SR-8B (12)
PCD: PPA: SF: KG: DM
F: lsharelccreportllmsdpcsr
Council Meet~ng: April 2S, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: C~ty staff
Santa Monica, Cahfornia
aRR 2 5 ~95
SUBJECT: Recommendak~an to Adopt a Resolurion Certify~ng the Final En~rronmental Impact
Report; Adopt a Statement of Qvemding Cansiderat~on; Intrflduce for First
Reading an Qrdinance Amending Section IX of the Santa Monica Munieipa~ Cocle
to Create the Light Manufacturing ar~d Studio Distnct; and Introduce for
First Reading an Ordinance Amendmg the Official Drsmcting Map.
INTRODUCTION
TYus report recammends that the City Couneil review the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District Final Environmentat Impact Report and adopt a resolution certifying the FEIR, adopt
a Statement of Overriding Consideration for impacts relateri to traffic, air quality, and parks,
introduce for first reading an ordinance amending Sect~on IX of the Santa Momca Mun~cipal
Code to create the Light Manufacturing and Stud~o Dxstnct, and introduce for first read~ng an
ordinance amending the ~fficial Distncting Map.
BACKGROUII~~
In March of 1993 the Crty Counc~l approv~d a monon directing staff to study selected areas of
the e~st~ng CS Special 4ffice Cornmercial Distnct and M1 Industrial Conservat~on District,
generally located nor~ of the Santa Momca Fre~way and east af Nineteenth P1ace AIIey, and
to conduct environmental revlew of an option that would rezone the area to a new zonmg
designation. In June of 1993 the City Councit adopted Ordinance 1687(CCS) which imposed
° ~.
1 ~ ~
t~.
APR~~~
~
new developrnent standazds for mast commercial areas of the Crty. At that time the Caunc~l also
adopted ~ntenm zoning requirements (Ordinance 1686 (CCS)} for part~ons of the Ml and CS
districts located north of the Sasita Monica Freeway and east of 19th Place Aliey, (naw referred
to as the Light Manufactunng and Studio District} pend~ng the completion of a land use study
and en~ironmentai impact report. Since the adoptron of the original intenm ard~nance tn 1993,
the ~ntenm zomng has been extended three t~mes. The current intenm ordinance (Qrdinanee
1777{CCS)} will exp2re on June ~0, 1995.
In March of 1994 the City Council authonzed staff ro hire the consult~ng firm of Chns 7oseph
and Associates to prepare an environmental impact report to evaluate the impacts of the proposed
develogment standards contained in the intenm ordinance. The Draft of the Enviranmental
Impact Report was available far public re~iew from March 9, 1995 to Apr~l 7, 1995.
As stateci abo~e, the exishng mtenm ord~nance (Ordinance 1777 {CCS)) will expire on lune 10,
t995. In order to adopt permanent standards prior to the expirat~on of the inter~m ordinance,
City Couneil must hold a secand reading of the new ordinance by May 9, 1995.
ANALYSIS
Development Startdards
The interim de~elopment standards far the distrrct mclude a two-stary, 30' height limit with a
1.0 flaor area rario. These standards apply to the entire distnct as shown vn ~he attached map
(Attachment A}, vv~th the except~on of thre~ parcels lcnou~n as the special study zQne areas (SSZ}.
2
These SSZ parcels have been cansidered far mixed-use and residential development. The
intenm development standards for the specia~ study mne parcels include a reduced floar area
ratiu for cotnmercial projects and a floor area ratio bonus for residential prajects. The locat~ons
of the SSZ's are as follows:
o SSZ 1 is a 42,260 square foot, rectangular-shaped parcel at the
southwest corner of Stanford Street and Colorado Avenue.
o SSZ 2 is a 191,100 square foot, rectangular-shaped parcel at the
southeast corner af Colarado A~enue and Stewart Street.
o SSZ 3 is a 478,200 square foot, trzangular-shaped parcel bordered
by Nebraslca Avenue ta tY~e narth, Olyanpic Boule~ard to the sauth,
and the ~ntersection oF Stewart Avenue and Olymp~c Boulevard to
the west.
Uses
The l~st of interim permitted uses includes industnal and quasi industnal uses, including high
tech entertainment and other design ind~stries. The germittea uses a,~sa dist~nguish betrveen uses
which are limited to a m~imum af 50 percent office space and those allowed with unlimitsd
office space, as ~ong as the office space is related to the pnmary use Iocated on the sa~ne site.
The mtenm ordinance permits residential use on the SSZ sites with approval of a Canditional
U5e Permit, residential throughout the remainder of the district is prohibited.
PLANNING CQNiMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At the Planning Commission meeting on Apri1 I2, 1995, the Commission approved a motian
recommending cerhficat~on af the EIR, appraved a mot~on recomtnending the adflpt~an of a
3
Statement of Ovemt~ing Cansiderat~on, and recommended approval of standazds for the new
district. In recommending apprvval of the new district standards, the Commission included the
development standards and }~ermitted uses contained in the intenm ordinance w~th the following
modificat~ons:
o Ehminat~on of the Special Study Zones
o A lA FAR for all commercial pro~ecfs, and a 1 5 FAR f~r
pro~ects containing arUst studia livelwork resident~al un~ts pro~ided
the addihonal FAR (.5) is devoted to the resident~al use. This
standard would apply to the ent~re distnct.
o Increase the permitted height hmit to 45' for pro~ects contat~ing
studios, theaters, or so~nd stages, with the candition that a~y
portion of a building oyer 30' m height must be setback at least 9'
fram the front parcel lme_
o Reference the Moule/Palyaoides design stucfy (Appendix D of the
FEIR) to be used as cntena for artist studio pra~e~ts.
a Allow Iive theaters with approval of a Condihonal Use Permit
Planmng Commission has recommended that theaters be
condit~onally permitted in response to a theater operator who
would like to establ~sh a live theater in the proposed distr~ct.
Although hve theater is not currentiy an allowed use under the
~nterim zorung standards, the Commiss~an felt that permitt~ng li~e
theater use with approval of a Conditaonal Use Permit would be
appropriate, m that live theater could be compat~ble with other
cultural uses that have developed in the area. Allowing the use by
CUP would ensure that lndividual theater uses can be reviewed,
and condit~ons can be placed an their operat~on by the Planning
Commiss~on. Two letters regarding ~~s ~ssue have been re~eived,
and are attached far your review (Attachments C and D},
o Re~ise Sect~on 2(A} (2) of the mter~m ardinance to elirninate the
fifty percent cap on office square footage and expand upon the
definition of broadcasting facilities as fotlows:
"Broadcast~ng/communicat~ons, telecommumcations praduction
faciiihes, and ancillary faciht~es customarily associated with and
incidental to such groduct~on facilitxes, including, without
limitat~on, facilit~es for broadcasting, transmittmg, distribution,
4
recording, receiving, editing, and creating
broacicast/communications and telecommunicat~ons." This would
better define the rypes of fac~ht~es that could be cansidered a
broadcasting fac~lity, ar~d would remove the ex~st~ng requirement
contained in the interim ordinance that states that in order for such
uses to have more than 50 % of the~r floor area de~oted to office
space, a Conditional Use Permit ~s rec~uired.
In addit~vn to the iterns listed ahave, the Planning Commission recammended the revis~on to
Sectian 2(A) (3} regarding general office use in respanse to a developer who recei~ed planmng
appraval for an office building priar to the adaption of the intenm ordinance, hut received a
building permit to build the office building after the adoption of the mtenm vrdinance. While
under the provisions of the interim ordinance, the developer should not have been issued the
buildmg permit, due to the fact that the building permit was issued, the Plannmg Comr~ussion
felt that ~n fairness to the de~eloper, th~s section should be revised to allow the building to be
accupied by general office uses, as was onginally mtended. Tt~e revised language is stated
below.
a Revise Sect~on 2(A) (3) af the intenm ardinance to read as
follows• "General office existing as of June 26, 1993, and general
office uses in buildings which were granted a planmng permit
specifically for general office uses between December 1, 1992 and
June 26, 1993, ar~d which obtai.ned a Cemficate af Occupancy
pnor to the adoption of this Part shall be perm~tte.ci provided that
such uses may not expand by more than ten percent (10%) in floor
area. " The exis~ing inter~m ordina~tce requires such pro~ects to
ha~e obtained a building permit ~rior to 7une 26, 1993 in arder to
have general affice uses.
5
STAFF REC4MMFNDATIONS
Staff generally supports the changes recommended by che Planning Commission and has ~ncluded
t}~e modifieat~ons in the proposed language conta~ned in the attached ordinance. Howe~+er, staff
has some concerns which are discussed belaw.
Staff feels that the additional .5 FAR far artist studios should be subject to a discretionary
review. Staff is recommending a Development Review Pezmit process for such pro~ects. The
DR permit would provide an opportumty far the Planning Comtnission to review artist studio
pra~e~ts m order to ensure that they are compat~ble w~ith the surround~ng land uses While staff
feels artist stud~os would be the most appropriate and compatihle type of hou~i~g use for the
Light Manufactunng and Studio D~strict, the DR permit process is necessary to guard against
potent~al land use confl~cts. If the Council would like to re,quired a DR permit for the .5 FAR
bpnus for amst studios, staff recommends the ~aliowing mod~ficat~on to Sect~an
9.04.08.35 060(b):
(b) Malcirnum Floor Area Ratio. Maximum Floor Area Rativ shall be 1.0, except the
following pro~ects may have a floor area ratio of 1.5.
(i) Projects invalvir~g the expansion of public or private elementary and secondary
schools (Grades K through 12) existing pnor to September 8, 1988
(ii) With the appro~al of a Development Review Permit, projects mcludmg ar~st
studias, provided the adc~it~onal .5 FAR ~s devoted to amst studia use, and the commercial
6
square footage dces not exceed 1.0 FAR.
Consistent with the Planning Commission dire~tian, staff re.commends that the Moule/Polyzoides
design study be used in the evaluation of arhst studio pro~ects Due to the fact that not all artist
studio projects would require a discretxonary permit, staff fe~ls the respansibility for th~s zeview
should be placed with the Architectural Review Baard As stated m the attached ordinance, for
pro~ects that mclude aztist studios, the ARB shail refer to the L~ght Manufactunng/Research and
Development Study datecl June 15, 1994.
Unlilce other zoning distncts includzng the existuig M1 District, traditional muiti-famiiy
residenaal development would not be permitted in the new distnct Ta be consistent with the
fact that all other zones either include resident~al as a permitted use or a conditionally permitted
use, staff is recommending that mult~ family resident~al uses be permitted in this district sub~ect
ta the approval of a Conditionai Use Permit. If the Counc~l would like ~a allow mult~ family
resxdenrial uses with a CUP, staff recommends that residential uses be added to Secrion
9.04.08.35.040 (Conditionally permitted uses) of the attached ordinance. Due ta the fact that
the Council originally identified the three Special Study Zone parcels as likely locahons for
resident~al development, staff recommends that a 1 5 floor area rario be permitted far muln-
family residential uses m the SSZ. A 1.4 floor area rat~o wauld be permitted for mult~-family
resadential uses in the remainder of the district.
Consistent with the Special Office Distnct sectaon of the Land Use Element, which calls for
7
building height, buik and setback guidelines to create a"campus" environment for development,
staff is recommending a twenty foot setback requirernent from Olympic Boulevard for all new
construction. The setback will empHasize Olympic Boulevard as the ma~or green space and
thoroughfare in the district, and compliment the exist~ng Olympic Boulevard median. This
recommendation is mcluded ~n the proposed Ordinance as Secrion 9.04 08 35.060(h).
