided all of the fallawing
findings of fact are made:
- 13 - ~ ~~1~~ o
(a) The proposed use is one subject to
approval of a Use Permit within the subject district
and camplies with all of the applicable pravisions of
this Chapter.
(b) The subject parcel is physically ~uitable
for the type of land use being proposed.
(c) The proposed u~e is compatible with any of
the ~and uses presently on the subject parcel if the
present land uses are to remain.
(d) The proposed use would be compatible with
existing and permissibZe land uses within the
distri~.4 and the general area in which the proposed
use is to be located.
{e) Tha ph~rsical location or placement of the
use on the site is compatible with and relates
harmoniously ta the surrounding neighbarhood.
(f2 The proposed use is cansistent with the
goals~ objectiv~s, and policies of the G~neral P1an.
(q~ The progosed use would not be detrimental
~
to the public interest~ health~ safety, or general
welfare.
Section 9.04.20.36.050 Coaditiaas. In
granting a Use Permit, the Zoning Administrator, or
the Planning Commission on appeal, shaZ~ require that _
the use and development of the property conform with
a site plan, architectura2 drawings, or statements
submi.tted in support of the application, ar in such
i ~1i2 i
-iz- ~
modifications thereof as may be deemed necessary to
protect the public hea2th, safety, and genera~
welfare and secure the objectives of the General ~
Plan, and may also impo~e such other conditions as
may be deemed necessary ta achieve these purposes,
including, but not limited to~ the fol~owing matters:
{a~ 5etbacks, yard areas, and open spaces.
(b) Fences, wa~ls, and screening.
(c) Lands~aping and maintenance of landscaping
and grounds.
{d) Regulation af signs.
(e) Control af naise, vibratian, adors, and
ather potentially dangerous or abjectionable
elements,
(f~ L~mits on time far conduct af specific
activities.
(q) Time period within which the proposed use
shall be developed.
(h) Such ather conditions as may be determin~d
to assure that development will be in accardance with
the intent and purposes af this Chapter,
(i} Reasonable guarantees of coa~pliance with
required canditions, such as a deed restriction or
requiring the applicant to furnish security in the
form of ~oney or surety bond in t~e amo~xnt fixed by
the administering agency.
~~ ,'1 ~ ? r,
- 13 - -
Section 9.04.20.36.Ob0 Co~mencement cf ~se.
The rights grantad by the Use Penait shall bE
effective only when exercised within the period
established as a condition of granting the permit ar.
in the absence of such estabZished time period, ane
(1) year fram the date the permit becomes effeCtive.
This time limit may be extended by the Zoning
Administrator for good cause for a geriad n~t to
exceed six (6) months upon written request by the
applicant. Use Permits approved in c~njunction with
new constructian projects s~ail expize if the rights
granted therein are nat exercised ~rithin six (6)
months followir~g issuance of a Certif icate of
Occupancy.
Section 9.04.20.36.070 Revo~atioa. T3~a Zaning
Administratar may, in exercise of his or her own
discretionl or upon the direction of the Planning
Commission sha3.1, revake any approved Use Permit in
~ accardance with the follawing procedures:
(a) A revacation hearing shall be held by the
.Zoni.ng Administratvr. Natice of the hearing shall be
published once ~n a newspaper of general circulatian
within the City and shali be served either in person
or by registered mail an the owner af the property _
and vn the permit holder at least ten (l0} days prior
to such hearing. The notice of hearing shall cantain
a statement af the specific reasons for revocation.
-1~- - !~~~9
(b) After the hearing, a IIse Permit may be
revoked by the Zoning Administrator, or by the
Planning Cam~mission on appeal or review, if any one
cf the following findings are made:
(1) That the Use Permit was obtained by
misrepresentation or fraud.
(2y That the use far which the Use
Permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended
for six ar more cansecutive calendar ffianths.
( 3~ That the C031dIt10IlS of the p~rmit
ha~e nat been met, or the permit granted is being or
has recently been exercised c~ntrary to the terms af
the approval or in violation of a specif ic statute,
ardinance~ law or regulation.
(c) A written determination of revocatian of a
Use Permit shal~ be mailed to the praperty awner and
the permit holder within ten {10) days of such
determination.
