SR-8-A (59)
ill.
..._~
CA:SSS:BB:se
Counell Meetlng 02/24/81
-
e
~
Santa Monlca, Californla
STAFF REPORT
8',1}
TO:
Mayor and Clty Councll
fEB 2 4 1981
FROM: Clty Attorney
SUBJECT: Ordlnance for ~elntroduction Relating to Development
Standards lD the C3 General Commerclal Dlstrlct.
I~JTRODUCTION
ThlS report transmlts for relntroductlon a proposed
ordlnance revlSlng the property developMent standards ln the
C3 General Commerclal Dlstrlct (Central BUSlness Dlstrlct).
BACKGROUND
In recent months lncreaSlng concern has been vOlced
about probleMs assoclated wlth lncreased development ln the down-
town business area, partlcularly with a rlse In vehlcular trafflc.
The Plannlng COmM1SS10n consldered t~lS problem and On ~ovember 3,
1980 recoMMended to the Clty Councll that an ordlnance be adopted
reduclng permlssible bUlldlng bulk and requlrlng an analysls of
trafflc and parklng lmpact for new or changed development.
At lts February 11, 1981 meetlng, contlnued froM
February 10, 1981, Agenda Item 5-P, the City Council consldered
for lntroductlon an ordlnance revlsing property development
standards In the Central BUSlness Dlstrict. Followlng publ1C
hearlng the Caunell dlrected the Clty Attorney to draft an
ordlnance for relntroductlon, incorporatlng some provlsions of
the proposed ordlnance then before lt and addlng several other
prOVlslons.
FEB 2 4 19o~
f-4
.
-
e
~~
THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
Seet~on 911GB of the Santa Monlca Mun~c~pal Code establ~shes
developmentstandards for the C3 General Commerc~al D~striet. Th~s
ordlnanee would add subseet~on 6, establlshlng a floor area (bulk)
llmitatlon, subsect~on 7, requir~ng a parking and trafflC analysls,
and subsectlon 8, prov~dlng exeeptlons to the requirements of
subsectlons 6 and 7. Subsection 3 lS amended to allow a lesser
rate of parklng for each use In a development upon a showlng that
cOmRerclal and resldentlal uses w~th~n a buildlng wlll share
park~ng spaces wlthollt substant1al confllct.
Seetlon 9l16A is also amended to allow resldent~al use
above the flrst floor level.
The ordlnance also provldes a vested rlght standard and a
hardshlp exceptlon.
Sectlon 1 of the ordlnanee amends 9116A2u to permlt
resldentlal use above the f~rst floor, rather than the fourth
floor as presently requ1red.
Seetlon 2 of the ord~nanee establlshes a floor area
l~m~tatlon of 3.3 tlmes the horlzontal area of the eommerc~ally-
zoned lot. It lS substantlally identlcal to the ordlnanee
establlshlng a slmilar limltatlon In the CA/ep and C4 Dlstricts.
The sectlon permlts the Plannlng Comm~sslon to allow overSlze bUlldlngs
by lssulng a condltlonal use permlt based upon an envlronmental
and fiscal analysls. It further provldes that areas devoted to
apartment uses shall be computed at one-half the actual total
adJusted floor area and that areas devoted to park~ng structures
below the f1rst floor shall be excluded.
-2-
.
-
e
.
Sectlon 3 of the ordlnance requlres owners or developers of certaln
proJects to prepare a park~ng and trafflc analys~s ldentlfYlng
adverse impacts and measures to ellm1nate or mltigate them. Th15
analysls 1S requlred for any bUlld1ng of more than two stories
and appl1es to new constructlon, addltlons to floor areas, and
changes from retall to other use.
Sect10n 4 provides an exceptlon to the requlrements re-
gardlng bulk and park1ng and trafflc analysls. An exception may
be granted by the Plannlng Dlrector,and the Plannlng Comm1ss10n
on appeall upon a show1ng of severe hardsh1p, WhlCh was not
created through the fault or lack of dlllgence of the appllcant.
Sect10n 5 amends the off-street park1ng requ1rements in the
C3_Dlstr1ct to allow a lesser rate for each use 1n a development
upon a showlng to the Planning Dlrector, and the Plannlng
Con~lss1on on appeall that commerc1al and res1dent1al uses wlthln
a bU1ld1ng w1ll share park1ng spaces wlthout substantlal confl1ct.
Sect10n 6 sets forth a vested rlght standard for proJects
etherw1se subJect to thlS ord1nance. The standard 1S Slmllar
to that used ~n the bulk ord~nance and prov1des that lf, on
January 27, 1981, a person had expended sums 1n excess of 10% of
the proJected costs of the proJect for purposes dlrectly related
to the floor area of the buildlng, 1D good falth rellance on the
nonexlstence of floor area llmltatlons and park1ng and trafflc
study requ1rements, that person shall be deemed to have a vested
rlght to complete the proJect.
DeC1S1ons concernlng vested rlghts shall be made by the
Planning CommlSS1on upon recommendatlon of the Plannlng Dlrector.
Any dec1s10n may be appealed to the Clty Councll by any 1nterested
party.
-3-
~
e
ALTERNATIVES
The Clty Counc~l may 1ntroduce the ordlnance as drafted,
mod~fy or reJect 1t.
RECO~~ENDATIONS
It lS respectfully recommended that the Clty Councll
lntroduce the proposed ordlnance revislng the property development
standards and permltted uses In the Central Business D1strlct.
Prepared by:
Stephen Shane Stark, Actlng Clty Attorney
Bettylou Borovay, Deputy Clty Attorney
Susan Carroll, Deputy City Attorney