DESI~N STUDY
Following the adopt~on of the intenm ordinance m October 1993, staff hired the firm of
Ehzabeth Maule and Stefanas Polyzoides, Architects and Urbanls~s, to de~elop preliminary
design standards for the thre~ parcels in the spec~al study zone The results of the design study
include averall policies for the area st~rroundmg the special study zone, as well as specific height
ar~d setback recommendations for projects developed on the three subject parcels. The Design
Study is attached to the FEIR as Appendix D.
In regard to the overall urban strategies for the special study zone, the design consultants
recommend that a nurnber of street extensions be cansidered as part of any new dev~lopment
pro~ect in order to mcrease pedestrian and vehicular access through the azea. As indicated ~n
the design study, this co~ld be accomplished by connecung Franklm and/or Stewart Street t~
Olympic Boulevard, and connectmg Iowa Street ta Stewart Street. In add~t~on, the consultants
recommend that alleys be introduced o~ large parcels in order to reduce parce~ square footages
and create develapment opaons far smaller pro~ects.
S
The design consultants alsa recommend specific design standards for development in the special
study zone includmg setbacks, apen space locataon and street fronta.ge requuements. The
standards include recommendahons that there be no required yard sethacks, except where a
housing use is located, in which case an eight foot side yard setback shall be required. the
standards alsa call for a minimum of f~e percent of parcel square footage ta be devoted to
pnvate open space, and a mmimum of SO% of street frontage to be devoted to building frontage.
In addirion, the staridards suggest that building styles and materials shall be of an industnal
nature, cansistent with t~e surrounding area.
In addition to the recommendations contamed in the design study, in order to ensure that
residen~ial dEVelopment is compat~ble with sunounding uses, noise mingat~on devices such as
double doors, saund insvlat~on, and double pane windows should be required for new residenrial
de~elapments.
ECONUMIC STUDY
Fallowing the adoption of the mtenm ordinance, staff hire~d the Real Estate Cflnsulring f rm of
Kohn, Regan and Mouchly (KRM) to determme the economic feasibil~ty of mixed use
development m the special study zone KRM analyzed the economic poten~als for mdustrial and
mixed-use mdustriallres~dential develapment on the three subject parcels. Withm the constraints
of the interim zaning for the thr~e lots under study, KRM used land use residual madels to
illustrate fihe profitability ta de~elopers of alternat~ve develapment scenarios based on current
de~elopment costs and operating income anc~ expense assumpt~ons.
9
Based on recent transact~ons in ~he area, KRM determined industnal property to have a raw land
~alue of approximately $78 per square foot, and residential property to have a raw Iand value
of approximately $SO per square foot. The economic analysis concluded that based on a
commerc~al rent of $2.25 per square foot, a mixed-use de~elopment with a FAR of 1.5
containing 7S % residential and 2S % high-tech industnal would be profitable with a land cost of
$54 per square foat or less. The analysis also concluded that a de~elaprnent with a FAR of 65
con~aining only hlgh-tech industria~ would ~e profitable with a land cost af $52 per square foot
or less. Based on estimated land ~alues in the area, development of a m~xed-use pro~}ect with
a 1.5 FAR and 75% residen~al would only be shghtly more profitable than development of a
lIXl% commercial pro3ect wi~h a.b5 FAR.
The analysis concludes that the pnce of land determmes tf~e economic feasibzl~ty of a pro~ect.
Therefore, it is a policy decision to establish development standards wrth the understanding that
property aalues will adjust based upon the ma~cimum develop~nent potential.
ENVIRONMENTAL REYIEW
As required by the Cahfornia Env~ronmental Quahty Act (CEQA), the FEIR examines
alternarives to the proposed pro~ect and impacts of the alternati~es at tatal build-out. The project
and aiternat~ves aze described below. The ~mpacts of the praject campared to the project
alternat~ves are similar. For example, except for Alternative 3, which is the na new
de~elopment alternati~e, all of the alternatives wvuld result in the sarne number (se~enteen) of
10
significant ~mpacis at area interse~tions. However, Alternative 2, which evaluates rnaximum
potential buildout of existing zoning, would actually result in a higher number of tnps, although
the number of im~actetl intersectians would be the same as the project.
The Proyect
The FEIR examines impacts of the proposed project at total build-out. T'he pro~ect standards
include a l.a FAR for atl areas ather than the SSZ's, and a 1.5 FAR for projects in the SSZ's
which contain at least 75 % resident~al. Pro~e,cts located m the SSZ's which contain less than
7S % residential are subject to a.65 FAR. The allawed uses are the same as those contained m
Ord~nance 1777 (CCS).
The FEIR ident~fies environmental effects arid sign~ficant unavoidable adverse impacts of the
proposed pro~ect. The FEIR conclvdes that implementat~on of the praposed pro~ect would have
the following sigmficant unavoadable impacts in the area of traffic, air quality and parks:
Traffic
At build-aut, t~e pro~ect is forecast to result in eleven intersect~ons with sigmficant irnpacts
dunng ~he AM peak hour and sixteen intersect~ons w~th sigmficant impacts durmg the PM peak
hour for a~ overall total of seventeen signzficantly i~npacted intersect~ons (some locations ha~e
forecast ~mpacts during both peak hours),
Although significant impacts are predicted, mit~gation measures for the development which is
11
farecast in the FEIR wauld he idenrified and implemented on an as-needed basis depending upon
the level and location of development act~~rty. Mandat~ng spec~fic physical mitigat~on measures
such as major raadway or interse~tian widening w~th~n the FEIR is not apprapriate since it may
ultimately not be required if development does not accur as est~mated. The follow~ng signalized
intersections would be impacted at build-out of the praject:
Twent~etti St.JW~lshire Blvd. - AM only
Twentieth St./Broadway - PM anly
Twe~ttieth St /Olyrnpic Blvd. - AM and PM
Twenty-third St /Ocean Park Blvd. - AM and PM
Cloverfield Blvd./Olympic Blvd. - AM and PM
C1o~erfield Blvd.lMichigan Ave. - PM anly
Clo~erfield B1~rdJI-10 WB Off-ramp - AM and PM
Clo~erfield B1vdJI-10 EB On-ramp - PM anly
Cloverfield Blvd./Ocean Park Blvd. - PM only
Twenty-sixth StJWilshire Blvd. - AM and PM
Twenty-sixth St./Santa Monica Blvd. - AM and PM
Twenty-s~xth St./Colorado Ave. - AM and PM
Stewart St.IColorado A~e. - PM only
Stewart St./Olympic Blvd. - AM and PM
Cent~nela Ave./Broadway - PM only
Cent~nela Ave,lCoiorado Ave - AM a~d PM
Cent~nela Ave. {East)/Olympic Blvd - AM and PM
In addit~on, during the PM peak period, the pra~ect would have a significant impact at the
unsignalized intersecrion of Yale Street and Broadway.
All of the development alternat~~es result in the same number of impacted signalized
intersections at build-out {17), except for the reduced FAR alternat~~e (Alternative 3), wh~ch
results in 13 impacted signaiized intersect~ons at build-out.
12
Air Ouahty
Pro~ect-related developrnent at buiidout would contribute air pollutants at three locations
(Crossroads High School at 1714 21 st Street, the multa-fam~ly building at narthwest corner of
Cio~erfield and Broadway, and at Newbridg~ School at 3131 Olympic Baulevard) arid would
result in irnprovements in air quality at two locat~ons (Schaeder Park and McKinley School), due
to changes in traffic flows. The project would ha~e a significant a~r quality impact at Newbridge
School by increasing the eight-hour CO concentration to abo~e the sfgnificance threshald.
Compliance with applicable SCAQMD and local rules and policies would reduce, but not
ehmmate, pro~ect-related impacts.
Parks
Based on the builci out of the pro~e~t ident~fied in the FEIR, pro~ect-relatsd resident~al populat~an
and non-res~dent~al populat~on would contrxbute to curnulat~ve increases beyond the capacity of
existing pazks and recreat~onal facilities and would therefore be considered a significant impaet.
Each applicant for future development would be requ~red to mit~gate its impact on park and
recreationai facihties throug~ cvmpliance with local ordinances However, since existrng
ordinances may not t~e adequat~ ta fully m~hgate the impacts at full build out of the project,
sig~ficant impacts would remain.
A~ternative 1 - No Proj~~
This alternative considers the en~ironmental canditions in the pro~ect area if no new development
were to occur. Obviausly, under this alternat~ve, no additianal traffic would be generated,
i3
natural resources wo~ld nat be consumad by additional de~eloprnent, and a~r quality would nat
be impacted. Therefore, the no-project alternative is considered to be envaronmenkally supenor
ta the proposed praject. However, this alternative would not allow any new de~~lopment and
is nnt cons~dered a practicat option.
Alternat~ve 2 - No Act~an
This alternative considers the consequences of not adopt~ng the proposed Light Manufactunng
and Studio District standards. If the plan were not adopted and the interim ordinance were to
expire, the existmg M1 and CS standards wauld be the guiding factor for the develapment of
the area. Build-out of the existing standards would allow a 1.0 FAR for both zomng
designations, similar to the proposed standards. The ex~snng M1 standaxds are similar to the
proposed district standards, with the exception of the provision for studio uses cantained in the
proposed standards. The existing CS standards permrt pro~ects that are one-hundred percent
affice. Therefore, the No Achon alternat~ve would result in a greater amount af affice
de~elapment than the proposed pro~ect, and would not ac}ueve the pra~ect ob~ect~~es of
encouraging studio and light industrial uses Furthermore, build-out af the existing standards
would result in the same number af impacted intersections as the project.
Alternative 3 - Reduced FAR
This alternat~ve examines the impacts af a 0.5 FAR far the non SSZ properhes. The allowed
FAR for the SSZ's would be the same as the pro~ect with a 1 5 FAR for pro~ects in the SSZ's
that incl~de at least 75 % residential. Because this alternat~ve reduces the m~imum FAR for
14
all non-SSZ parcels in the study area from i.0 to O.S, all dens~ty-related impacts such as traffic,
air quality, energy, water consumpt~on, and sewer and sohd waste generation are substantially
reduced The number of impacted intersect~ons for this alternahve at build-out would be 13.
Other than Alternative 1, this is considered to be the environmentally superiar alterr~ative.
However, this alternat~ve would not provide as much opportunity for the develvpment of light
indusmal and studio related business as the proposeri pro~ect.
Alternative 4- No 5pecial $tudy Zone
This alternative e~aluates the impacts of the proposed pro~ect without speciat development
standards for the three SSZ parcels Thus, the three parcels would have the same de~elopment
standards as the non-SSZ are~s af the distnct. Under ttus alternative, peak penod tnps would
be increased. Hawever, this alternat~ve wauld result in the same number o€ impacted
intersections (17) as the praposed pro~ect
Alternat~ves 5. 6 and 7- Sneciat Studv Zone Alternat~~es
Alternat~ves 5, 6 and 7 analyzes development of the three SSZ's with a range of FAR's and
percen~age requirement af residential.
o Alternatxve 5 would allow a FAR of .65 if 30 ~ of a pro~ect were residenriai.
o Alternahve 6 would allow a FAR of 1.5 if 50% of a proaect were resident~al
o Alternati~e 7 woulc3 allow a FAR of 1.5 if 40°b of a pro~ect were resident~al.
i5
The FAR and permitted uses for the non-SSZ areas of the praposed district would be the same
as the pro~ect under each of these alternative. Due to the fact that the FAR for the non-SSZ's
would be the sarne for each of these alternatives, and that the SSZ's make up a relatively small
percentage of the total distnct area, all three of these alternat~ves wauld have similar impacts
in terrns of traffic and a~r qualiry, wfth 17 impacted mtersect~ans.