-- Section 9.44.2o.3s.480 Appeals. The approval,
conditions of appraval, deniai, or revocatiQn af a
Use Permit may be appea~.ed to the Planning Cammission
within fourteen {~4) consecut~ve calendar days of the
date the decision is made in the manner prov~ded in
Part 9.04.20.24, Sections 9.04.20.24.010 through _
9.04.20.24.050.
SECTTON 4. Any provisian of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisians of
~1'1f1;;~
- 15~ -
this Ordina~ce, to the extent of such incansistencies and no
furthEr, are hereby repea~ed or modified to that extent necessary
to effect the provisians of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. If any sectian, subsection~ sentenc~, clause,
or phrase of this Ordinance is far any reason he].d to be inva~id
ar unconstitutional by a decision a€ any court of any competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall nat affect the validity Q~ the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it wauld have passed this Ordinance, and each and
every section, subsection, sentence, clause, ar phrase not
declared i.nvaiid or uncanstitutianal withaut regard to whether
any portion of the Ordinance wou~d be subseqnently declared
invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 6. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall
attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
cause the same ta be published once in the off icial newspaper
within 1.5 days after its adaption. This Ordinance shall becom~
effective after 30 days from its adoption.
APPR4VED AS TO FORM:
, ~
C-' ~---~ ~ ~`•~,
JD EPH~LAWRENCE
A ing City Attarney
^ ~~t
~,~~~
- i 6- -
~l ~~~1~Y1~1Y1 ~
~ `I l ~ C:
Part 9.04.D8.02 R1 8inqie Family Residential ~~~~ District.
9.84.08.02.Q14 PutpQSe.
The RZ District is intanded to provide a single family
residential area free of disturbing noises, excessive traffic,
and hazards created by moving autamabiles. The R1 district is
designed to prevent burdens on the public faciliti~s, incZuding
sewer, water, electricity and schools by an influx and increase
of people to ~~~ n degree larger than the City'6 geographic
limits, tax base or financial capabilities can reasonably and
responsibly acconu~odate. The R~ district nffords protection from
deZeterious environmental eftects and serves to maintain and
protect the existing character ~~~ ~~~x~ of the residentia~
neighborhood. (Frior code 9014.1)
g.o~.aa.o2.aafl permitted uses.
The fo~lowing uses shall be penaitted in the R1 District;
(a) Haspice faeilities.
(b) ona single family dweZling per parcel pla~e3 on a
permanent foundatian (including manufactured housinqy.
(c~ One-story accessory buildings and structures up to 14
feet in height.
(d) Publ~c parks and playqrounds.
(e} Small fami3y day c~re homes.
(f) State authorized, licensed, or certified uses to the
extent required ta be permitted by State Law.
{g) Yard sales, limited to two per calendar year, for a
maximum of two days each. (Prior code 9D10.2)
(h) Dcmestic violenas shelter.
9.oa.os.o2.o30 IIses aubject to perfcrmaACe standarda permit.
The fallowing uses ma~ be periaitted in the R1 D~strict subject ta
the approval of a Performance Standards Permit:
' (a) Large Fam~ly Day Care hames.
(b) one-stary accessory living quarters, up to 14 feet in
height, on a parcel having a minimum area of 1~,400
squara ~eet.
(c) Private tenMis courts. (Prior cade 9010.3)
9.04.08.02.040 IIses 8ubject to IIse Permit. The follawinq uses
may be permitted in the R1 District sub~~ct to the approval of a
IIse Permit:
ia} one-stary accessory buil~inqs bver 14 feet ia heiqht nr
two story aoaessory buildinqs up to a maximum heiqht of
24 feet.
;b} Dupiexes on a parce2 having not less than 6,000 square
feet of area, a side parael iine of ~hich abuts or is
separated by aa alley from any R3, or R4 District.
9.o4.os.o2.45G Conditionaily permitted uses.
