Loading...
M-5/3/1988 I 280 CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 3, 1988 A meeting of the Santa Monica City council was called to order by Mayor Conn at 6:35 p.m., on Tuesday, May 3, 1988, in the Council Chambers, having been adjourned from April 26, 1988. Roll Call: Present: Mayor James P. Conn Mayor Pro Tempore Herbert Katz Councilmember David B. Finkel Councilmember william H. Jennings councilmember Alan S. Katz Councilmember Christine E. Reed Councilmember Dennis Zane (entered at 6:37 p.m.) Also Present: city Manager John Jalili Assistant City Attorney Joseph Lawrence Deputy City Attorney Laurie Lieberman Acting city Clerk Donna R. Betancourt 1. DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE: Presented was the matter of Council direction to staff on the Draft Zoning Ordinance. [All page references are to the Fourth Draft of the Santa Monica Zoning Ordinance, dated November 1987.] For Subchapter lOB, Home Occupation permits, Councilmember Reed moved (p. 299) to amend this section to include provision for mail notice on the application for a home occupation permit, within a 500 foot radius, with an opportunity for those being noticed to comment back to the Zoning Administrator, and that the home occupation permits have a specific term, either two or three years, so there is a periodic renewal required and renotification that would enable the review of any changed circumstances. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. Discussion was held. With no obj ection from the second, the maker amended the motion to change the notification radius to 100 feet. Discussion was held. At the suggestion of staff, and with the concurrence of the second, the maker amended the motion to refer the matter to staff to come back with a proposal to improve the existing process, stressing that the initial intent of the motion not be lost, that there be some notice and some opportunity for people to comment. The motion was unanimously approved. Councilmember Finkel moved (pp. 300-301) to direct staff to look at subsections 9110.3{b) and 9110.3{k) and make appropriate recommendations to Council as to what standards for "benign" and inobtrusive activity might be appropriate to permit. Second by Councilmember Zane. During discussion, at the suggestion of Councilmember Reed, the maker and second amended the motion to 1 May 3, 1988 281 delete reference to subsection 9110.3(b). The motion failed by the following vote: council vote: Affirmative: councilmembers Finkel, A. Katz, Zane Negative: Councilmembers Jennings, H. Katz, Reed, Mayor Conn Councilmember Reed moved (p. 300) under subsection 9110.3(g) that "reasonable courier servicesll be defined as no more than twice a week. The motion died for lack of a second. For Subchapter 10E, variances, Councilmember Zane moved (p. 316) under Section 9113.4 to change the notification radius from 300 feet to 500 feet. Second by Councilmember Finkel. with no objection from the second, the maker included in the motion that it be made explicit that lIall property owners and tenants" mean all commercial and residential property owners as well as commercial and residential tenants. During discussion, the maker amended the motion to withdraw the portion referring to 500 feet, leaving the radius at 300 feet for notification for variances. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. Discussion was held. The amended motion was approved, Councilmember Jennings opposed. For Subchapter 10F, Conditional Use Permits, councilmember Zane moved (p. 320) under Section 9114.1 to add language spelling out the 500 foot radius for notification. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. For Subchapter lOG, Site Plan Review Permit, Councilmember Jennings moved (p. 326) to add that if the height or FAR goes over the as-of-right standard, the developer must establish to the City's satisfaction that the increased FAR or height will not result in more traffic generation than what would be generated by the FAR and height allowed as of right, and that some amount of usable open public space be provided in the project in order to go over the basic allowed amount. Second by councilmember Zane. Discussion was held. Councilmember Zane moved a substitute motion to direct staff to develop standards which require that for the purpose of granting a site review permit so as to provide extra height and extra density above the established standard, that an affirmative finding needs to be made that some significant public objective would be achieved, and that no excessive burdens would be created, with staff to bring back to Council language and a procedure to reflect this, and some criteria by which the decisionmakers can evaluate it, inclusive I of the criteria set forth in Mr. Jennings' motion, including in the motion that in the context of the Interim Zoning Ordinance, no site review processes should be applied, and that by the time the Zoning comes back for final adoption, the aforementioned criteria and procedure should be developed for any future site review approvals. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. During discussion, with the concurrence of the second, the maker amended the motion to limit it to the substance of the change, with the question of what happens in the interim to be the subject of a separate motion. The amended motion was unanimously approved. 