Loading...
SR-6-B (35) J r '--/$ ~ CA:JL:jld762/hpcal/pc OCT 1 3 1992 City Council Meeting 10-13-92 Santa Monica, California STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and city council FROM: city Attorney SUBJECT: ordinance Amending section 9515 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to Exempt Designated Historic structures from Architectural Review; Ordinance Amending Chapter 9 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to Exempt Designated Historic Structures from Signage Approval by the Architectural Review Board; Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance sections 9133.1 and 9133.3 to Permit the Zoning Administrator to Approve A Reduced Parking Permit for Designated Historic structures; and Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance section 9048.1 Relating to the Review of Demolition Permits by the Landmarks Commission At its meeting on September 29, 1992, the city Council introduced for first reading the following ordinances: Ordinance Amending Section 9515 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to Exempt Designated Historic structures from Architectural Review; Ordinance Amending Chapter 9 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to Exempt Designated Historlc structures from signage Approval by the Architectural Review Board; Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance Sections 9133.1 and 9133.3 to Permit the Zoning Administrator to Approve A Reduced Parking Permit for Designated Historic structures; and Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance Section 9048.1 Relating to the Review of Demolition Permits by - 1 - ,-/3 - Del 1 3 1992 ,- , the Landmarks commission. The ordinance is now presented to the city council for adoption. RECOMMENDATION It is respectfully recommended that the accompanying ordinance be adopted. PREPARED BY: Joseph Lawrence, Acting city Attorney - 2 - , tarb2fword.ppd -~~ City Councll Meeting: 10-13-92 Santa Monica, California ~ ~ ORDINANCE NUMBER 1651 (CCS) - (City Council Series) . AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA TO AMEND SECTION 9.32.170, FORMERLY SECTION 9515 OF THE SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE TO EXEMPT DESIGNATED CITY LANDMARKS AND STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS FROM ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION l. Flndlngs and Purpose. The Clty Council finds and declares: (a) In September 1990 the City Council directed staff to amend the Santa Monlca Municipal Code to exempt designated city landmarks and historic dIstricts from the Architectural Review Board process. (b) In November 1990 the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 1535 (CCS) implementing procedures for review of the alteration or demolition of structures located in the Third street Nelghborhood Hlstoric District and exempting the historic district from the Archltectural ReVlew Board process. ( c) In July 1991 the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 1590 (CCS) amending Chapter 6 of Artlcle IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code relating to landmarks and historic districts. - 1 - ---- ---- ---- (d) Section 9621 contained in Ordinance 1590 (CCS) exempted such designated structures from the Architectural Review Board ~-- ~ -- process. - (e) It lS necessary to amend Section 9515 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to make it conslstent with Ordinance 1590. - NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1- section 9.32.170, formerly Section 9515, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: SECTION 9.32.170. Architectural Review District Boundaries. Pursuant to section 9509 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code an architectural review district is hereby established. Said architectural review district shall be composed of all commercial, industrial and residential areas within the corporate boundaries of the City, wlth the exception of those areas designated as R-l districts by Article IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and those structures designated as landmarks or contributing structures within historic districts pursuant to Chapter 6 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. Non contributing structures located within historict districts shall be subject to archltectural review unless otherwise exempted by the ordinance that establishes procedures for the alteration of structures wlthln the historlc district. SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto 1.nconsistent vll th the provisions of this - 2 - - - - - --- Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed or modl.fied~~ _that extent necessary to ..;S'""__ effect the provisions of this Ordinance. - SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance 1S for any reason held to be invalid or . unconstitutional by decision of court of competent a any jurisdictlon, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the 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 Ordlnance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. The Mayor shall s1gn and the city Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The city Clerk shall cause the same to be publlshed