- 1 -
± JC3~'
_ .:t
The follcwing uses may be permitted in the Rl Dietrict sub~ect ta
the approval of a Conditional Use Permit:
,c~r ~~x~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~z~~~x ~~~~~~ ~~~ x~~~ ~~~r~ ~,~~~~ ~~~~~
~¢~~ ~~ ~x~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~x x~r~~ ~s ~~~~~ ~~~~~,~ ~~ ~~
~¢~~~~~~~ ~~r ~r ~xx~~r ~x~~~ ~~~t ~~t ~~ ~ ~~~x~~~~~
,~~r ~rs~t~x~x~r ~~¢¢~~~~r ~~~x~~~~~ ~~~~ z~ ~~~~ ~n ~¢~~~~ ~~
~~~ ~~~~ ~¢~~~~~~ ~~~x~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~x~~~ ~~~~x~ ~~
z~ ~~~~~
(a) Schools. (Prior code 9010.4)
9.04.08.D2.Ob0 Prohibited uses.
(a) Board~ng houses.
(b} Rooftap parking.
(c) Secvnd dwe~ling units pursuant to Section 65852.2(c) of
the Government code, State of Califarnia.
(d} Any uses not specifically autharized. (Priar cade
~oia.5)
9.04.08.02,070 Praperty developmeat standards.
AZ1 property in the RI District ShaZl be developed in accordance
with the fo~}.a~ring standards:
{a) l~iagimum Buildinq 8eiqht.
{1) Two staries, not ta exceed 28 feet, which includes
a].1 bui~dinq elemgnts egcept ahimneys ~d¢~~i~i~i~¢~ix
l~~~~i~~Jl~ ~7~FI ~~~`~~l't~}Z~ • ~''~~~~ 1d~X`~l~n~ ~~ ~~~l~ ~3~~X~~}'~~'
$x~3~~~~~3~~ ~l~ ~?~~#~~ ~~ X~ ~~~~ ~~ K~~f~~1~ F~~~J~$ ~~1~
~~¢~~$~ ?'~~~7d~`~X $~"'~~~ ~~ ~k~~ ~~R~~~~~ ~~~~ Y~~~ ~~~~~~1~
~~~XX ~~ ~~~~~~x ~n ~~~~~~~n~x X ~~~~ ~~z ~~~~`]r z ~¢~~ ~
z~~~~~ ~~~~~ x~ ~~~x ~~ ~~~x~~r~~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~
~~~~~~ ~~ ~x ~~~~f ~~ ~~~~x~x~ ~~ ~~¢ ~~~x~~x~~ ~~~xx
~~~~x~~~~ ~ ~x~n~ ~~~~~~~n~ ~x ~~~ ~r~ x~~~~~ ~~ ~~~
~~~z~~~ ~~~~ ~~x~ ~~~~~~~ ~r~~ ~~~~x~~~ri~ ~~ ~~ ~~:~x¢ ~~
~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~x~~~x ~~~~x~~ ~~~ ~r~~~~~~x ~~ ~~~
~~~~~
(2) On lats of more than 20,000 square feet with a
} mini~um fraat parcel ~ine dimension of 200 feet ~~
~~~~~~ ~~`~pi~~(~¢, the height shall nat exceed 35 feet for
a pitched roof or 28 feet far ~( ,f~~~ ather types of
roof s .
(b) M~ximum IInit Density, dne dwelling unit per parcel,
except where a¢~~igt~~~~~i~x Use Permit has been approved
for a duplex as permitted by Sectian 9.04.t}8.02.044 ib?.
(c) Minimum Lot Size. 5,000 square feet. Each parce]. shall
cantain a minimum depth of 100 feet and a minimum width
of 50 feet except that any parcel existing on the
effective date af this Chapter sha31 not be subject to
this requirement.
- 2 -
~ JLJ4
(d) Maximum Parcel Coveraqe. 4D percent ascapt that parc~ls
3000 square t~et ar smaXler map have a parae~ ccveraqe
ot 5o percent.