2 May 3, 1988 I 282 Councilmember Reed moved to direct staff not to hold the Zoning Ordinance for the competion of the work that is necessary to address the previous motion, and that further, they be directed at such time as they bring the Zoning Ordinance back to council, to also bring whatever document or ordinance is necessary to hold the site plan review process in abeyance until such time as the staff work is completed, but in no event longer than six months after the adoption of the full Zoning Ordinance. Second by Councilmember Zane. Discussion was held. Referencing the earlier discussion with respect to site review permits having to do with developing of standards to include afffirmative findings of some significant public objective, Councilmember Zane moved a substitute motion that that site review permit is the standard to be applied when a developer wishes to exceed the as-of-right height and density standard, and it is not to apply in the instances where it is simply above the two-lot standard. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The chair clarified that the process outlined in the Fourth Draft of the Zoning Ordinance would stay in place for those projects that surpassed the threshold, but that site review of projects above the by-rights standard would be held in abeyance. Discussion was held. Councilmember Zane moved a substitute motion that the prior adopted motion shall apply only to those si te review permits triggered by projects proposing to exceed the as-of-right height and FAR standard, and both in the interim and until the standard comes back to council, no proposals for site review above the as-of-right height limit and FAR limit will be processed. Second by Councilmember Finkel. Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment to limit the unavailability of site plan review permits to when the FAR is exceeded but not the height. The amendment was accepted by the maker and second and incorporated into the motion. The maker clarified that this motion states that no site review permits for excess FAR would be granted in the interim period and those site review permits which are granted are limited to those that are between the two-lot standard and the as-of-right FAR, and further, that the only restriction is on variations from FAR. The motion, as amended, was approved, Councilmerober A. Katz opposed. Councilmember Zane moved (p. 326) to increase the notification radius from 300 feet to 500 feet, and clearly spell that out in Section 9115.3. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The motion was clarified to apply only in those cases between the two-lot and the as-of-right FAR standards, and the increased height. The motion was unanimously approved. For Subchapter 10H, Amendments of comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, Councilmember Zane moved (p. 330) under subsection 912o.2(a) (3) to include specific notice of the same sort that would apply in the case of a site review permit. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. During discussion, the second was withdrawn. Councilmember Zane moved to direct staff to develop language to address the concern regarding notification whenever a text amendment results in a change for a specific parcel. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. 3 May 3, 1988 283 Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz moved (p. 333) to add a subsection under section 9120.6 that for interim ordinances, there be a variance procedure in the interim zoning ordinance. Second by Councilmember Reed. The motion was unanimously approved. Councilmember Zane moved (p. 333) under Section 9120.7 that the vested rights standard be drafted to reflect applicable state law and judicial precedent, whereby proj ects are vested upon the basis of having made substantial expenditures in reliance upon final approvals, not upon the final approval itself. Second by Councilmember Finkel. Discussion was held. Councilmember Reed moved to delete section 9120.7, thereby not providing a general standard but giving Council the discretion to adopt individual vesting standards particular to each circumstance. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The maker and second accepted the motion as a friendly amendment to the main motion. The motion, as amended, was unanimously approved. For Subchapter 10L, General and Specific Plans, Councilmember Reed moved (p. 340) to add a subsection under Section 9121.13 to allow for the private initiation of a Specific Plan, and have staff advise council as to whether a minimum size in number of lots or acres for a Specie Plan area should be included. Second by Councilmember Finkel. Discussion was held. The maker amended the motion, to take into consideration the recommendations of staff, that the language be drafted to allow the individual property owners to request consideration before the Planning Commission, and let the Commission decide whether or not the request merits formal consideration. Second by Councilmember Zane. The motion was unanimously approved. Councilmember Zane moved (p. 341) under Section capitalize "Specific Plan" in line 3. Second by Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. 9121. 17 Mayor to Pro For Subchapter 10K, Hearing Procedures, councilmember Zane moved (p. 349) under subsection 9131.5(a) that the language regarding the hearing notification radius be made consistent with prior motions. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. For Subchapter 10L, Appeals, Councilmember Zane moved that the policy of the City should be that any Planning commissioner or Councilmember may appeal to the Council. Upon determination that this provision is included in the Draft, the motion was withdrawn. For Subchapter 10M, Enforcement, Councilmember Reed moved (p. 357) that the prior authorization of the City Council and the intent thereto to include citation authority for the Zoning Administrator be appropriately incorporated into Section 9150.5. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. This concluded direction on changes on a page-by-page basis; the following directions are to sections throughout the document. 4 May 3, 1988 I I 284 Councilmember Reed moved (p. 295) , regarding subsection 9080.4(c), to direct staff to gather information and advise Council who will be put out of business in five years on vehicle storage lots and vehicle sales lots. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. Discussion was held. The motion was unanimously approved. Councilmember Reed moved (p. 160) to add "hedges" into the language of Section 9040.8, thereby reading, "Any fence, wall, hedge, or flagpole shall comply "Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. Discussion was held. With the consent of the second, the maker amended the motion to include authorization to include an appropriate definition for hedges, and clarifying that this does not include trees, but linear, densely planted hedges acting as fences. The motion was unanimously approved. Councilmember Zane moved in the C3C Zone (the Downtown Core District) to adopt a policy of counting residential at 50 percent of its FAR on all parcels in that zone, to encourage housing in the mixed-use projects in the Downtown Zone. Second by Councilmember Finkel. Discussion was held. with no objection from the second, the maker included in the motion Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz's suggestion that staff be directed to evaluate whether any modifications in parking standards should be required as a consequence of this action. Councilmember Reed moved an amendment to restrict the housing provision to above the second floor. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment to limit residential uses to the second floor and above. Upon advisement that this requirement is already included, the motion was withdrawn. The motion was approved, Councilmember Reed opposed. Councilmember Finkel moved to direct staff to explore ways and means of encouraging affordable housing in the C3C Zone and make appropriate recommendations to Council. Second by Councilmember Zane. The motion was unanimously approved. Referencing city Attorney Memorandum Opinion Number 88-2, dated March 8, 1988, which states that in the opinion of the city Attorney's office, pursuant to current state law (Section 65852.2 of the Government Code), the prohibition of second units within single-family residential zoned areas is unlawful, Councilmember Finkel moved (p. 41) under subsection 9010.5(b) to instruct staff to come back with recommendations for substitute language which would come as close as possible to conforming to the spirit and purpose which Council sought to achieve, and at the same time, doing it in a fashion which is legal. Second by councilmember A. Katz. The maker modified the motion to incorporate councilmember A. Katz's suggestion that this not be limited to modifications to this section but may be made a performance standard that affects several sections. Discussion was held. Councilmember Jennings moved a substitute motion to direct staff to prepare the necessary findings, as best they can, to support the exclusion of second dwelling units in the Rl areas, and to bring those findings to Council for inclusion in the Zoning Ordinance when it 5 May 3, 1988 285 is considered in July. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. Referencing city Attorney Memorandum of Opinion Number 87-54, dated December 31, 1987, regarding proposed Zoning Ordinance provisions regulating child care, Councilmember Finkel moved that all sections of the proposed ordinance referred to in the City Attorney I s analysis (p. 4 of the Opinion) be amended so as to bring them into conformity to the proposed language and the proposed changes set forth in the Opinion (thereby conforming to state law). Second by Councilmember A. Katz. councilmember A. Katz clarified that in a number of sections, the city Attorney noted that the section as it currently exists is not inconsistent with state law, and in those cases, no change would be made. councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment to strike from the main motion references to subsections 9050.3(c) and 9050.3(d). Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. During discussion, the maker and second modified the motion to adopt the proposals made in the city Attorney Opinion, except to the extent that Council directions to staff that have been voted on since the Opinion was written are contrary to the Opinion, the subsequent directions to staff govern. The motion was approved, Councilmember Finkel opposed. Councilmember Finkel requested that the record reflect the reason for his no vote is that the effect of this may well be to make it impossible or impracticable for us to have the very child care centers and facil i ties that we want to have because of the economic considerations, and he does not think that overriding factor is outweighed by the concerns expressed about noise, and he believes it is self-defeating. Councilmember Reed moved an amendment (referencing p. B of the city Attorney Opinion) to have the same minimum notice provisions that are required of home occupation permits, thereby adopting Option (3) outlined under section 9050.3(m) of the opinion, with notice provision within a 100 foot radius, with performance standards. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was approved, Councilmembers Finkel and Zane opposed. Councilmember Finkel requested that the record reflect the reason for his no vote is that this motion, just as the past motion, is designed to try to cut the guts out from under the very set of regulations which were created to make it possible to have child care centers. The effect of this motion will be to inflame I neighors to make protests, to stir up the argument and debate, and that is going operate counter to the goal Council is trying to achieve. Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment under section 9050.3(d), as amended previously, that "solid wall" be changed to "solid fence. .. Second by Councilmember Finkel. The motion was unanimously approved. 6 May 3, 1988 I 286 Councilmember Jennings moved an amendment (p. 256 of the Draft Zoning Ordinance) under subsection 9055.3(b) to leave the language as adopted by Council in the page-by-page direction on outdoor play areas and fences and walls. The motion was withdrawn when it was determined this direction was not necessary. Councilmember Jennings moved an amendment to delete the reference in the City Attorney Opinion to on-site parking for child day care centers. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. Councilrnember Zane moved an amendment (p. 9 of city Attorney Opinion and pp. 256-257 of the Draft referring to subsection 9055.3(b)) to add a section on outdoor play areas, adjust the numbering, and make the section consistent with what Council has adopted for Large Family Day Care Homes. The motion was withdrawn when it was determined this direction was not necessary. Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment to forbid having more than one facility within 1,000 linear feet, as opposed to a 1,000 foot radius (subsection 9050.3(1)). Second by Councilmember Finkel. Discussion was held. The motion was approved, Councilmember Reed opposed. The main motion on the child care policy, as amended, was approved, Councilmember Reed opposed. Councilmember Reed requested that the record reflect that she did not agree with the Memorandum of the City Attorney in certain specific instances, and wasn't given an opportunity to completely review it against each section of the Zoning Code. Councilmember Reed moved to put Fifth street back into the Downtown Core (C3C) for the same height and FAR standards, noting that, based on council's prior action, the site review portion will not be taking effect immediately. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was approved, councilmember Finkel opposed. Councilmember Finkel requested that the record reflect his no vote is based on the fact that he believes that Fifth Street is the present savior of Fourth street. Regarding the interim and proposed R-l zoning ordinances, Councilmember Reed moved to reword the requirement for Front Yard Setback (Section 2(e) of Ordinance No. 1424(CCS) sec.2(e) and subsection 9010.6 (e) of the Draft) to read, "...25 percent of 'allowable building width' must be set back an additional five feet. f1 Second by Councilmember A. Katz. Discussion was held. The motion was amended to direct staff to look at the three points raised in the April 19, 1988, letter from Koning, Eizenberg (those on allowable building width, side yard formula, and the existing tradeoffs to side yards in the rear two-thirds of the lot to allow for greater flexibility for plantings and to 7 May 3, 1988 287 save existing trees) and return with staff recommendations. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved. Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz moved to treat the 'A' lots in the same manner as the I R' lots (Council direction on April 19, 1988), with the exception of intensity, allowing the intensity to increase by some number, to allow remodeling at approximately 25 to 30 percent (without losing the 'A' lot), with staff to return with recommendations regarding intensity. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. During discusion, the maker clarified the intent of the motion to be to allow 'A' lots to stay, in perpetuity, if the use does not change 1 if there is development in some form, either a partial or total rebuild, the 'A' lot would be lost and all parking would have to be provided on-site. with no objection from the second, the maker amended the motion to allow expansion by subterranean parking in the 'A' lot, with a landscaped surface, allowing ingress and egress only on the existing commercial property. It was further clarified that the 'A I lot is not to be counted as part of the parcel for the purpose of calculating the FAR. Discussion was held. Councilmember Jennings moved a substitute motion to direct staff to incorporate appropriate requirements or incentives, whichever works best, for underground parking for the 'A' lots upon redevelopment, substantial remodel, or expansion of the adjacent commercial property, with the surface of the I A' lots being appropriately landscaped as open space, with the entrance and egress to the parking solely through the commercially zoned lot, and with the 'A' lot not being used for the purposes of calculating the FAR. Second by councilmember Reed. During discussion, the motion was amended to replace "substantial remodelll with "50 percent remodel." The motion, as amended, was unanimously approved. The main motion, to approve the Draft Zoning Ordinance, as amended by Council actions on March 5, March 8, April 5, April 19, and May 3, 1988, was approved by the following vote: Council vote: Unanimously approved 7-0 ADJOURNMENT: At 11:30 p.m., the meeting --------- ~TES( . ~A.. - Donna R. Betancourt Acting City Clerk 8 May 3, 1988 I