once in the official newspaper with1n 15 days after its adoption. This ordinance shall be effective 30 days from its adoption. , APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~~ JOSEPH LAWRENCE Acting City Attorney - 3 - . ..s- __ ~ - Adopted and approved this 13th day of October, 1992. - 4 I hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 1651(CCS) VIas duly and regularly introduced at a meeting of the city Council on the 29th day of September 1992; that the said Ordinance was thereafter duly adopted at a meeting of the city council on the 13th day of October 1992 by the following Council vote: Ayes: Councilmembers: Abdo, Genser, Holbrook, Katz, Olsen, Vazquez, Zane Noes: Councilmembers: None Abstain: Councilmembers: None Absent: Councilmembers: None ATTEST: ~~/a~. ..-- Ci ty Clerk ! c:V BEFORE DISTRIBUTION CHECK CONTENT OF ALL FOR CITY CLERK'S ACTION DISTRIBUTION OF RESOLUTION # ORDINANCE # It ~r~- Council Meeting Date /~/3/t14. Introduced: 9/0!~/tJ-L / , ~ ~ - ~ Agenda Item :it 6-8 Adopted: /p~319J- /yo ALWAYS PUB~ISH ADOPTED ORDINANCI Was it amended? Cross out Attorney's approval VOTE: Affirmative: -; ,,- ,-J Negative; Abstain; Absent: PROOF VOTES WITH ANOTHER PERSON BEFORE ANYTHING DISTRIBUTION: ORIGINAL to be signed, sealed and flIed in Vault. NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION (Date: ) -r-- Department orlginating Staff report ( ) Ordinance only for Attorney (Claudia Thompson) 1 City Manager Lynne Barrette ORDINANCES ONLY _L- Agency mentioned ln document or staff report (certified?) Subject f11e (agenda packet) 1 Counter file 1 Others: (Review for departments who need to know) Airport Parking Auth. Auditorium Personnel Build1ng Dept. Planning I C/ED Police Finance Purchasing General Servo CARS Engineering City Yards Library Transportation ____ Manager Treasurer Fire Water SEND FOUR COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: Debra Myrick r/ Santa Monica Munlclpal Court 1725 Main Street, Room 118 Santa Monica, CA 90401 SEND ONE COPY OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: Donna Christensen I Book Publ1shing Co. 201 Westlake Avenue North -b+-- ? Seattle, WA 98109-5293 Total Copies tarb3fword.ppd city Council Meet1ng: 10-13-92 Santa Monica, California -=- --- ~ -- ORDINANCE NUMBER 1652 (CCS) - (City Council Series) - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA TO AMEND CHAPTER 9 OF THE SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE TO EXEMPT DESIGNATED CITY LANDMARKS AND STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS FROM SIGN AGE APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1- Findings and Purpose. The City Council finds and declares: (a) In September 1990 the city Council directed staff to amend the Santa Monica Municipal Code to exempt designated City landmarks and historic distrl.cts from the Architectural Review Board process. (b) In November 1990 the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 1535 (CCS) implementing procedures for review of the alteration or demolition of structures located in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District and exempting the historic district from the Architectural Review Board process. ( c) In July 1991 the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 1590 (CCS) amending Chapter 6 of Article IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code relating to landmarks and historic districts. - 1 - - ------ ( d) section 9621 contained in Ordinance 1590 (CCS) exempted ~'"""'- such designated structures from ~ ~rchitectural Review Board process. - (e) It is necessary to amend the Santa Monica Municipal Code to make it consistent with Ordinance 1590. . NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following section shall be added to Chapter 9 of the Munlcipal Code to read as follows: SECTION 9.52.041 Landmarks commission Review. In the case of any new sign proposed to be placed, changed, altered, or displayed on a designated City landmark or structure located in a designated historic distrlct, a sign permit must be obtained from the Landmarks Commission, instead of the Architectural Review Board, through the approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness application. Such signage applications shall be subj ect to the same standards speclfied in this Chapter. The Landmarks Commission shall have the same powers as the Architectural Review Board to approve, deny, modify, or approve adjustments to sign applications. All signage decisions by the Landmarks Commission may be appealed to the Planning commission. The Landmarks Commission Secretary shall have the same powers as the Architectural Review Board Secretary in the administrative approval of sign permits. - 2 - I A-I TAC-H M blVT 13 ~ , , August 15, 1992 Robert Myers C~ty Attorney City of Santa Monica Box 2200 Santa Monl.cat CA 90406 Dear C~ty Attorney Xyers~ This is a formal citizens complaint that the Santa Monica . Plann~ng Staff and the Planning Commission cons~stently violate portions of C~ty Ordinance Subchapter 5J. Alcohol Outlets. Section 9049. Request that your office invest~gate these violations by reveiwing the Planning Department Staff Reports on Gond~tiona1 Use Permit Applications 92-026 and 92-028 scheduled to