(e) Front Yard 8etbsck. As shown an the ~f~icial
Districting Map o~ the City, or, if na setback is
spec~fied, 20 feet. ~'~~ ~~~!¢~~t~`~~ ~~i~~ X~ ~¢~~ ~n
l~l~~~~~,1 ~~ F~~~`~~}~~ ~~ ~}~~ ~~`~J~r ~X~7~~~~~~ ~J~~~ Xf ~~~~
~~ #~~~~}~~ ~~~XX ~~ ~¢~~~t~~ ~x~ ~~~~~~~x~~X ~~~~~~¢ ~~ ~
~~~~ t~~~~~ ~x¢~~ ~ ~~~~ri~ ~x~~~ ~~~zx ~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~n
x~~ ~~x~~x~x~~r~ ~~ ~~~n~ ~x~~~~~~n ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~
~~~~~n~ ~~~ ~c~~~~~~~~x ~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~x•
(~) Additiona~ Front 8tepback Abova 1~ Feet in Height. For
new structures or additioas ta ex$stiag st~ctures which
are over l~ faet in height, 2~ percent o€ the maximum
allowable front elevation shall be ~~~jd~i¢~t steppea-2aack
an additianal average amouat equal to four percent af
parcel ~epth, ~#Y~~~~t~ ~S~ ~ ~~~~t ~ram the required tront
setback, but ~n no case gre~ter than ten ~eet ~~~~~~
3bk~RX`~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~X~~~` $~~~~~ ~l~'i ~}s ~~~$~`~~J+~ ~~~t ~~ 1~~~
¢h~~l~~¢~,~ ~#~~A~ ~¢f~~7R~ ~X~~~ ~~~XX 1~~~ ~~ ~~1~~~~R~ ~l!~ ~~~
~~x~~x~~~~r~ ~~ ~~~r~~ ¢x~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~x~~~~~ ~~ ~~¢xz~~
~~~ ~[~I~l~~~~}~~x ~[7i~}~~i~¢ ~ ~~~~ ~¢~~d~i~J~t,! As used in this
Chapter, *~maximum aZlowa~ls elenatian~+ shalZ mean the
maximum theoretical linear leaqth of a qiven faCader
~hicb iaaludes tha parael widtb, m~.nus required ma~nimum
setbacks.
(g) Rear Yard Setbaak. 25 fset.
(h) Additional Rear Stepback Abone 14
nem strtrctures or additiQas to
having a buildiag heiqht in excess
25 peroent of ths mauimum allowabZe
be atepped-back an additional, ave
four peroent af parcel depth tro
setback, but ~n no aase greater tha
Fest in Heiqht. For
agisting structures
ot li feet in beiqht,
rear eievation shall
raqe amouat equa.z ta
m the required rear
n tea faet.
(i} side Yard Sathnck. Tan percent of the ~~~ parcei width
or a minimum of ~~~¢ ~~~~ three feet six inches,
whichever is greater, but ia no Gase greater than i5
~eet. i~~3a¢~~~,1 ~n X~i~~ X~~~ ~~ri ~,i~l~-~ ~~~~`~ ~~~~,t ~
l~~~X~}~P~ 1~ ~~~~ ~~~~ I~~~`~ ~~~Xx ~~ ~~~~~`~F~~ (See also
Section 9.04.10.02.~90}
(j} Additionai 8ide 8tapbacks Abava i~ test in Height.
Fifty percent of tba masimum allomable side building
elevations in axcess af 14 feet in heiqht ~[~d~7~¢ ~~i¢
~1~~#~l~~ ~~~kt~~[x ~~`~C~~ ~I~C abova the required side yard
setback shall be ~~~]b~(~x stepped-back an additional ~.
foat for every 2 feet 4 inches abave ~.4 feet af building
height to a maximum height of 21 feet. j~~ ~~}~~~~d~i ~~
~~~ ~3~~XR~~7~$ ~I~~XX ~~~~X~~~~ ~ l~x~l~~ ~~~~#'~~~}~~ ~X ~~l~~
~K ~¢~~~~ ~~ ~M~ F~~l~~#~J~ ~~~~ I~F~J~R~ ~~~~~¢~ ~}~~ ~~~~1~~~1~~
- 3 -
~~'~ft~'3;
~~ ~~ ~~~x~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~z ~~~~~~ ~~~
~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~
(k} Additional 8ide Btepbaak_Above 21 Feet ~n Heiqht. Na
partion of the bnilding, escept permitted Pr0]~Ct1QAS~
shal2 intersect a plane cam~~ncinq 21 feet in heiqht at
the ~iaimum sidepard setback and estendiaq at an anqle
of ~5 deqreea from the vertica~ toxard the interior af
the site. Thxs requirement may be m~dified by the
Archi~eaturai Review Board uader ths provisions cf
8ectiom tn? belo~.