Proiect and Alternaav~s a~ lp Years
As descnbed above, the FEIR examines the impacts of each pro~ect alternat~r+e at full build-out,
as if every parcel in the district were developed to the maximum FAR. In order to provide a
realist~c development scenazia, the environmental consultant also analyzed the pro~ect,
Alternative 3(the reduce~ FAR alternat~ve), and Alternative 4(the no SSZ atternative) at ten
years.
For ~ach of the three scenanos, it was assumed that 20 percent of the project build-aut growth
m the non-SSZ areas would occur by 2004, and that 20 percent vf exisring development would
be demolished. It was also assumed that maximum bu~ld-out of the SSZ's would pccur by 2004.
Each of the three Year 2004 scer~arios were evaluated more schemat~cally than the analysis for
the proposeti pro~ect in the FEIR, and the potential deveiopment assumptaons for the scenarios
are hypothetical. However, specific conclusions can be drawn from the analysis for comparati~e
purposes.
The conclusians of the Year 20t)4 analysis are sim~lar to the conclusian of the build-out analysis.
16
Due to the fact that the FAR's considered for the alternaaves are similar (1.0 FAR), the
en~iro~menta~ impacts are similaz as well. For example, the pra~ect would result in 14 impacted
intersect~ons in ten years, and Alternative 4(the no SSZ alternative} would result ir~ 13 impacted
intersect~ons in ten years. The reduced FAR alternarive would result in 11 ~mpacted
mtersections i~ ten years. Other impacts of the pra~ect and the alternatives at ten years, such
as air quality, ~obs/housing balance, and ut~lit~es, would also be similar.
CONCLUSION
The analysis contained in the FEIR concludes that the impacts of the praposed project at totai
bu~ld-out are similar to the ~mpacts of the proaect alternanves. As would be expected, the
reduced FAR alternative results m slightly fewer impacts However, the reduced FAR
alternative would not provide s~fficient opportunity to encourage the types of uses, such as
studio and entertainment uses, outlined in the pra~ect ob~ect~ves. Since the impacts are similar,
it is a pol~cy decision whether or not residential uses are appropnate in the pro~ect area. The
Plannuig Commission recommended that the SSZ's be eliminated and a 1.5 FAR be permitted
througho~t the district, provided the addit~onal 5 FAR is devoted ta artisi studios. Howe~er,
this would ~e the oniy zoning district in the C1ty where residentral is prohibited All other
aones, mcluding the Ml Distnct either include residential as a permitte.ci use or a condit~onally
permitted use. Consistent with this approach, staff is recommending that mulrifamily residential
be permitted in this distnct sub3ect ta the approval af a conditianal use perm~t.
17
BUDGETIFINANCIAL ~'ACTS
The recommendations presented xn this report do not have any b~dget or fiscal impacts.
RECONIl~fENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council review the Light Manufactunng and Studio District
Final Enviranmental Impact Report and adopt a resalut~on certifymg the FEIR, adopt a
Statement of Ovemding Considerat~on, rntroduce for first reading an ordinance amend~ng
Se~ct~an IX of the Santa Mamca Municipal Code to create the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District, and introduce for first readmg an ordtnance amending the ~fficial Districking Map .
Prepared by: Suzanne Fnck, Director of PCD
Karen Ginsberg, PPA Plannir~g Manager
Davi d Martin, Associate Planner
Attachments: A. Pro~ect Area Map
B. Intenm Ordinance 1777 (CCS)
C. Letter from Wayne Blank dated Aprii 4, 1995
D. Letter from Gordon Davidson dated Apnl 5, 1995
E Resolution Certifying the Final EIR
F. Statement of Overriding Cons~deration
G. Ordinance amending Article IX of the SMMC
H. Ordinance am~ndmg the Official Distnct~ng Map
I. Offieial Distncting Map
J. Final Envlrontner~tal Impact Report
18
ATTACfIl1~NT A
'~I ~ .
r;
.~
. .~ .~ .
~ ~
• ~
~..
... r. ~ ~
. ' : .
~• ~ ' .
. ~G' ~ . .
~~ . ': • ,
..
1 ^ j ~^ •
~ ~
:,
^^
~ r•
~.
~
1
-~
~ -~• ~
•
-
! f 1 .. . . #
~
: ^
i
^
,• ~ ~i
~ ~ ~
. ~ ~i ~
•
~ ~ ~
~
~ ~
1
+
,
~~ `._ , +
^ ~
i~ ~
~
~a
I ~~ i i - ~
^
~`
1 ~~ ~~ •
f~ ~
~
~•
i
lhl ~~
I~r~ ~ o ~ ..
! +~
y
~
~
~• ^
^ •
•~
~• ~
••~
~ /
~r~~ ~• ~ ~ ~ ~
_. -~
_ ~ ~ .
f.:~ ' ~ '
r• •• ~
~~
. ~ ~'. ~
• r• ' ~.
~ _. _
1~~
i~~
~+ ~-.
~ ~~r~ ~ ~ i
• .i~~ ~ ~~ `
/
~ _~. ~-- - . . ...._. .. ,. _ ~ ~
.: : ~:-
~ . ~=:. _~ ~_._•4_.~ :
~ ~ _ ~ ~- -
-~ ~;.; -
lnterirn Zorring
Study Area
Spec~ai St~dy
Zone
ATTACIIII~NT B
CA:f:~atty~muni\~aws~mhs\~ic5dist.6
City Cauncil Meeting 11-22-94 Santa Manica, Ca~i~orn~a
ORDINANCE NUMBER ~773
(city Cauncil SeriesJ
~
AN ORDINANCE ~F THE CITY C~UNCIL
QF THE CITY OF 5ADiTA MONICA
ESTP,BLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ~OR
PaR`I`IONS OF THE CITY LaCATED IN SELECTED AREAS dF THE
M1 AND C5 DISTRICTS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ~RDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTIaN 1. Findznas and Puruvse. The City Cauncsl finds and
dec~ares:
(a) At its March 1~, 1993 meeting, the City Cfluncil
approved a motion directing staff to st~dy sel~eted_areas of the C5
and M~ districts (the "Interim Z~ning Study Area") and to conduct
env~ronmenta]. review of an option which would rezone the area to a
new zonzng designation ta be known as "M1/RD". The Interim Zaning
Study Area is shown on the map attached hereto and incorparated
here~n as "Exhibit A". Certain partions of the Inter~m Zoning
~tudy Area are further designated as ths "Special Study Zone" on
the map attached hereto as "Exhibit A".
(b) In o~der to pratect the public health, safety and
welfare, it is necessary, pendzng completion of the study and re-
zon~ng of these areas to a zoning de~ignation cansistent with the
City Council's directzon, to limit an an ~nterim basis the maximum
1
building height, flaar area ratio, and permitted uses for the study
area.
(c~ On March 1G, 1993~ the City CQUncil directed staff
r
to prepare an interim ordinance to implement the development
standards propased for the M~/RD district. ~n June 15~ Z993, the
City Councii adopted Ordinance Na. 1586 (CC5), establishang interim
deveZopment standards far the Interim Zaning Study Area for a
p~rzod of foxty-five days.
(dj On July 20, 1993, the City Council adopted Ordznance
I3o. 1694 (CCS), extending the inter~m deve~~pment standards ta
January ~0, I995, in order to allow staff adequate time to ana~.yze
the proposEd rezonzng arid ta conduct th~ required an~ironmental
re~iew.
(e) On September 28, i993, the City Counc~~ adopted
ordinance No. 1707 (CCS), which modified the interim ordinance in
order to prot~ct czty services and infrastructure and atherwise
effectuat~ city policy.
(f) on March 22l ].994 the City Council adopted ordznance
No. 1734 (CCS) which modified the interim ordinance to allow
existzng primary schoo~s a reasonable apportunity to expand at
the~.r current locati~r~s. Ordinance No. 1734 is due to expire on
January 10, 1995.
(g} Si.nce the adoptian of ardinance No. 1734 (CCS}, a
consultant has been hired to prepare an Environmental xmpact Repart
an the prapased standards. ~ Draft Environmental ~mpaet Repert
will be available in Navember 2994. In order to pr~vide adequate
2
time far the planning Commission and City CounciZ to obtain pub~~c
input and adopt permanent standards, it is necessary to extend the
interi~ ordinance until June 10, ~995.
r
(h) There exists a present a~d immediate threat ta the pu~i~ic
safety health and welfare should the interim ardinance not be
modified and shauld development inconsistent with the contemplatad
re-zonzng af these areas be allowed ta occur. Thus it is necessary
to extend the limitations on maximum building height, flooz aarea
ratio, and permitted uses for the study area for an additional
three manth~, until June ].0, 1995.
SECTION 2. Interim Zon~.nq. Sub~ect to the provisions of
Sectior,s 3 and 4 of this ordinance, the Planning Cammission and
City staff are di.rected, after June 23, 1993, to disapprave any
request for the issuance of a building permit, a tentative snap, a
tentative garcel map, an adminxstrative approval, a development
rev~~w permzt, a conditionaZ use permit, or any other City perm~t
for the con~truct~on, erectz.on, conv~rsian, or moving of any
structure located i.n the area designated as the Interim ~aning
Study Area on the map attached hereto as "Exhibit A", unless the
prQ~ect complies with the fo~~awing davelopment standards:
(A) Permitted Use~.
(1} The following primary usas shall ba permztted
if conducted within an enclflsed building (except where otherwzse
pex~nitted), provided any affice space included therewith is
directly reZated ta, ancillary ta, and supp4rtive of the pri.mary
3
permitted use an the same szte and does not exceed fifty percent
(50~) of the grass floor area of the primary use: _
(a} Artist studio~ and art galleri~s.
~
(b) Automabile repair and automabile paint~ng
facilities except those wzthin 100 feet of a residential distriet.
(c) Dance studios.
(d) DflmeSt~c violence she~ters.
(e) Estab3ishments engaged in research
relating to, or tha devalopment, manufacturing, fabricating,
assembly, testing, repair, servicing, or processing of, the
~ollowing:
{i) A~rcraft parts ather ~han
engines.
(ii) Appare~ except Ieather and fur
goads. - ~
(iii}
( ~v)
(~)
metal.
(vi}
(vii)
~viz~)
( ix)
carc~board .
~x)
Audio products.
Metal, woad ar canvas awnings.
Caated, plated, and engraved
Cominunication equipment.
Cut stone and stone praducts.
Dance studios.
Diecut paper a~d paparbaard, and
E~.ectric components and
accESSOri~s.
4
(xi) Electric lightin~ and wiring
equip~ent.
(xii} Fabricated textiie praducts.
, ,
(x~ii} Furnzture and f ixtures.
(xiv) G~.ass products.
(~) Jewelry, si~verware, and plated
ware.
( ~tv i ) Lugqage .
(~cvii) Musical instruments and parts.
(xvi~i) Office machines.
(xix} Paperboard containers and boxes.
(xx) Pens, pencils, and ather office
and artists materials.
