sr-102875-7aSanta Monica, California, October 1'], 1975
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff ~"
SUBJECT: Review of Planning Commission Approval of Con minium`
~'^J Conversion at 191`] - 11th Street
Y A ypgegQ R~~R®r~ ~$$gg~~p~~pe
Introduction ~ q ~tqq ~~
This is a staff report on a Review by the City.Cou~~~~ ~i"7a'~
~'Mts i33 ® sa~~
action by the City Planning Commission approving conver~e~~L~N~~~,~g
GI"lY CL~R6C
six unit apartment house to a six unit condominium. FOt2 F441tA~:
Background
In September 1974 the City Council established a moratorium
on condominium conversions until a new condominium conversion
ordinance based on a Housing Element had been adopted or six months
read elapsed whichever came first: By virtue of the six month limi-
tation the moratorium expired on March 17, 19']5 while the Housing
Element is only now in its final stages of completion. On August 12
the owner of the six unit apartment at 1917 - 11th Street filed a
Tentative Tract Map to convert the building to condominium purposes.
The .building. meets the minimum requirements of the City's Condo-
minium Ordinance in that it is three years old and has 1% parking
spaces per unit.
On September 22, 1975 .the City Planning Commission by vote of
4 to 1 approved the conversion and on October 9, 1975 Councilman
Seymour A. Cohen requested that the decision be reviewed by the
City Council.
Section 9123 of the Municipal Code regulating the development
of condominiums requires that condominium projects be evaluated and
processed .pursuant to Section 9148 regulating Conditional Uses which
Section provides that any member of the City Council may ask for a
Review of a Planning Commission decision within 20 days of the
Commission's action and that the Determination of the City Council
affirming, reversing or modifying any decision shall be final.
In reaching its Determination that the application should be"
approved, the Planning Commission cited the following factors:
1. The City presently does not have a moratorium
in effect precluding condominium conversions.
2. .The building meets-the minimum required standards -
for condominium conversions.
3. The building is well maintained in both appear-
ante and repair and the present tenants-are not
opposed to the proposed conversion.
4. The conversion would make :available owner-occupied
dwellings at or near the $40,000 price level, a
range in which few if any such units are now being
offered.
5. Construction features and proposed improvements,
including automatic carport gates, represent better
than average standards for the community.
Alternatives
In view of the building's recent construction and area limi-
tation," the City Council appears to have only two alternatives:
to sustain or reverse the Planning Commission's decision.
- 2 -
Alternative 1. Sustain the Planning Commission decision and
" approve the subdivision for, condominium purposes.,
Pros of this alternative include the provision of six owner-
occupied units in a probable price range and area in which the
availability of owner-occupied dwellings are at a premium. Such
action will also probably result in increased property values and
a corresponding rise in tax revenues to the City.
The cons of this alternative include the approval. of a condo-
minium conversion prior to the City Council's expressed desire to
defer further conversions until they had an opportunity to approve
new regulations. Another result may be an increase in the cost of
housing for either the present occupants or subsequent occupants of
the units involved.
Alternative 2 includes the reversal of the Planning Commission
Determination and the denial of the subdivision application.
The pros of this alternative include the retention of the
present ban on condominium conversions until such time as the City
Council has reviewed and adopted new policies and regulations cover
ing such actions. Additionally'housing costs for the present occu-
pants and the units involved will probably be retained at a some-
what lower level in the near fut~zre than would otherwise be done
and those present tenants not wishing or unable ,to participate will not
be displaced by the conversion activity.
The cons include the potential loss of owner-occupied units
which may not be eligible under revised conversion regulations, the
resultant loss of potential increases in property values and City
- 3 -
-revenues and the disruption of plans or decisions which the present
occupants may have made based on the expectation; of conversion.
Recommendation
In light of the Planning Commission's determination that this
property represents a-.suitable subject for a condominium conversion;,
in spite of the intended moratorium on conversions and the staff
recommendation that such action be deferred or denied, it is re-
spectfully recommended that the City Council affirm_ the Planning
Commission's determination in this-case and take such action as may
be necessary to preclude further conversion applications until new
regulations have been prepared.