{1) Additiaaa~ Side Setback for Gorner Paraels. An
additionA~ sideyard aetback equal to txo percent of the
parcel aidth, but in ao casa aquaYinq more than an
adaitional t~o feet, shall be pravidsd alonq the street
sideyard for cornQr parceis.
(~} Frant Yard Paving. No more than 5D~ p~rasnt of the
required front yard area including driveways ahall be
paved, escept that ~ots ~ith a xidtb of 25 feet cr less
may hava up to 60 parcent of ths frant yard area gaved.
~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~Y~~~Y~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~
~~~~ ~AF #~~~ ~~ W~~~~!
{n) Moditiaatfons to Stepbacks abova i~ feet in haiqbt. The
tront ~~~~ and side yard ~¢~~~~ ~~~~~~~ stepback
requirements for the portion of a gtructure above 14
feet in height may be modified sub~ect ta the review and
approval of the Architectural Review Board if the Baard
finds that the madi~icatian will not be d$trimental to
the property, adjoiainq properties, or the general area
in ~hich the proparty is ~ocated. (Prior code 90~0.6;
amended by Ord. No. 1476 CCS, adopted 4/25/89)
{oy circular Driveways. No circular driveways shall be
permitted on parcels less than 1D0 feet in width.
s (p) Basements and 8u~terranean Garages. No basement cr
snbterranean qaraqe ahall extend iato any required yard
setback area, except for ang b~aenieat or qarage lccated
beneath aa acaessory buildiaq ~rhich is otherwise
perm3tted withia a yard area.
(q) Acce~s to 8uhterraaean Garaqes and Basemeats. No
dra.veway, stairway, docrway, liqhtwell, Nindow or other
auah e~ement to a subterraneaa or semi-subterranean
garaga or basemeat sha7.1 be looated in the frant yard
setback area. Thia requirement may be moditied by the
Arcbitectural Review ecard ~f ~t fin!!s that tapoqra-phia
conditions or the plaaement of agistinq buildings on the
site aecessitate that such access be permitted.
(r) Roof de~ks. Rvof deaks shall be set back at ~east three
feet trom the miaimum sideyard setback.
- 4 -
.. , ., ~
_ - ~ . ~i ~ ~ .~ ~~
9,04.08.02.080 Architectural revie~.
No buildinq or structur~ in the R1 Distr~ct shall be subj ect ta
architectural rev~ew pursuant ta the prov~sian6 of Chapter 9.32
of ~yi~~ ~i~~~~¢ tbe ~iuaicipal code except:
(a} R1A lots developed far surface parking lots, properties
instaZling paraboZic antennae (on~y with respect to the
antennae and screening).
{b) Duplexes.
(c) Any structure above 1~ f~at in haiqht that does not
ccnform to the raquired yard ~f~i~l ~i~~~j~~ ¢~~]8~€~~~
stagbaaka for structures above 14 feet in height.
(Prior code 9D1b.7}
id} Anp structure that does not conform to tha limitations
on access to s~btsrranean garaqes and basemeats.
~
9.84.06.02.C90 6ubstantfal remadel.
Parking shal~ be provided in accordance with the provisions o~
~~¢~~~~i $~~~~X~,l~~~~b~t~ Part 9• D~ • 10. 08, off 8trset Parking
Requireiaents~ if the principal buildinq on the parcel is
substantially remodeled or, if 50~ percent or more additional
square footage is added ta the prinoipa~, building at any ane
time, or incremental~y, a~ter ~pt~ ~~~~~~,~~~ ~t~i~~ ~~ ~pi~~ ¢~i~[~~~~
septen-ber B, ~988, provided the aggraqato additian is 500 square
feet or mare. (Prior code 901d.8).
permdoc/rl
- 5 -
~,~,y~~
AT~'14CH1VIE~ C
.. ,.~ , ,.~ ~
rJ _ ~` ~