(xxi) Perfum~s, cosmetzcs, and ather
toilet preparations.
(xxii) PharmaceuCical products.
(xxiii) Photographic and optical goads,
watches, and clocks.
(xxiv} Pluznbing fixtures and heating
apparatus.
(xxvy Pottery and re~ated produets.
(xxvi} Prafessiona}., ~cientific, and
cantrol~~ng instruments.
(xxvii) Tvys, amusements, sporting and
athletic goods.
5
( x~r i i i} woaden co~ta iners .
(xxix) Food products, except that no
food consumpti4n by the public or ~ood take-out by the public shall
r
be perm~tted.
{xxX) Products which are determined by
the Zoning Administrator to he similar to thase 1~sted above and
which are GQns].SteTit with, and nat associated wi~h more disturbance
or da.sruption than, permitt~d products.
(f} on-site production facilities for
ad~ertising purposes.
(g) Establishments engaged in the wholesale
distribution of the following:
(i) Dry goods and apparel.
(ii) Electrical gaods.
(iii) Groceries and related praducts,
except unpackaged or unprocessed poultry and poultry products, ~ish
and seafood, and fruit and vege~ables.
{i~) Hardware, plumbing, heating
equipment and supp3.ies.
(v) Machinery, equipment, and
suppl~es, except farm machinery and equ~pment.
(vi} Motor vehicles and automatzve
equspment.
(vii) Paper, paper products, and
kindred suppl~es.
6
(vii~) Pharmaceutical products and
a~lied praducts.
(h) Homeless shelters with less than 55 beds.
f
(i) Photography studids.
(j) Publxc or private schoals existing priar
to September, 1988.
{k) Pub~~c util~ty service centers and sarvice
yards.
(I) PubZic utility substations.
(mj Self storage or public mini-warehouses.
(n) Veterinary ciinics.
(a} Warehouses.
(p) Uses wh~ch are determined by the Zan~ng
Admin~stratar to be similar ta thvse ~~sted abave and which are
consistent with, and not anore disturbing or dJ~sruptive than,
p~rmitted uses.
(2) The foliawinq primary uses shall be permitted
if conducted w~thin an enclosed bui].ding (except where othervrise
permitted) and may include offzce space, which doas not exG~ed
fifty percent (50~) of the gross floor arEa of the przmary use, sa
l~ng as the office space is direct7.y related, ancillary to, and
s~pportive of the primary use located an th~ sazne site:
(a) Broadcasting/co~nmunications,
telecammunications facilitzes.
(b} fles~gn studios and officas for architects.
7
(c) Drafting, pr~nting, blueprinting and
reproduction servica~.
(d) Laboratories and faci~ztaes for medical
,
testing and scientific research deve~opment and testing.
{e~ Publishzng facilities,
(f} 5oftware and other computerYrelated
product~on facilitzes.
(g) Studios and offices for qraph~c designers.
(h) Dutdoar ar enclosed entertainment-re~ated
faciZit~es inc~uding, without limitat~.vn, mov~e 5tudios and
production facilities, distr~bution facilities, editing facilitzes,
cater~ng facilst~es, prin~ing faci~ities, post-productian
facilities, set construction facilitiesi SDU17C~ studios, special
effects facil~.ties and other entertainment-relatEd productxon
operativns.
(i) AlJ. uses custamary or inczdentaZ to the
productzon or distrzbution af motion pictures and other forms of
aud~.o/visual products, inc~uding, but I10t ~lIR1tEd t0~ educat3.on and
entertainment films or tapes.
(j) IIses which are determined by the Zoning
Admin~strator ta be simi~ar ta those listed above and ~rhich are
consistent with, and not more disturbing or disruptive than,
perm~tted uses.
(3) General office uses existing as of June 26,
1993, shall be permitted provided that such uses may not expand by
mor~ than ten percent (10~~ in flaor area.
8
{4) Service stations shall be permitted pravided
that they 2~re not located within i00 ~eet of a res~dential district
and th~y comply with Section 9.4~4.12.130 of the Municipa~ Code.
t
~5) Restaurants with 5~D square feet of ~loor area
or ~.ess shall be perm~.tted.
(6} No use, involving the manufacture, processing,
or treatment of products, whzch by nature af the operation is
likely to be obn~xious or offensive, whether by reason vf emiss~.on
of odor, dust, smoke, naxio~s gases, noise, vibrationE glare, ar
heat or by reason af ather impacts or hazards relating to
materzals, g~acess, product wastes ar by other methads, sha~.l be
permitted unless mitigation measures are s~zbmitted and are
acceptab~e ta the Zoning Administratar.
(B) Conditional~y Perm~tted Uses. The foilowing uses
may be permitted subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use
Pexnit:
(1) Automobile dea~erships.
{~} Automabile repair and automob~le painting
faczlz~~es, and expansion vf existing fac~lities r,rithin Z00 feet of
any res~d~ntial district.
(3) Chi~.d day care centers.
(4) Hea~th clubs and gymnasiums.
(5) Homeles~ shelters wzth 55 beds or more.
(b) Outdaor stor~ge of fZeet vehicles if such
vehicles are directly related ta the priYaary ~ndustx~ial or
manufacturing operation on trie site.
9
(7) Parking and automobile storage lots and
structures. _
(8) P2aces af worship.
(9) Residential ~5~5 located in the area
desxgnated as the Special St~dX Zones an the map attached hereto a~
~'EXhlblt A~~.
(].D) Restaurants with over 500 square feet of floor
area.
~11) Retail sales of goads manufactured on the
premzses, provided that the floor space devated to such use does
nat exceed twer~ty percent {20~) of the gross floor area of the
primary permitted use ar 2~~00 square feet, whichever is less.
{12) Service statiQns within 100 fQet of any
re~ident~al distx~ct.
(13) New pub].ic or pr~vate sehools.
(14) Any use of the transportatzon r~ght of way far
other than transpartation purposes.
(15) Uses which are determined by the Zoning
Adminzstrat~r to be similar to thase listed above and rtithich are
consistent with, and not rnore disturb.~nq or d3sruptive than,
conditionally permitted u~as.
(16) Any use p~rmitted by section 2(A}(2) above in
wh~ch off ice space eXceeds f ifty percent ( 5~~ ) af the gross f~vor
area af the primary use, so long as the office space is directly
related, ancillary to, and suppoztive of the priinary use ~ocated on
the same site.
10
(C) Prahibited Uses. The follow~ng uses shall be
pzohibited:
(~} Roaftop parking on parcels directly abuttzng,
or separated by an alley fro~, a residential district.
(2) New general affice uses.
(3) Any use not specifically authorized as a
perm~tted or canditianally permitted use,
[D) P~operty Deve~opment Standards. A11 property in the
area designated as Interim Zoning Study Az~a on the map attached
hereto as "Exhibit A" shaZ~ be developsd in accardance with the
fal~aw~ng standazds:
(1) Maximum Building He~ght. The maximum building
height shall be two (2) stories, not ta exceed 3o feet, except that
for prajects involving the expans~on of pubZic or private
elementary and secondary schools (Grade~ x through 12) existing
prior to September 8, 1988, a maxzmum height of faur stories, 45
feetr shall be permitted. For projects locatea on property ~n the
ar~a designated Spec~al Study Zone on the map attached hereto as
"~xh~bit A", a max~mum he~ght of four (4} stor~es, not to exceed 45
feet, may be permitted with the approval qf a Conditional Use
Perm~t fo~ pra~ects containzng at ieast 75 per cent residentzal
uses. The~e sha~l be no limitation on the number of staries of any
detach~d parking structure sa Iong as the height daes not exceed
the number of feet permitted in the district.
(2) Maxz~u~ FZoor Area Ratio. Maximum F~oor Area
Rat~o shal~ be 1.0, except that for pro~ects ~nv~lving the
11
expansian of pub~ic or private eiementary and secondary schools
(Grades x through 12) existing priar to September 8, 1988, a
max~mum floor area ratiQ Qf 1.5 shall ~e permitted. For pro~ects
~
~ocated an property within th~ area designated Special Study Zone
an th~ map attached hereto as "Exhibit A", the Maximum FZoor Area
ratio shall be .65, except that a maximum floor area ratia of 1.5
may be permitted wzth the approval. of a Conditional IIse Permit for
pro~ects containing at least 75 per cent residential uses on such
5pecial Study Zane designated prgperty.
(3} Minimum Lat Size. The minimum lot size sha21
be 15,000 square feet, Each ~.o~ shall cvntain a mznimum depth of
~.~o feet and a mznimum width of 100 feet, except ~hat lots existing
on September 8, Z988 sha11 not be subject to this requirement.
(4} Frant Yard Setback. A1.1 ~andscaping sha~~ be in
accordance with the pravisions af Part 9.04.10.04 of the Santa
Monica Mur~icipal Code.
(5) Rear Yard Setback. No rear yard setback shal~
be requ~red except:
ta} where the rear parcel line abuts a
resadential district, a rear yard equal to:
5' +(stories x lot width)
sa~
sha1l be required.
The required rear yard may be used for paxking or Ioading
to w~thin five (5) feet of the rear parcel 1~ne pravided the
parking ar loa~ing does not extend above the first floor level and
provided that a waZl. nat less than five (5} f~et ar more than six
iz
(6) feet in height zs erected and maintaxned along the rear
commercial parcel line. Access sha~l be permitted to cross
perpendieularly the r~quixed rea~ yard pravide~ the driveway does
f
not exceed the minzmum width pe~mitted for the parkzng az~a. A
required rear yard sha~l not be usad ~or commercial purposes.
(b) Such rear yard setback as is necessary to
accommodate landscaping and scre~ning for a rear yard buffer
required pursuant to the provisions af Part 9.04.10.04 of the Santa
Manica Municipa]. Code.
(6) 5ide Yard Setback. NQ ~ide yard setback shall
be required except:
(a) Whare the interior side parce}. line abuts
a reszdential distr~ct, an interiar side yard equal t~:
~' +(staries x ~ot width~
50'
shaZl be requ~red.
The intezior side yard may be used far parlcing or loading
no closer than five (5) feet to the interior s~de property line
provided the parking or loading dQes not extend above the first
f Ioor Ie~el and provzded a wall not ~ess than f ive ( 5) feet or mare
than szx (G) feet in height ~s erected and mainta~ned a~c~ng the
13
s~de cammercial parcel line. A requzred ~nterior sYde yard sha~l
not be used for access or for commer~ial purposes.
(b) 5uch side yard setback as is needed ta
f
accommodate landscaping required far a street side yard, landscape
buffer and screen~ng pursuant to the provis2ons of Fart 9.0~.1~.04
of the 5anta Monica Municipai Code.
(c) For portions of buildings that cantain
windows, doors, or other openings inta the interior of the
buziding, a ten (10) foot setback fro~ an interior praperty linE
shall be required. An inter~or side yard setback of le5s than ten
(lo} feet shal~ be germztted ~f provzsions af the Uniform Bui~ding
Code related to fire-~ated apenings ~n side yards are satisf~ed.
(E). Development Review. A Development Review Pex-mit is
required far any development of more than 30,000 square feet of
flodr area and for any development with rooftop park~ng.
(F) Architectural R@Vi~W. All new canstruction, new
addztzans ta ex~sting buildzngs, and any other exterior
zmpro~ements that require issuance Qf a building permzt shall be
sub~ect tv archxtectural review pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 9.32 of th~ Santa Monica Mun~cipal Cvde.