Prepared by: James Zunsford
Jl,:bt
- 4 -
SIXTEEN EiG HTY FIVE MAIN STREET
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90404
Mr. James Lunsford
Director of Planning
City of Santa Monica
1685 .Main Street
Santa Monica, Calif. 80401
Dear Mr. Lunsford:
Seymour A, Cohen
Councilman
October 8, 1975
I note that the City Planning Commission
Minutes of September 22, 1975 indicate approval of Tentative
Tract No. 28111 allowing the conversion of a six unit apartment
building at 1817 - 11th Street, Santa Monica, to a six unit
condominium.
Under the provisions of Section g148C of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code, any member of the City Council
upon written notice filed with the Secretary of the Planning
Commission within twenty days from the date of Determination'
may-require the Commission's decision be reviewed by the City
Council.
I hereby request that the decision in the
matter of Tentative Tract No. 28111 be reviewed by the City
Council in accordance with the provisions of this Section.
SEYMOT3IZ A. COHEN, Councilman
City of Santa Monica
cc: City Manager
City Attorney
RESOLUPION OF THE CITY PLANNING
COMMISSION bF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA APPROVING THE TENTATIVE
MAP FOR A SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS a Tentative Map for a subdivision of Lot 378,
Towner Terrace Tract, having been filed on August 13, 1975_.
by Christopher J. Bourke, owner and subdivider, and,
WHEREAS the Tentative Subdivision Map, identified as
Tract No. 28111, effects property .located in the corporate
boundaries of the City of Santa Monica, and,
WHEREAS the City Planning Commission of the .City of Santa
Monica has held a Public Hearing on such application for subdiv-
ision on September 15, 1975, and,
WHEREAS the City Pla-ning Commission finds that the proposed
subdivision is in conformance with Chapters 1 and 3, Article. IX
of the Santa Monica Municipal Code relating to subdivisions, and
in conformance with the General Plan,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City Planning Commission of the City
of Santa Monica does hereby approve the Tentative Subdivision
Map No. 28111 subject to any corrections required by the City
Engineer.
SECTION 2. That the Secretary shall certify to the adoption
of this resolution and henceforth and thereafter the Resolution
shall be in full force and effect.
ADOPTED and APPROVED this 22nd day of September, 1975
DONALD G. MALCOLM, Chairman
City Planning Commission
City of Santa Monica
ATTF.CT
Regular Meeting of the City Planning Commission 9-22-75 Page 2.
C. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 28111, 1917.- 11th Street
Public Hearing was called in the matter of a request for approval
of Subdivision Tract No. 28111, involving the conversion of a six
unit apartment building to a six unit condominium.
Following a Staff report, the Public Hearing was declared open.
The following persons spoke in favor of approval:
Christopher Bourke, Applicant
There being no one else present wishing to speak on the matter,
the Public Hearing was closed: -
Following a discussion by the Commission, Commissioner Malcolm
moved to approve the Tract with the provision that the cohstraints'
as to the treatment of the tenants as stated in findings of the-
Planning Director be included as a condition bf approval. The motion
was seconded by Commissioner Schneider and carried by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hotchkiss, Katz, Schneider, Malcolm
NOES: Commissioner Lonsinger
ABSENT: Commissioi~er_s Gould, Roper
ADDED IPEM:
In the discussion of Item Sc, the Commissioners expressed
a feeling that further attempts at condominium coriver_sions should -
be eliminated until the Housing Element is adopted and the effects
of nonversi_ons on housing and economies is known., Commissioner-
Ratz moved to reconunend to the City Council a moratorium on condo-
minium conversions until the Housing Element is adopted. The .
motion was amended at the request of Commissioner Lonsinger to,'
reconnnend a six months moratorium. The motiori was seconded by
Cornmiss.i_oner Schneider and carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hotchkiss, Katz, Lonsinger,.
Schneider, Malcolm
NOES:- None
ABSENT: Commissioners Gould, Roper
Sd. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, Z. A. CASE 237 U.P. Kramer Motors
Public Hearing was called in the matter of a request by Kramer
Motors for a Conditional Use Permit to extend a commercial use for
automobile service into an adjoining R2A District.
Following a Staff report,, the Public Hearing was declared
open. The following persons spoke in favor of the application:
Robert Kramer, Kramer Motors
There being no one else present wishing to speak either in
favor or opposition on the matter, the Public Hearing was closed.
Following a discussion. by the Commission, it was unanimously
agreed to put over the request to the October 20 meeting because
of the lack of definitive information. The applicant was requested
to have floor plans, detailed landscaping plans and elevations
available for review.