be heard by the Plann~ng Commiss1on this Wednesday August 19th. The letter and intent of Section 9049.3 requires that a Condit~onal Use Per~it for sale of alcoholic beverages can be lssuec only if the fol1o\dng f~ndin&s be made in a aff1rmative manner: (a) The proposed use will not adversely affect the welfare of ne~ghborhood residents in a signif1cant manner. (b) The proposed use w~11 not contribute to an undue concentration of alcohol outlets in the area. (c) The proposed use w~11 not detrimentally affect nearby neJ..ghborhoods considering the distance of the alcohol outlet to residential buildl.ngs, churches, schools, hospitals, playgrounds. parks, and other existing alcohol outlets. (d) The proposed use 15 compatible with existlng and potential uses within the general area. (e) Traffic and parking congestion will not result. ef) The public health, safety, and general welfare are protected. < ,. The staff report on the two above Conditional Use Permit ApplJ.cations do not even address the welfare of neighborhood res1.dents, undue ne1ghborhood alcohol concentration, affect on children playgrounds, parks (public beach), public health, safety and general welfare. Somehow the plann1ng staff, planning commissioners and city council members have dn.f ted into bel1.eving that such concerns are not 1mportant and can be ignored. If the City wishes to adopt this negligent viewpoint, they must go through the process of changing the law to accommodatepthis ~~ viewpoint. r- .... r UU'JJ,": ~~ ~ - Adopted and approved this 13th day of October, 1992. - . I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance No. 1652 (CCS) was duly and regularly introduced at a meeting of the City council on the 29th day of September 1992; that the said Ordinance was thereafter duly adopted at a meeting of the city Council on the l3th day of October 1992 by the following Council vote: Ayes: Councilmembers: Abdo, Genser, Holbrook, Katz, Olsen, Vazquez, Zane Noes: Councilmembers: None Abstain: Councilmembers: None Absent: Councilmembers: None ATTEST: ~f4~ ~ city Clerk ( @ BEFORE DISTRIBUTION CHECK CONTENT OF ALL FOR CITY CLERK1S ACTION DISTRIBUTION OF RESOLUTION If ORDINANCE If /6S $ Council Meeting Date ~03/9~ Introduced: 9' /~q/9..:f- " . < Agenda Item If 6--8 Adopted: /O//~/97 (V() ALWAYS PUBLIsH ADOPTED ORDINANCI Was it amended? Cross out Attorney's approval -~ j VOTE: Affirmative: r! .. Negative: Abstain: Absent: PROOF VOTES WITH ANOTHER PERSON BEFORE ANYTHING DISTRIBUTION: ORIGINAL to be slgned, sealed and f~led in Vault. NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION (Date: ) I Department originat1ng Staff report( ) Ordinance only for Attorney (Claudia Thompson) 1 City Manager Lynne Barrette ORDINANCES ONLY _L- Agency mentioned in document or staff report (cert~fied?) SubJect file (agenda packet) 1 Counter file 1 Others: (Review for departments who need to know) Airport Park~ng Auth. Auditorium Personnel Building Dept. P1ann~ng ( C/ED Police Finance Purchasing General Servo CARS Engineering City Yards Library Transportation ____ Manager Treasurer Fire Water SEND FOUR COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: Debra Myrick >r--I Santa Monica Municipal Court 1725 Ma~n Street, Room 118 Santa Monica, CA 90401 SEND ONE COPY OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: Donna Chrlstensen / Book Publishing Co. 201 Westlake Avenue North --!-I-- 7 Seattle, WA 98109-5293 Total Copies . < lcrpp5jword.ppd city Council Meeting 10-13-92 Santa Monica, California ~~ ~- ORDINANCE NUMBER 1653 (CCS) - (City Counc1l Series) . AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE SECTIONS 9.04.20.26.010 AND 9.04.20.26.030, FORMERLY SECTIONS 9133.1 AND 9133.3, TO PERMIT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO APPROVE A REDUCED PARKING PERMIT FOR A DESIGNATED LANDMARK OR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1- Findings and Purpose. The city Council finds and declares: ( a) In September 1990 the City council conducted a study Session to review revisions to the Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance and the Demolition ordinance. Following the study Session Council directed staff to revise these ordinances as recommended by the Landmarks Commission. (b) In July 1991 the city council adopted Ordinance Number 1590 (CCS) amending Chapter 6 of Article IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code relating to landmarks and historic districts. Section 9621 of this ordinance includes the establishment of a series of preservation incentives. Among the incentives is the provision that parking incentives should be available to designated historic properties. Allowing for the approval of a - 1 - -- -- ---- . reduced parking permit when small addition are proposed to ~-- designated historic structures is one such parking incentive. ~- (c) On September 25, 1991 the Planning Commission adopted a - Resolution of Intentlon to recommend that the City council amend Sections 9133.1 and 9133.