SECTION 3. Applicability. Sub~ect ta Section 4 oP this
Ordanance~ the requ~rement5 vf Section 2 of thzs Ordinance shall
app~y ta a11 pra~ects developed on any p~operty zn an area
d~~ignated Interim Zonzng Study Area on the map attached hereta as
"EXh].blt A'r .
14
SECTION 4. Exemptions. The follawzng appi~cat~ons are exempt
fram the provisions of Sectian 2 of this Ordinance:
(A7 Any building ar structure ~or wh~ch a building
. ~
permit, which has nat yet exp~.red, was issued on or b~fore June 15,
1993, but whi.ch has not obtained a Certificate of Occupancy as af
the effective date of thZS Ordinance.
(B) Any project t~r which a vesting tentative map
appl~cation was filed and deemed complete on or before June 15,
I993, which tentative map has not yet expired.
(C} Any project ~.ocated an a property sub~ect to a
Development Agreement as af the effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. This ~rdinance sha,~l be of no further fQrce and
effecL after June 1D, 1995, unZess priar to that date, after a duly
not~.ced p~bZic hearing, the C~.ty Council, by ma~o~~ty vote, extends
the int~r~m ordinance a~ prov~ded in Sectit~n 9.04.20.16.060 of the
Santa Monica Munzczpal Cade.
SECTION 6. Any prov~sions vf the Santa Monica Municipal Cade
or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this
ordinance, ta the extent af such inconsistencies and no further,
are hareby repealed or modified ta that extent necessary to
effectuate the pravisions at this ardinan~e.
SECTI~N 7. Ordinance Na. 1734 (CCS) is hereby repealed.
15
~SECTION 8. ~f an~ section, subsection, sentence~ clause or
phrase of this ordinance is far any reason held to be invalid or
uncanstztutional by a decls~on of any court of any competent
r
jurisdzction, such decision shall not affect the validity of th~
remainzng portions of ~his Ordinance. The City Cauncil hereby
declares that it would have pass~d thi~ ~rd~nance, and each and
every section, subsectian, sentence, c~ause, ar phrase not declared
invalid or unconstitutional w~thout regard to whether any gartion
af the Ordinance would be subsequent~y declared invalid or
unconstztutional.
SECTION 9. The Mnyor shail sign and the City C1erk shall
attest ta the passage of th~s Ordznance. The City Clerk shall
cause the same ta be published once in the officaai newspaper
with~n Z5 days after its adoption. This Ord~nance shall become
effective 30 days from its adaption.
APPROVE~ AS Ta FORM:
•
MAFtSHA JON MOUTRIE
City Atto y
16
~ , ~~
~Mayar
State of Califox~ua }
County of I.os Angeles } ss.
City of Santa M~niCa )
I, Clarice E Dykhause, C~ry Clerk of the C~ry of Santa Mamc~, do hereby cerufy that the
foregoing Qrduiance No.1777 {CCS) ~ad its first readmg on Noverr~ber I5, 2994 and had
its second reading an Navember 22, 19g4 a~d ~uas passed by the fallow~ng ~ate
Aves Cauncilmembers•
Noes Councitmembers.
Abdo, Genser, Halbrook, Olsen, Vazquez
Greenherg
Abstam Councilmembers. Rasenstem
Absent Conncilmernbers. Nane
ATTEST
~~
~ ,
City Clerk
a
~__._J ~ ~~~ ~~~___.~-I ~.1~ ~ ~, "~, _.
' I ~- ~ ~ ~~•,7,-.Y~.,,,Tr.,,,~.,,,T,T, ~ r~ ~ _..I T
lT7A ' 4 I
~ ..W ' ~' , ~ .. •.. .. _
- -~ ,~ . ' , , -----
- .~.~. ~„~
" ~ TY. '.'YY4 •
~..i ~.~~ __ ~ ~ _~~~~~
-~~~ . -
1-«~~•~~.~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~+~-~/~ F~J~ ~ ' I I ~ +
-~~ _ dl7~I,DWItiY ~~ U~ ~_,~J [~..r~J
~n^~. ~ - _`. _ ai~+o rri
A ''^' q D ~ N U .~ - -- ~ - -~ ,
r~ ....r.rL rn m fA A ~ -
, { .....~.. ~,{ _ '~ ' ~ ~ I i ~
~~-. ` AVCNU~ ~ -~.L ~LJ.t~. .1~ ~ 1 y
~ ~
I ,~ ID~wO~~[
_ , ~.. ... .~ f~~~ r~mIl~ r~_rm m ~n~ r- ~
.I ~ .; • ' `' ; ~ r~ ~~ r' r ~ . !I I i ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ^ . ~ • ~ i ~ ~ s
~~ ~I . j ! ~' '~'.'n i ~ ~ • ~, ft{ "~r, ~f ~i~+ ~. 1 ~e~~' il ~' ~ ~ ~~
~;~ I ~ , , .:~ ~ . . , ~; ~I~ . ~ la:t , r. ~ . ~ ~ ~~
^~ ~ . • .
~ ~ ~' ~~ ,. ~ . •~ ' •,, ~ +! ~~ /~f ff~' f . '~I ~ ~I _ `'
~ ~ u ` ;~ ~ ' ' ~4 ~ r '%//.~1~, ~I i ~ ' ~
. ' I
r `«~ ~7 ' • I ~ 'y j ; f i . . . . ~ ~ , ^ , ~ ~ , `
~ I 1 ~I '~' ~ ' 1' ` +~ . ' I f - ~ ~ • ` ~ I ; , i~ ~ ' ~ ?w~ i~i
~ . ~~1 . I' ~ ~ • • ' ,' ~ • V y • - I ~i , + ' ~~ II ; ~'..
1~ : ~ ~ ~ ~
1 • , ~ i• ' ~ ~ ' ~~'~' L ' - ' ~ ' I ' ' ~ I•. I~
'. I~ . ' , _. •~ 'r~, ~ ' ; ~ _ ti ~ ~ . • . I~ ~~ •
' ~ .. I~ , ~ ~,,.a • ~ ~ ! I ~ . ' •- I ~~
II . ' ` _.. , ~ , I ~
~ ~,~ ~~ ~ i• I
~ ~. ~ I , • •••~. ~.~ ~-~,...,... ~~ ~ _J s;
I ' II . , `~ ~~'~ ~ :~~ . '; ~ ' ', i I ~' i . . ~ •~ r L • ~ ~• • ~ ' ~ G•fff,~~~I`f~ ~f~~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~ r' f~ ~r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , - "- ----
~~ + ~ ~ `
6 i ' 1 ~ ' ~ .' ~ . • ,~ i~ f f ~ ~~f f'
~~.I ' I . I~ ~ ~, i ~ ... .. , r . . ~ ~~ ~ ~, ~
~ ~ f f~`f~
. '~ ' ' • ~ f ' ~~~ /
~ ~• 1 f • . , '~ , ~ ~,, •• ;• . . ~ f~~~ ~~ i
.l~ I , I ~ ' 1 ~'~'+ ~ ~: . ~~....~ ; ~l '' ~,; f~~f ;
, ~ ~: ; '~ f
~ ` ~ ..._..~ .•.~.~ ' i • ~ { .: ' ~ ~~,~I .
~•~ ~ ~'+' ~ ~ ' I f ~ 1'• ~ ~ ~~' . ~ .~•' .:' ; i • ' ~ • ~ _ • ' . . , . ~
ATTAC~IlVIENT C
~v`~~~'rl~S~J~'J~ J:IrSy~:1'~~1~
2525 MICHIGAN A~fNUF, SANTA MON1Ca, CALIFORNl.4, 90404
April 4, 1995
Pfanning Commission, City of Santa Monica
clo Da~id Martin, Associate Planner
Dear Pfann~ng Commiss~on,
We would like to take this opportunity to express our strong s~apport for
the reguested c~ange to the M1RD zon~ng for the area inclusi~e of
Bergamot Stat~on to permit "Live Performance" as a canditional use.
This proposed change in #he zoning would aflow us to ex~and the existing
visual arts agenda to ~nclude "LiWe Theatre," thereby pro~iding the
cit~zens of Santa Marnca with a unique Visual and P~rforming Arts Center
at one location
The addition of Li~e Theatre would enhance Bergamot's ~isual program and
be cohesi~e in its shared use of the property En that there would be
galleries by day and theatre in the evenings. This would have li~tle impact
on the area as there would exist four or five times more parl~ing than
rec{uired and any mcrease ~n traffic would come at times where there
wauld normally be a minimal amount of traffic ~n the neighborhood after
normaf #~~siness ho~rs. Such a complex would help brfng westside ~isitors
to our restaurants and create additional tax and ather revenues for our
c~ty ~n rnany different ways besides adding to the intellectual well-being
af our communEty.
~'~ar~k ~cu ~~r yaur anti~i~ated sa~port ~~ #h~s request. l~Ne are available to
answer any questions concernEng this ma#ter
Smcerely yours,
~
.
~
. i/1layne S Biank
iNS B/,~ h
ATTAC~IlV~NT D
APR-~5-19~~ 11 56AM FROM ~TG EXE~UTIUE OFFI~E T~ 9-131~4583380 P.02
CENTER '~HEATRE G~OLTP
AF#i1+1AN50N THEATR~ • MARiCTAPER FqRUM
Apri~ 5, 1995
Planning Commissioners
City of Santa Mnr~~ca
1685 Main S~re~t
santa rlonica, C~lifarnia 90407
Via Fa~simile: (31bj 458-~3380
~~+$J," Ci73~.'1551oX1eTS :
The Center Th~atre Gr~up/Mark Taper Foram i~ cexrrer-tiy i3~
d~,scus~i~ns r~garding the p~rssi.biii~y saf per~orming on a
regular k~asis a~ th~ Berga-znot Station Ar~s Ca~plex ir~
S~nta Monica.
I am wr±ting to y~u ~n support of the sta~f r~~~~r~en~lation to
~mend th~ a~ninq for tY:e Berga~t~ot Stat~~~ ~.rea to a1~ow ~iv~
th~atr3cal ~acilities by ~and~tiQr~al us~ perm~t. Yt is ~.l~ar
to as that ~uch a~se wi~,1. ,b~ compatible with the currertt
arts ~omp~ex uses, and wiil be of co~xsiderab~e ~~nsfat to the
ar~a and S~nta Mcnic~. If yau ne~d ~ny further in~o~at~.vn,
I can be reached at (213j 37~--1388.
u s s~r~ 1~.
Gvr~an ~av~cisan
Artistic Director/Produc~r
GD:~~
~Aus~c Ce~ter o~ Los A~ve~esCaunty ~135 M1larth Grsnd Aven~. Los Anqeies. Catrfom~a 800~2
ATTAC~IlV~NT E
RESOLUTION NO. 8895
(City Cauncil Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CERTIFYING THE FIIdAL ENVTRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
ON THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND STUDId DISTRICT DEVELUPMENT
STANDARDS
WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation of an Enviror~ental Impact
Report was issued in March, ].994; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completian of a ~raft Environm~nta~
Impact Report was published in March of ~995; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Enviroruuental Impact Report was
circulated for a 30-day period; and
WHEREAS, in April, 1995, the Final Environmental Impact
Report was published; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered
the contents,,of the Final EIR in its decisaon-making procass; and
WHEREAS, the Planninq Commission recommended certification
of the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, an April 25, 1995, the City Council, as Lead City
Agency, reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Repvrt~
1 eff44
i
NOW, THEREF~RE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY RE54LVE AS FOLLOWS:
S~CTIDN 1. The City Council has reviewed and considered the
Final Environmental Impaet Report on the Light Manufaeturing and
Studio District develapmant standards prior to acting on the
project.