OLD BUSINESS:
None
NEW BUSINESS:
None
CO1dP;U?VICATIONS
e~"
- CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF SANTA. MONICA
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: September 18,.,1975
T0: The I3onorable Planning Commission
FROM: The Director of Planning
SUBJF'CT: Proposed Condominium Conversion, Tract
191'] - 11th Street, 6 Units.
Christopher Bourke, owner of the
building at 191'] - 11th Street, has filed
Map for the conversion of the apartment to
No. 28111,
6 unit apartment
Tentative Tract
condominiums.
Completed in September 1972 and providing 9 parking
spaces for 6 units, the building meets the minimum requirements
for conversion in that it is three years old and has 1%z parking
spaces per unit. The building is in good condition and we11
maintained. All units are two bedroom and 2 baths with the
exception of an owner's unit of 2 bedrooms, a family room, a
den and 3%z baths.
In September of 19']4 the City Council placed a mora-
torium in effect on all condominium conversions for a period of
six months or the adoption of a new condominium conversion
ordinance based on the City's Housing Element. Unfortunately,
completion of the Housing Element has not been accomplished as
early as anticipated and although the moratorium has technically
expired, a new condominium conversion ordinance has not been pre-
pared. Inasmuch as the moratorium is not in effect the applicant
has the legal right to seek approval for a condominium conversion
under the existing Ordinance and consequently has filed a Tentative
Tract Map for this purpose.
The applicant was advised that the Planning Staff did nod
belies the application was appropriate or would be favorably re-
ceived because the intent of the City Council was clearly to
defer all further conversions until they had adopted a more ac-
ceptable conversion ordinance.
Recommendation
In view of the fact -that the proposed structure meets
the minimum requirements for conversion and the applicant has
elected to pursue the matter at this time rather than wait for
adoption of a new condominimum ordinance, it is respectfully
recommended that the application be denied on the basis that the
granting of a condominium conversion constitutes a discretionary '
act effecting the availability of housing in the community and
that the absence of an adopted Housing Element impairs the capa-
bility of the Planning Commission to properly make a decision
based upon adequate information as to need and economic copse-
quences.
As an alternative, it is suggested that the matter be -
put over, with the consent of the applicant, until a new convey-
sion ordinance has been adopted or such other action as may be
forthcoming. Unless such consent is granted by the applicant,
the application should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
.w L
James Lunsf r
Director of arming
JL:bt
- 2 -
CITY PLANNING DEPAR'IMII~T
CITY OF SANTA MONICA '
AGENDA ITEM 5C
TJM EVALUATION ANALYSIS
TENTATIVE TRACT NO: 28111
FOR: Christopher Bourke
Santa Monica
ADDRESS: 1917 - 11th Street
LOT SIZE: 50' x 150'
LOI' AREA: 7500 Square Feet
MAXIMUM UNITS PERMITTED: 6
Il7P AREA PER UNIT: 1333.3 Square Feet
I,OT COVERAGE: 63°s
DISTRICT: R2
ADJACENT DISTRICT: R2
PLUS z ALLEY: -8000 Square Feet
UNITS PROPOSED: 6 Unit Conversion
D~VSITY: 32.67 DU/ACRE
TAT TYPE: Interior
YARDS: Front: 20'
Rear: 15' from centerline of rear alley
Right Side: 5'
Left Side: 5'
HULLOING FIGHT: 2 stories over subterranean garage - 22' total
HEIGHT OF SUBTERRANEAN GARAGE: Varies (Hillside)
UNIT DESCRIPTION: Owner's - 2 bedrooms, Family room, Den, 32 baths
2400 square feet
#2 2 bedrooms, 2 baths 1050 square feet
#3 2 bedrooms, 2 baths 1120 square feet
#4 2 bedrooms, 2 baths 1070 square feet
#5 2 bedrooms, 2 baths 1250 square feet
#6 2 bedrooms, 2 baths 1080 square feet
PARKING: 2 spaces in front subterranean garage .for owner's unit;
7 spaces (2 tandem) in rear carport off alley.
GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS: Please refer to attached "check list"
CC&Rs: Please refer to attached "Resume.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: Exempt from CEQA
EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: 6 unit apartment building
TREES OR LANDSCAPING TO BE REMOVED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Date: B
W. FORD
JWL/js Directo of Planning
MR. Cl-iRISTOPHER J. BOURKE,
t9t7 11TH STREET, #1
SANTA MONICA
CA 90401
AUGUST 12TH, 1975
DEAR MR, OBERBECK,
6 UNET APT. BU@CDING; t9t7 tt.TH STREET
LOT 378, TOWNER TERRACE
1 APPLY TO HAVE THE ABOVE APARTMENT BUILDING CONVERTED
INTO A 6 UNIT CONDOMINIUM® ENCLOSED, HEREWITH, IS A CHECK FOR $60
TOGETHER WIdH A TRACT MAP, ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND CONDOMENIUM
LAYOUTS
THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE, INSURANCE, OUTSIDE LIGHTING,
ACCESS AREAS, LAUNDRY ROOM, GAS AND WATER USAGE WILL BE PROF~SS[ONALLY
ORGANISED UNDER A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
IF THE CONVERSION IS APPROVED, MY WIFE AND 1 INTEND TO
ENCLOSE THE CARPORT WITH AUTOMATIC OPEN AND CLOSE .GATES,
YOURS FAITHFULLY,
CHRISTOPHER J. BOURKE
(OW NERD
CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING,
ROOM 202, 1685 MAIN STREET,
SANTA MONICA
SCALE I"• 40' - SjiEET i OF I SHEET
• TENTATIVE MAP .
.~ ~~~
' IN THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
" STATE OF CALIFORNIA I~
FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
'. BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 378, 70WNER TERRACE, PER MAP _
RECORDED IN BOOK 8, PAGE 25, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF LOS
- ANGELES COUNTY. ~~
I
" ~ -` AUGUST II, 1975 ".. ': --, ... '~~.
... O INNER ... ~ NOTE--
C.h'/2/STOPHER ®oURKE TN/J % RO/ECT CoN3/STS Of THE PROPOSED
/9/> E[E/ENTN 9TR EET APT / foH/EA3/ON, TO Go NdO M/N/e/M OF AN
SANTA MON/CA, CAL/PORN/A 9040¢ EX/ST/N4 2' S/ORT, 6-UN/T APq RTMENT
' TEL ~2/3) ,395-9457 _ ,9u/LO/NG, D/ER 9 PARK/NG SPACES,
- LOGATEO /N THE R-C ZONE AT /9/>
' EGE /ENTN .STREET, JANTy MON/LAS
"'ENG/NEER^ fAL/FORK/A.
ROBERT Yl! (NOOOBC/RY ~R.GE, 65BSJ - i
6d0 N/GNTREE ROAD
SANTA MON/cA fAL/PORN/q 90402
TEL. ~ ~Z/gJ 4S6 - 5650 _ _ - Ili
.tu
.. o _
Fi'>`
o ~_ "ti THl'ELFTH STREET - - ~_ ~
-.. -. m - - .. - - -. -
" v
1
_~
I ~~
~-
of
, o'
Q, a~
2~ y
d~ v
o
2
_~ ~ _ .*3V
~ &~e
ne
ti
~
~~
o
°
0' 6
O'
' vk4
3 JO 5
~
r
.. -0
~ o-
_ @ _ E~EVE~vrH srR~Er
- -
® _-
0
a
~ •
1 _
0
Q ~2O
N ~;~
tto
W !h
~or7 y~~a
`~ 3°'wW
~ 4Vq
h \~p`
t
Z Zo\~
SO.OO ~ /d
CA SIS:cam
Santa Monica, California
October 28, 1975
T0: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Request by Seymour A. Cohen for
Review of Planning Commission Approval
or Tentative Tract No. 28111; Council
Agenda Item No. 10A3, October 28, 1975
INTRODUCTION
This report discusses available grounds to
disapprove the above referenced tract map..
BACKGROUND
Denial can be based upon the discretionary deter-
urination that the affect of the conversion's overall impact
on "schools, parks, utilities, neighborhoods, streets,
traffic, parking and other community facilties and re-
sources" is adverse from the point of view of "sound
community planning, the economic, ecological, cultural and
aesthetic qualities of the community, and on public health,
safety, and general welfare." (Section 9123A1 S.M. M.C.)
Specifically, §9123B presently requires two
parking spaces per unit for a condominium. This structure
provides only 1-1/2 spaces per unit. This lack may have
an adverse effect upon the neighborhood, streets, traffic and
parking, sound community planning may require adequate parking
to affect a "home-like" atmosphere for condominium owners, to
keep vehicles off the street and to prevent possible future
manipulation of garage area parking space by the proposed
homeowner`s association in contravention of ~9123B1,
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that if denial of
tract #28111 is desired, it be implemented through the above
process.