SECTIOAT 2. The City Council certifies that the
~nvironmental review for the project was conducted in full
compliance with State and City CE¢A Guidelines, that there was
ad~quate public review of the Draft Environmental ~mpact Report,
that it has considered all coyaments on the Draft Environmental
Impact RepQrt and responses to com~tents, that the Final
Environ~ental Impact Report adequately discusses all significant
enviranmental issues, that the Fina1 Environmental Impact Report
reflects the independent judgement of the City, and that the City
Counci~ has considered the contents of the Final Environmental
rmpact Report in its decision-makinq process.
~
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shail certify to the adaption of
this Resalution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in fu11 force and effect.
APPROVE^ AS TO FORM:
~r't~.~-c-C-r.~.c~-- ' ~c-~~~
MARSHA y~MOUTR2E
City Attorney
w/lmsdef44
2 eff44
!
Adopted and approved this 25th af April, 1995
~ c.1~-~
Mayor
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resoiution 8895 (CCS} was duly adopted at a meeting
of the City Council held on the 25th of Apri1,1995 by the follawing vote
A~es
Noes
Abstain
Absent
Councii members. Abdo, O'Connor. Genser, Ebner, Holbrook, Greenberg
Counc~i members None
Council members Rosenstein
>
Council mernbers None
ATTEST:
,G~~ ~~
`r ~ ~
City Clerk
ATTACI~VVIEElVT F
RESOLUTION N4. 5896
{City Council 5eries}
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONiCA MAKING FINDTNGS NECESSARY T4 APPROVE
THE L~GHT MANUFACTURING AND STUDIO DISTRICT DEVEL{}PMEI3T STANDARDS
ANU ADOPTING A STATEMENT ~F OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION
WHEREAS, the City Councii has certified an Environmental
Impact Report for the Light Manufacturing and Studio District;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY APPROVE THE ESTABL~SHMENT OF THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING
AND STUDIO DISTRICT AATD RELATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND MAKES
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:
SECTION 1. Cvnsistent with Article VI, Section ~2 of the
City o€ Santa Moni.ca CEQA Guidelines and Sections 15091. and 15092
~f the State of CaZi.fornia CEQA GuideZines, the City Council
finds that most impacts resulting from the project can be reduced
to an acceptable Ievel. Most significant environmental effects
as identified below can €easibly be avoided and have been
eZiminated ar substantially lessened. The remaining unavoidable
significant effects cannot be fully mitigated but are
nevertheless found to be acceptab~e due to overriding
considerations, as discussed in Sectio~s 2, 3 and 4.
1 eff45
(a) The final EIR determined that without mitigation the
propased praject cau3d result in significant adverse impacts on
land use with the introduction of res~dential units into the
Special Study Zone parce~s that are larqely industrial/warehouse
in ~ature. In addition, the operating eharacteristics of
potentialiy conflictinq uses, such as traffic patterns and hours
of operation~ could also impact sensitive residential uses.
Cansistent with Artiele VI, Section 22 of the City CEQA
Guidelines and Section 15Q91 of the State of Califarnia CEQA
Guidelines, the City Council finds that the f~llowing changes
have been made to the project which will avoid or substantially
lessen the potential significant enviran~nental effects identified
with respeot ta land use:
(1) The type of residentia~ units permitted in the
district will be artist studio units, which are ~ore compatible
than traditio~al housing with ather uses permitted in the Light
Manufacturirng and Studio District. These types of live/work
residential units wauld be more compatible with existing and
proposed uses 9.n the district because they are typically places
where original works of art are created on-site~ and the work
area of the unit must ba at least fifty percent of the total
square faatage. Furthermore, the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District section of the Zoning Ordinance requires that for
2 eff45
projects that include artist studios, the Architectural Review
Board sha~l refer to the Light Manufacturing/Research and
Development 5tudy dated June 15, 1994, prepared by Elizabeth
Moule and Stefanos Polyzoides, to ensure the compatihility of the
artist ~tudios with other uses in the district.
(b) The final EIR determined that without mitigation the
pro~ect cauld result in significant adverse impacts on the demand
~or water. Based on City vf Santa Monica water consumption
factars, projected future development would cons~me 508,344
gallons of water per day. This is a net increase of 351,386
ga~lons of water per day over existing conditions. This
prajected consumption is equivalent to 2.9 percent of existing
City water consumption. Furthermore, although supplies are
adequate, existing water mains along Olympic Boulevard between
Twentieth Street and Centinela Avenue may not have adequate
capacity to9supply both domestic and fire service for a large
amount of new development. Consistent with Article VI, Sectian
12 of the City CEQA Guidelines and Section 15091 of the State af
California CE4A Guidelines, the Cit~ Counci~ f inds that the
following mitigatian measure has been required in the project
which will avoid or substantially lessen the potential
significant en~ironm~ntal effects identified with respect to
3 eff45
water:
(1) All individual developments praposed subsequent
to approval of the proposed project shall be required to comply
with applicable City ordinances regardinq water conservatian,
{2) Provisions for meeting fire flow requirements
and improvements to water distr~bution lines, and improvement
costs, shali be borne by ind~vidual project applicants.
{c) The final EIR determined that without mitigation the
project cauld result in significant impact to sewage gen~ratian.
The sewaye generated by the project would increase the City's
total sewaqe generation by 2.99 percent. Consistent with Article
VI, Sectian 1~ of the eity CEQA Guidelines and Section 15~91 of
the State of California CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds
that the following rnitigation measure has been required in the
project whidh will avoid or substantially lessen the potential
significant environmental effects identified with respect to
sewage generation:
(1} Al1 individual developments subsequent to
approval of the proposed project would be required ta comply with
applicable City ordinances regarding sewage generation and water
4 eff45
conservatian.
(d) The final ETR determined that withaut mitigation the
proj~ct ca~ld result in significant i~pact to solid waste, the
salid waste qenerated by the project would increase the City's
tata~ so~id waste generation at buildout by 5.8 percent.
Consistent with Article VI, Bection 12 of th~ City CEQA
Guide~ines and Section 3509~ of the State of California CE~A
Guidelines, the City Council finds that the follawing mitigation
measure has been required in the project which will avoid or
substantially ~essen the potential significant environmental
effects identified with respect to solid waste generation:
(1) All individual development subsequent to
approval of the praposed project shall be required to comply with
applicable City ardinances regarding solid waste d~spasal.
SECTION 2. The Final ETR found that development allowed
under the project would result in significant traffic impacts at
eleven intersectians in the A.M. peak hour and sixteen
intersections in the P.M. geak hour for an overall total of
seventeen significantly impacted intersections (some locations
have forecast impaats during both peak hours). The fallowing
5 eff45
intersections projected to be impacted at bui~dout af the
project:
Twentieth St./Wilshire Blvd. - AM only
Twentieth St./Braadway - PM only
Twentieth St./Olympic Blvd. - AM and PM
Twenty-third St./Ocean Park Blvd. - AM and FM
Cloverfield Blvd./Olympic Bl.vd. - AM and PM
Cloverfield Blvd./Michigan Ave. - PM on~y
Claverfield Blvd./I-10 WB Off-ramp - AM and PM
Cloverfield B3vd./I-lo EB On-ramp - PM only
Cloverfield Blvd./Ocean Park Blvd. - PM only
Twenty-sixth St./Wilshire Blvd. - AM and PM
Twenty-sixth St./Santa Monica Blvd. - AM and PM
Twenty-sixth St./Colorado Ave. - AM and PM
Stawart St./Colorado Ave. - PM only
Stewart St./4lympic Bl~d. - AM and PM
C~ntinela Ave./Broadway - PM only
Centinela Ave.(East}/Olyiupic Blvd. - AM and PM
Consistent with Article VI, Section 13 af the City CEQA
Guidelines and Section 15093 of the State of Califarnia CEQA
Guidelines, the City Council hereby makes a Statement of
Overriding Considerations and finds that the benefits of the
praject autweigh its unavoidable environmental impacts based an
6 eff45
the following reasons:
(a1 While buildout of the praject would resu~t in
seventeen impacted intersections, the traffic impacts of the
project are identical to the impacts associated with buiidout
u~der existing zoninq standards for the project area. Therefore,
adaption of the project would ~ot increase the ntunber of
intersections that would be impacted at total buildaut of the
area.
(b) Individual prajects over 30,00o square feet in
~loor area will require project specific environmental review.
In the event that an EIR is required, the traf~ic ana~ysis ta be
completed within thos~ EIR's will b~ more detailed and specific
than the traffic ana~ysis which was conducted for this project.
Such EIR traf€ie analysis will include detailed mitigation
measures which are warranted based an the specific develogment
proposals. ~
(c) While the number of vehic~e trips generated by
development under the pro~ect would create significant impacts at
seventeen intersections, these impacts would be reduced by
compliance with existing and future City policies and pragrams,
i~cluding intersection signal upgrades and Chapter 9.16 if the
7 eff45
Santa Maniaa Municipal Code {Transportation Manageme~t), which
requires all empioyers of ten or more emplayees and all
developers of na~res~dential projeets which result in ten or mare
peak periad trips to subrait a Worksit~ Transportation Plan to the
City.
(d} The allowance and incentive for new artist
studio residential uses is consistent with the policies of the
Sauthern California Area Governments {SCAG), which promotes a
baiance of housing units and employment opportunities (a
~~jobs/housi~g balance") as a means of reducing traffic
congestian, reduc~ng vehicle emissions, decreasing commute times,
and reducing the need £or major capital expenditures for the
development of mass transit facilities. SCAG identifies Santa
Monica as a jobs-rich subregion and the allowance of residential
units in the distr~ct is consistent with the SCAG goal of
increasing the number of residential units in the City.
(ej Wh~lE buildout of the project may result in
seventeen impacted intersections, the devel~pment standards and
permitted uses in the district wauld be consistent with the
intent of the Light Manufacturing and Studio District which is to
preserve existing light industrial uses, provide a location for
studio-related facilities, accommadate visual and performing
$ eff45
arts, allow for the preservation and expansion of existing
schools, and provide opportunities for artist studio residential
units.
SECTION 3. The Final EIR found that devel~pment allowed
under the project would resuit in a sig~ificant impact on air
quality in that project related development wauld have a
significant air qua~ity impact at Newbridge Schaol by i~creasing
the eight-hour CO concentration to above the signifieance
threshald. Cansistent with Article VI, Section 23 of the City
CEQA Gu~de~ines and Section 15093 of the State of California CEQA
Guidelines, the City Council hereby makes a Statement of
Overriding Considerations and finds that the benefits of the
project outweigh its una~aidable environmental impacts based on
the following reasons:
{a) While buildout of the project would result in
cumulat~ve ~onstructinn emissions, the air quaZity impacts of the
project ar~ identical to the impacts associated with buildout
under existing zoning standards for the project area. Therefore,
adopt~on of the praject wou~d not i~cxease the air quality
imgacts that would be associated with total buildout of the area.
{b) Individual projects over 30,000 squar~ feet in
9 eff45
floor area will require project specific environmental review.
In the event that a EIR is required, the air quality ana~ysis to
be campleted within those EIR~s will be more detailed and
specific than the analysis which was condacted for this project.
Such EIR analysis will include detailed mitigation measures which
are warranted based ~n the specific development praposals.
(c) While the amount af emissions generated by
develap~~nt under the project wauld create sign~ficant impacts,
these impacts wvuld be reduced by compliance with existing and
future City policies and prvgrams, including the following:
o ~eve~opment projects must comply with SCAQMD~s Rule
402, whi~h regulates off site fugitive dust impacts.
o Development projects must comply with SCAQMD's Rule
403, which regu~ates fugitive dust emissions.
(d) While buildout of the project may result in
significant ~mpact an air quality, the develapment standards and
permitted uses in the district would be consistent with the
intent of the Light Manufacturing and Studio District which is ta
preserve existing light industrial uses, provide a iocatian for
studio-related facilities, accommodate visual and performing
arts, allow for the preservation and expansion of existing
schools, and p~ovide opportunities for artist studio residential
10 eff45
units.
SECTION 4. The Fina~ EIR determined that developmant
allowed under the project would res~lt in significant impact to
the parks and recreation facilities. Based on a ratio of 2.5
acres per 1,UO0 papuZation, the project would result in the need
for 4.35 acres af additiona3 park~and at buildout. Consistent
with Article VI, Section ~3 of the City CEQA Guidelines and
Section 15U93 of the State of California CEQA Guidelines, the
City Council hereby makes a Statement of Overriding
Cansiderations and finds that the benefits of th~ prajeet
outweigh its unavaidable environmental impacts based on the
following reasons:
(a) While buildout of the project would result in
significant impacts a~ parks, the i~pacts of the project are
identical to the impacts associated with buildout under existing
zoning stan~ards for the project area. Therefore, adaption af
the project would not increase the parks impacts that wauld be
associated with total buildout of the area.
(b) Individual projects over 30,000 square feet in
floor area will require project specific environmental review.
In the event that an EIR is required, the parks analysis to be
11 ef f45
completed within those EIR's wi~l be more detailed and specific
than the analysis which was conducted for this project. Such
analysis will include detailed mitigation measures which are
warranted based an the specific develapment proposals.
(c) The FEIR conc~uded that the project would result
in 870 additional residential units. However, the EIR analysis
assumed the creation of the Special Study Zones, which wou~d have
included residential units. Due to the fact that the Special
Study Zones have been eliminated, the actual number of
residential units that wauld exist in the district at build out
would be substantial~y less. Furthermore, since the majarity of
the residentia~ units would be artist studios, which are not
typicaily accupied by families with children, the impacts an
parks would }~e reduced.
SECTION 5. Consistent with Section 21081.6(d) af the
Califarnia ~nvironmental Quality Act, the documents which
constitute the record of proceedings for approving this project
are located i~ the Planning and Cammunity Development Department,
1685 Main Street, Room 212, Santa Monica, California. The
custodian of these dacuments is Associate Planner David Martin.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
12 eff45
1
this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in fu31 force and effect.
APPROVE~ AS TO FORM:
~ ~`~-e-~
~
MARSHA JONE 4UTRIE
City Attorney
f:\ppd\share~eirtemps\lmsdef45
r
13
eff45
i
Adopted atid approved this 25th of April, 1995
~
Mayor
I hereby certzfy that the foregoxng Resnlution 8896 {CCS} was duly adopted at a~neehng
of the City Counci~ held on the 25th of Apn~, 1995 by the following vote:
Ayes: Caunci~ members Abdo, Holbrook, Greenberg, Ebner
Noes: Counc~i members ~'Connor, Genser
Abstain. Council members Rosenstein
Absent. Co~ncil members None
ATTEST
/1_L1~O ~ ~ ,
~ - ~ -
City Clerk
ATTAC~IlVIENT G
ORDINANCE NUMBER
{CITY COUNCIL SERIES}
AN ORDINANCE dF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA M4NICA AMENDING ARTICLE IX
OF THE SANTA MONICA MUrTICIPAL CODE TO CREATE
Z`HE LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND STUDIQ DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolurion of In~entinn to amend the
development standards and permitted uses in the cammercial distncts of the City, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a pubhc hear~ng on the Light Manufacturing
and Studio Distnct and made recommendat~ans to the C~ty Council follawing the hear~ng, and
WHEREAS, the City Counc~l held a pubhc hearing on the Light Manufactunng and
Studio District; and
WHEREAS, the Crty Council approved a motion to adopt the proposed zonmg standards
for the Light Manufacturing and Studio District foilowing the pubhc heanng; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declazes that the proposecl amendment to
establ~sh the LMS District in portions of the former M1 and CS distr~cts is consistent in pnnciple
with the goals, objecti~es, pohcies, land uses, and pragrams specified m the adopted Generai
Plan, in that, cvnsistent with Land Use and Circulation Element Policies for the Speciai Office
District arid Ob~ective 1. S, the de~elopment standards and permitted uses designated for the LMS
1
Distnct further the goal of accornmadatang advanced technology uses which require largE floor
area, whi~e recogmzing ~hat the goal of accommodat~ng large scate general office deveiopment
has been accomplished through retaining designated parcels subjec~ to developrnent agreements
m CS zoning designations and consistent witY~ ~b~ect~~e 1.9, the development standards and
permitted uses designated for the LMS District further the goal of preserving existing and
accammodating future industrial and manufacturing uses in the area: and
WHEREAS, the public health, safety, and general welfare requue the adopt~on of the
proposed amendment, in that the Light Manufactunng and Stud~o Distnct standazds set
appropnate limrts to non-resxdent~al development in the area, m order to allow nan-res~dential
grawth in amounts sufficient ta keep the city fiscally sound, and at a level that will protect the
health and welfare of city residents and maintain c~uality of life standards,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY C~UNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MQNICA
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Part 9.04.0$.35 is added to the Municipal Code ta read as follows:
Part 9.04.48.35 LMSD - Light Manufactur~ng and Studio District
9.04 08.35.010 Purpose.
The Light Manufacturing and Studio District is intended to preserve exist~ng hght
industnal uses, pro~ide a location for studio-related uses 5uch as film and music product~on and
pos~ product~on facilit~es uses, and provide opportunities for artist studio hve/work residenrial
2
development. T}~e Light Manufacturing and Studio District ts also designeci to accornmodate
visual and performing arts studios and to provide for the preservat~on and expans~on of exist~ng
sehools Allowable develapment intensity with this Distnct is intende~ to be arnong the lowest
in the City, consistent with the goals, ob~ectives, and pohcies of the General Plan.
9.04 08.35 020 Permitted uses.
(a} The following pnmary uses shall be permitted if conducted within an enclosed
building {except where otherwise permitterl), provided any office space incl~ded therewith is
directly related to, ancillary to, and supparhve of the primary perm~tted use on the same site and
does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the gross floor area of the primary use:
{1} Artist studios and art gal.lenes.
(2) Automobile repair and autamobile pavit~ng fac~lit~es except thvse within
10{} feet of a residential distnct.
{3) Dance studivs.
(4} Domest~c violence shelters.
(5} Establ~shments engaged m research relat~ng to, or the development,
manufactur~r-g, fabricating, assembly, testing, repair, servicing, ar processing of, the following:
(i) Aircraft parts other than engines.
(ii) Appazel except leather and fur good~.
(iii) Audio praducts
(iv) Metal, wood or canvas awnrngs
(v} Coated, plated, and engravad metal.
3
(~i} Communicarion equipment.
(~ii) Cut stone and stone products.
(viii) Diecut paper and paperboard, and cardboard.
(ix) Electric components and accessones.
(x) Electric lighting and winng equipment.
(xi) Fabricated text~le products.
(xi~) Furniture and fixtures.
(xiii} Glass products.
(xiv} Jewelry, silverwaze, and plated ware.
(xv) Luggage.
(xvi} Musical instrcirnents ar~d parts.
(xvii) Office machFnes.
(xviii) Paperboard containers and boxes.
(xix} Pens, pencils, and other office and artists matenals.
(x~c) Perfttmes, cosmet~cs, and other toilet preparations.
(~a) Phazmaceut~cal products.
(xxii) Photographic and aptical goods, watches, and clocks.
(xxiii) Plumbing fixtures and ~eating apparatus.
(xxiv) Pattery and related products.
(xx~) Professional, scientific, and controll~ng instruments.
(xxvi) Toys, amusements, sportxng and athlet~c goods.
(xxvii) Wooden containers.
4
(xxviii} Food products, except that no food consumption by tl~e publ~c or
food take-out by the pubhc shall be permitted.
(xxvc) Products which are determined by the Zomng Admimstrator to he
similar to those listed above a~d which are consistent with, and not associated with more
disturbance or disrupt~on than, germitted products.
{6) Estabiishments engaged in the wholesale distnbutian af the following:
(i) Dry goods and apparel.
(ii) ElectncaF goods.
(iu) Grocenes and related pr~ducts, except unpackage~ or unprocessed
paultry and poultry products, fish and seafood, and fruit and vegetables.
(iv) Hardware, plumbmg, heat~ng equipment and supplies.
(v) Mac~inery, equipment, and supplies, except farm machinery arid
equipment.
(vi) Motor vehicles and automative equipment
(vii) Paper, paper products, and landred supplies
(viii) Pharmaceutical praducts and allied products.
(7) Homeless shelters wrth less than 55 beds.
(S} Phatography stud~os_
(9} Public or private schoo~s existing pnor to September, 1988
(10) Pu61ic urility service centers and ser~ce yards.
(11) Public ut~hty substaaons.
(i2) Self starage or public mini-warehouses.
5
(13) Vetennary clinics.
{14) Warehouses.
(15) Uses which are deterrruned by the Zomng Adnurustrator to be similar to
those listed ahove and wh~ch are consistent with, and not more disturbing ar disruphve than,
permitted uses.
(b) The foliowing pn~nary uses shall be permitted if conducted within an enclosed
building (except where otherwise perrnitted) and rnay lnclude office space, so long as the affice
space is dlrectly related, anciliary to, and supporhve of the prirnary use located on the same site:
(1) Broadcasting/communicatrons, telecommumcat~ons facih~ies, and a~cillary
facilities custamarily associated with and incidental to such producnon facilit~es, mcluding,
without limitation, faciht~es for broadcasting, transmitting, dismbuhng, recording, recei~u~g,
ed~tmg, and creating broadcast/cammunications anc~ telecommunicat~ans.
(2) Design studios and offices for architec~s.
(3) Drafting, prmhng, bluepnntmg and reproduct~on services.
(4) Laboratones and facilities for medical test~ng and scienrific research
development and testing.
(S) Publishing facih~es.
(6) Software and other computer-related production facilities.
{7j Studios and offces for graphic designers.
{$) On-s~te production facihties for advertiszng purpases.
(9) Outdaor or enclosed entertainment-related facilities ~ncluding, without
s
hmitation, movie studios and production facil~t~es, d~stnbuaon faciht~es, editing facilit~es,
cater~ng facilities, printing facilities, pos~-production facilittes, set constxucaon facilit~es, sound
studios, special effacts faciliries and other entertainment-relatec~ procluctaon operat~ons.
(10) All uses customary or inc~dental to the product~on or distribut~on of motian
pictures and other forms of audialvisual products, mcluding, but not hmited to, educati~n and
entertainment films or tapes.
(11) Uses which aze determined by the Zoning Admmistrator to be similar to
those listed abave and which are consistent with, and not mare disturbing ar disruptive than,
perm~tted uses.
(c) General office uses ex~sting as of 7une 2b, 1993, and general office uses m
buildings which were granted a planning permit specifically for general office uses between
December 1, 1992 and ]une 26, 1993 and which obta~ned a Certificate of accupancy prior to
the adoption of this Part, shall be permitted provided that such uses may not expand by more
than ten percent (10%} in floor area.
(d) Ser~+ice stations shall be permitted provided that they are not located within lt}0
feet af a residenhal district and they comply with Section 9.04.12.130 of the Mumcipal Code.
{e) Restaurants with 50{} square feet of floor area or less shall be permitte~
9.04.~8.35.040 Conditionally permitted uses.
The following uses may f~e permrtted su~ject to the issuance of a Condi~xonal Use Permit:
(a} Automobile dealerships.
(b) Automobile repair and automohile painting facilitxes, and expansion of existing
7
fac~lrties wrthin 100 feet of any res~dential distnct.
(c) Child day care centers.
(d) Heatth clubs and gymnasiums.
(e) Homeiess shelters with 55 beds or more.
(~ Theaters.
(g} O~tdoor storage of fleet vehicles if such vehicles are directly related to the
pnmary industrial or manufacturing opera~ion vn the s~te.
(~) Parlang and automobile starage lots and struc~ures.
(i} Places of wors~~p.
~) Restaurants with fl~er S00 square feet of floor area
(k} Retail sales nf goocis manufactured on the premises, provided that the floor space
devoted to such use does not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the gross flvor area of the pnrnary
perrnitted use or 2,OUQ square feet, whichever is less.
{l) Service stat~ons within 10(} feet of any resident~al district.
(m) New public or pnvate schoals.
(n) Any use of the transportat~an right of way for other than transportat~on purpases.
[o) Uses which are determineri by the Zoning Adrrunistrator to be similar ta those
listed above and which are consistent with, and not znore c~xsturhing or disrupt~ve than,
conditianally permitted uses.
9 04.08.35.050 Prohibited uses.
The follawing uses shall be proh~b~ted:
8
(a) Roaftop parking on parcels directly abutt~ng, or separate~ by an alley from, a
resident~al district.
(b) New general office uses.
(c) Any use not specifically auth4zized as a permitted or cond~t~onally permitted
use.
(d) Any use in~olving the manufacture, processing, or treatment nf products, which
by nature of the operat~on is likely to be obnoxious or offensrve, whether by reason af emissifln
of odor, dust, smoke, noxious gases, noise, v~brat~on, glare, or ~eat or by reason of other
impacts or hazards relating ta materials, process, product wastes vr by oth~r methods, shall be
prohibited unless mit~gat~on measures are submitted and are acceptable to the Zoning
Administrator.
9.04 08.35.06(} Property development standards.
All property in the Light Manufactunng and Studio District shall be developed in
accardance with the following standazds:
(a) Maximum Building Height. The maximum bi.ulding height shall be two {2} stones,
not ta exceed 30 feet, except the follawing prajects may have a maximum height of four (4)
stories, forty-five (4S) feet:
(i) Pra~ects involving the expansion of pubhc ar pri~ate el~mentary and
secondary schaols fGrades K through i2) e~st~ng pnor to Septemher 8, 198$
(ii) Entertainment retated facilihes ~ncluding so~nd stages, movie studios,
edit~ng fac~lit~es, post production facilit~es, set construction faciht~es, and special effects
9
facilihes.
{iiu) Theaters.
There shall be no limitation on the number af stones of any detached parking structure so long
as the height does not exceed the nurnber of feet permitteci in the d~smct.
{b) Ma~cimum Floor Area Ratio. Maximum Floor Area Rat~o shall be 1.~, except the
following prajects may ha~e a floor area raUo of 1.5:
(i) Pro~ects in~ol~ing the expans~on of public or pnvate elementary and secondary
sc~oals (Grades K through 12} existing pnor to Septem6er 8, 19$8.
(ii) Pro~ects including artist studios, provided the additional 5 floor area ratio
~s devoted ta artist studio use, and the commercial square footage dces not exceed I.0 floor area
raao.
(c) 11~nimum Lot Size. The min~mum lot si~e shall be 15,000 square feet. Each lot
shall contain a minimum depth of 150 feet and a minimum width vf 100 feet, excegt that lots
existing an the effe~tive date af this Chapter shall not be sub~e~t to tlus requirement
(d} Front Yard Setback. All landscaping shall be in accordance with the pro~isions of
Part 9.04.10.04 of the Santa Monica Mumcipal Code.
(e} Rear Yard Setback. No rear yard setback shall be requ~red except:
(1) Where the rear parcel line abuts a resrdential dlstrict, a rear yard equal to:
5' +(stories x lot width)
50'
shall be required.
~a
The required rear yard may be used for parlang or Ioading to within five (5) feet
of the rear parcei line pravided the parking or Ioading does ~ot extend above the first floor level
and provided that a wall not less than five (5) feet or more than six (6) feet in height is erected
and mainta~ned along the rear commercial parcel lme. Access shall he permitted to cross
perpendicularly the required rear yard provided the dn~eway does not exce~d the minimum
width permitted for the parlang area. A requ~reri rear yard shall not be used for commercial
A~~.
(2) Such rear yard setback as is necessary to accornmoda~e landscaping and
screening for a rear yard buffer required pursuant to the provisions of Part 9.04 14.(}4 of the
Santa Momca Municipal Caie.
( fl S~de Yard Setback. No side yard setback shall be requ~red except:
(1} Where the interior side parcel Iine abuts a residennal distnct, an intenor side
yard equal to:
5' + (stones x lot wicith)
50'
shall be requ~red.
The intenor side yard may be used for parkmg or loading no claser than five (5)
feet to the interivr side property hne provide~ the parlang or loading daes not extend above the
fizst floor level and pro~ided a wall not less than five (5) feet or more than six (6) fe~t in height
I1
is erected and maintained along the ~de commercial parcel l~ne. A required intenor side yard
shall not be used for access or for commercial purposes.
(2) Such side yard setback as is neede~ to accommodate Iandscaping required for
a street side yard, landscape buffer and screenzng pursuant to the provisions of Part 9.04.10 44
of the Santa Monica Mumcipal Code.
(3) For portions of buiidings that contain windows, doors, or other opemngs into
the mtenor of the builc3ing, a ten (10) foot se~back from an interior property Iine shall be
requirerl. An interior side yard setback of less than ten {10} feet shall be permitted if provis~ons
af the Uniform Buiiding Code related to fire-rated openings zn side yards are sat~sfied.
(g} Building Step Back. For partions of buildings between thirty (30} feet and forty-five
(45) feet i~ height, a mne (9) foot setback frnm the front property lme shall be required.
(h) Olympic Boule~ard Setback. Buildings shall b~ setback a minimum of twenty {20)
feet from Olympic Boulevard.
(i) Development Review. A Development Rev~ew Permit is requ~retl for any
de~elopment of mare than 30,000 square feet of floor area and for any development with roaftop
parlang.
9.04 0$.35.070 Arc}utectural review
All new construction, r~ew additions to exist~ng buildings, and any other extenor
impro~ertsents ihat require issuance ~f a building permit sha11 ~ie sab~ect to architectural review
purs~ant to the pro~isions of Chapter 9.32 of the Santa Mon~ca Municipal Code For pro~ects
that include arhst studios, the Architec~ural Re~iew Board shall refer to the Light
12
Manufacturing/Research and Development Study dated June 15, 1994 prepared by Ehzabeth
Moule and Stefa~nvs Polyzaides, to ensure the compatib~lrty of the artist sttidios with other uses
in the district.
SECTION 2. Any provis~on af the Santa Momca Municipal Code or appendices thereto
lnconsistent with the provisions of the Ordinance, ta the extent of such u~consistencies and no
further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provision of this
Ord~nance.
SECTI~N 3. Ordinance 1777 (CCS} zs hereby repealed
SECTION 4. If any section, subsecti~n, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinartce
is for any reason held to be invalid or uncansatutianal by a decision of any caurt of competent
~unsdict~on, such decision shall not affect the ~alidity of the remainmg portions of tlus
Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and
each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, ar phrase not declazed invalid or
uncons~tutianal without regard to whether any portion of the Ord~nance would be subsequently
declared mvalid or unconstitutional.
13
SECTIQN 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this
Ordmance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper
within 15 days after ~ts adoption. This Ordinance shall become effect~ve 30 days from ~ts
adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~ ~~~tis ~`~`~Lt~=-~ ~~ c~V'~ 'C~
Marsha J. Mo~tne
City Attorney
share/eirtemps/lmsdord
14
ATTAC~IlVIENT H
CA:f:\atty~muni\laws\mhs~mlydmap
City Council Meeting 4-25-95 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER (CCS}
(City Council Series}
AN ORDINANCE O~ THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONZCA AMENDING THE ~FFYCIAL
DISTRICTING MAP TD ESTABLISH THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING
AND STUDIO DISTRICT IN PORTIONS OF THE
FORMER Ml AND C5 DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, concurrently with adoption of this amendment to the
Official Districting Map to 2stablish the Light Manufacturing and
Studio District ("LMSD District") in porti~ns of' the farmer M1 and
C5 Districts, the City Council is adopting an amendment to the
Zoning ~rdinance to establish authoriz~d uses and property
develapment standards for the LMSD District; and
WHEREAS, the Czty CounciZ finds and declares that the proposed
amendment to establish the LMSD District in portions of the former
M~ and C5 districts is consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in th~
adopt~d G~neral Plan, in that, consistent with Land Use and
Circulat~on Element Policies for the Special Office Distrlct and
Objective 1.8, the development standards and permitted uses
designated far the LMSD Distr~ct further the goal of accommodating
advanced technology uses which require large floor area, while
recognizing that the goal of accommodating large scale general
1
office dev~lopment has been accomplished through retaining
designated parcels subject to development agreements in C5 zoning
designations; and cansistent with Objective 1.9, the development
standards and permitted uses designated for the LMSD District
further the goal of preserving existing and accommodating future
industrial and manufacturing uses in the area; and
WHEREAS, the public health, safety, and general welfare
require the adoptian af the prapased amendment, in that the LMSD
District standards set appropriate limits to development in the
area, in order to allaw growth ~n amounts sufficient to keep the
city fiscally sound, and at a level that will protect the health
and welfar~ of city residents and maintain quality of life
standards;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONTCA DQES ORDAIN AS FDLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Officia~ Districting Map of the City is that
set f~rth in Exhibit "A."
SECTION 2, Any provision of the Santa Monica Mun~cipal Cade or
appendices thereto, incansistent with the pro~isions of this
~rdinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further,
are hereby rep~aled or modified to that extent necessary tQ effect
the pravisians of this Ordinance.
2
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason h~ld to be 3nvalid or
unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any campetent
jurisdiction, such decision shali not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would 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 Ordinance would be subsequantly declared invalid or
unconstitutiona~.
SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall
attest to the passage af this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper
with~n 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall be
effective 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~
~1 ~ ~ ~
/ ~~~~~5-~.~~.c:~-~ :~ `--~-E-=~~`~'~-e-f
MARSHA JOI~'ES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
3
ATTAC~IMENT I
(4FFICIAL DISTRICTING MAP)
ATTAC~IlI~NT J
(FIlVAL ENVIR~NMENTAL IMPACT REPOR~