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the - Zoning Administrator to reduced parking permit for approve a a designated landmark or contributing structure in a historic district. (d) On November 6, 1991 the Plann1ng Commission unanimously recommended that the City council approve the revisions to sections 9133.1 and 9133.3 of Subchapter 10M regarding Reduced Parking Permits as submitted in the Resolution of Intention finding that: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent in principle with the goals, objectives, polic1es, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Policy 3.1. 3 wh1ch encourages the retention of historic and architecturally significant resources, in that it provides owners of designated historic properties with an incentive to preserve and maintain their historic buildings, it encourages the continued active use of historic structures by relaxing parking standards to enable small scale additions to the buildings, and could serve as a mechanism to encourage the historic designation of other eligible properties. - 2 - 2. The public health, safety, and general welfare require the .r __ adoptl.on of the proposed a~dl!!-ent in that the reduced parking permit will assist in the preservation of historic buildings by providing an incentive to maintain the building - in active use, while the limitation on the size of the addition constructed without the provision of additional . parking will mlnl.mlZe the project's impact on the surrounding neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 2. section 9.01.20.26.010, formerly Section 9133.1, of Subchapter 10M of the Santa Monica Municipal Code are amended to read as follows: SUBCHAPTER 10M REDUCED PARKING PERMITS. SECTION 9.04.20.26.010. purpose. A reduced parking permit is intended to permlt the reduction of required automobile parking spaces for senior housing, when shared parking, tandem parking, or in-lieu parking fees are proposed as part of any development, and under certain circumstances for landmarks and historic districts. SECTION 3. Section 9.04.20.26.030, formerly Section 9133.3, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: SECTION 9.04.20.26.0304. Applicability. The Zoning Administrator may grant a reduced parking permit for the following: - 3 - -- ----- - - - ----- (a) Shared parking. FacJ.lities may be shared if multiple -==- ......- uses cooperatively establl.sh and gs.e.r C!- t e parking facilities and if these uses generate parking demands primarily during hours when the remaining uses are not in operation. (For example, if - one use operated during evenings or weekdays only. ) The applicant shall have the burden of proof for a reduction in the . total number of required parking spaces, and documentation shall be submitted substantiating the reasons for this requested parking reduction. Shared parking shall be approved only if: (1) A sufficient number of spaces are provlded to meet the greater parking demand of the participating uses. (2) Satisfactory evidence has been submitted by the parties operating the shared parking facility, describing the nature of the uses and times when the uses operate so as to demonstrate the lack of conflict between them. (3) Additional documents, covenants, deed restrictions, or other agreements as may be deemed necessary by the Zoning Adm1.nistrator are executed to assure that the required parking spaces provided are maintained and uses with similar hours and parking requirements as those uses sharing the parking remain for the life of the building. (b) senior Housing. The Zoning Administrator may approve a reduced parking permit for the reduction in the number of parking spaces required for senior citizens and senior group housing based upon findings that the proposed development is located in direct proximity to commercial activities and services, and is adequately served by public transportation systems. - 4 - (c) Tandem parking. The Zoning Administrator may approve a .::~ reduced parking permit for tande~pC!-rking for commercial and industrial uses provided the development requires 250 or more parking spaces and, no more than a maximum of 20% of the total - number of spaces are in tandem and, an attendant is on duty . during the hours the building is open for business. (d) Low Income Housing. The Zoning Administrator may approve a reduced parking permit for the reduction in the number of parklng spaces requ~red for low to moderate income housing developments provided addit~onal documents, covenants, deed restrictions, or other agreements as may be deemed necessary by the Zoning Administrator are executed. (e) Landmarks and Historic Districts. The Zoning Administrator may approve a reduced parking permit for the reduction in the number of parking spaces requlred for a designated landmark or a contributing structure within a designated historic district under the following circumstances: (1) When an addition is proposed to a single family home that is non-conformlng due to the required number of parking spaces, no additional parking spaces shall be required for the addition of a bedroom, provided that the total addition to the structure does not exceed more than 25 percent of the square footage of the existing structure or 250 square feet, whichever lS greater, and that at least one covered parking space is provided on site. Only one such reduced parking permit may be permitted per designated structure. - 5 - -------- (2) When an addition 1S proposed to a multi family .r__ structure that l.S non-conformlng due to the required number of ~ parking spaces, no new parking spaces shall be required, provided that the addition does not add more than one bedroom to each - dwelling unit, the addition does not result in the addition of a new dwelling unit on the parcel, and that at least one parking . space is already provided on site per dwelling unit. Only one such reduced parking permit may be permitted per unit in a designated structure. (3) When an addltion is proposed to a commercial or an industrial structure that is non-conforming due to the required number of parking spaces, no additional parklng space shall be required, provided that the addition does not exceed 10 percent of the build1ng's existing floor area. Only one such reduced parking permit may be permitted per designated commercial or industrial structure. (4) Commercial or industrial structures that change to a use which has more intensive parking standards than the current use may be permitted to reduce the required parking according to the following formula: Total Required Parking Spaces After Percentage Reduction Change of Use From Total Required spaces 1 to 10 Up to 50% 11 to 20 Up to 25% 21 and over Up to 10% SECTION 3. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this - 6 - ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and not further, ~-- are hereby repealed or modified ~ _that extent necessary to effect the provlsions of this Ordinance. - SECTION 4. If any sectlon, subsectlon, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordlnance is for any reason held to be invalid or . unconstitutional by decision of court of competent a any any jurisdiction, such decision shall 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 to be invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared lnvalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The city Clerk shall cause the same to be publl.shed once l.n the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall be come effective 30 days from its adoption. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~~ JOSEPH LAWRENCE ACTING CITY ATTORNEY - 7 - - ----- - -- - --- --- - ----- ~--- ~ ~ Adopted and approved this 13th day of October, 1992. - ~ I hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 1653 (CCS) was duly and regularly introduced at a meeting of the city Council on the 29th day of september 1992; that the said Ordinance was thereafter duly adopted at a meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of October 1992 by the following Council vote: Ayes: Counci1members: Abdo, Genser, Holbrook, Katz, Olsen, Vazquez, Zane Noes: Counci1members: None Abstain: Councilmembers: None Absent: Councilmembers: None ATTEST: fh~ City Clerk / @ BEFORE DISTRIBUTION CHECK CONTENT OF ALL FOR CITY CLERK'S ACTION DISTRIBUTION OF RESOLUTION # ORDINANCE # /? '-: r r Council Meeting Date ~~~~~ Introduced: 9/;p _Q./9_"" /' /' Agenda Item # (: - t3 Adopted: /0// 3' / ;; ~ - IV() ALWAYS PUBLISH ADOPTED ORDINANCI Was it amended? Cross out Attorney's approval --} 0 VOTE: Affirmative: / Negative: Abstain: Absent: PROOF VOTES WITH ANOTHER PERSON BEFORE ANYTHING DISTRIBUTION: ORIGINAL to be signed, sealed and filed in Vault. NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION (Date: ) -r Department originating Staff report ( ) Ordinance only for Attorney (Claudia Thompson) 1 City Manager Lynne Barrette ORDINANCES ONLY _L- Agency mentioned in document or staff report (certified?) SubJect file (agenda packet) 1 Counter file 1 Others: (Review for departments who need to know) Airport Parklng Auth. Auditorium Personnel Buildlng Dept. Planning I CIED Police Finance Purchasing General Servo CARS Engineering City Yards Library Transportation ____ Manager Treasurer Flre Water SEND FOUR COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: Debra Myrick ~/ Santa Monica Municipal Court 1725 Main Street, Room 118 Santa Monica, CA 9040l SEND ONE COPY OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: Donna Christensen / 7 Book Publishing Co. 201 Westlake Avenue North -II- Seattle, WA 98109-5293 Total Copies . demrev5fword.ppd ~-- City council Meeting 10-13-92 ~ - Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER 1654 (CCS) - (city Council Series) - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 9.04.10.16.010, FORMERLY SECTION 9048.1, OF SUBCHAPTER 51 RELATING TO THE REVIEW OF DEMOLITION PERMITS BY THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA l-10NICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. The City CouncJ.l finds and declares: ( a) In September 1990 the City CouncJ.l conducted a study Session to review revisions to the Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance and the Demolition Ordinance. Following the study Session Council dlrected staff to revise these ordinances as recommended by the Landmarks Commission. (b) In July 1991 the City council adopted Ordinance Number 1590 (CCS) amending Chapter 6 of Article IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code relating to landmarks and historic districts. Section 9606.1 of this ordinance included the establishment of a structure of merit desJ.gnation category. (c) On April 15, 1992 the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution of Intention to recommend that the City Council amend Section 9048.1 of Subchapter 51 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow - 1 - the Landmarks Commlssion 60 days to reVlew demolition permit applications for structures 50 ~ea~rs old or older. The ..r...... Resolution also recommended that the Demolition Ordinance be amended to state that, ln addition to the filing of a landmark - designation application, the filing of a structure of merit application or a historic dlstrict application will delay the . approval of a demolition permlt. (d) On May 20, 1992 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the city council approve the revisions to the Demolitlon Ordinance as submitted ln the Resolution of Intention, finding that: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent in principle with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted General Plan, specifically Land Use Element POllCY 3.1.3 which encourages the retention of historically and architecturally significant resources, in that permittlng the Landmarks Commiss1on additional time to review demolition permlts will insure that demolition requests are not automatically approved without Landmarks Commission clearance and that requiring the Landmarks Commission to review all demolition permit applications for structures older than 50 years will insure, over time, that a greater number of Santa Monica's cultural resources will be protected and recognized through the structure of merit, landmark, and historic district designation process. - 2 - , . - z. In teaching non-swimmers, I estimate that 3 out of 4 are afraid to place their faces in the water. This may be based on childhood fixation lihereby a mother attCll1iJts to scrub the child's face with a cold, wet washcloth. The childr s struggling is not recognized by the mother as an attt:lIlpt to breathe. Thereafter the child is made fearful by having his or her face in water. To overcome this I recUlumend that a non-swimmer first become used to repeatedly placing their face in a snail bowl of wann water. Next, they learn to hold their breath as long as possible and also to blow bubbles in the water. When they can comfortably do this, they are ready to learn to swim. 3. I believe that anyone who can swim can also float on their back. Muscle tension and regularity of breathing have definite effects on floating. Relaxing of muscles and expansion of the Imgs decreases the body's specific gravity, and a relaxed swimmer floats. Conversely, irregular, shallow breathing plus anxiety related flexing of the muscles increases specific gravity, and the nan-5'rW'immer or the distressed swimmer does not float. Chronic sinkers also tend to exhale as they go below the surface. A person who has diffiOJlty floating should attt:lllpt to relax as much as possible, inhale deeply, and hold their breath. They should then roll into a tight ball, this will positively effect their buoyanCYt enabling floation with the back above the water' 5 surface. After experience and confidence is gained in this posi tim, the relaxed swimmer is then ready to attt:1llpt back flotation. Nonnally, a person not used to back floating may suffer discomfort through water in the nose. Hence, nose clips are required. Next, canpletely inflate the 1mgs and try relaxed floating on the back. The anns should be floated as far above the head as possible, with the back arched and the chin rolled away from the chest. The feet and legs may begin to sink in this attitude. Howevert by increasing the arch of the back and rolling the head further back'hards, sinking motion of the feet and legs can be countered. Breathing in this attitude is the same explosive technique used in dro"nproofing. I have taught swimmers \o;no could not othenlise back float, to fill their lungs canpletely, bend backwards in the water and. grasp their ankles. Although this is undoubtedly an unusual aquatic position - they float! Once they accept their ability to do even this, they should be able to progress toward back floating while fully clothed. 4. In many nationally accepted aquatic safety courses, participants are concH tioned to remove clothing in the water. This is done either to rescue others or to form a flotation aid for the individual. Here the effiphasis should again rest on making the survival procedure applicable to the situation. Satisfactory floating without removing any clothing, thereby insuring insulation and air ent!~~ment, should be taught and att~npted before disrob ing . , 9. . f"r-r -- Utiu.:),) Commission shall approve gUldelines and standards for property. ~'"""'-- maintenance plans pursuant to Muni~l_code section 9.32.030. (4) subsequent development is in conformity with the General Plan and all other applicable regulations. - (b) Single-family dwellings which are located in the Rl . District, any Commercial Distr1ct, or any Industrial District and which are not controlled rental units under the Rent Control Law are exempt from subsection (a) (2) of this section. (c) Prior to filing an application for a demolition permit, a Notice of Intent to Demolish must be prominently posted on the property. Such notice shall be in a form approved by the city. (d) In addition to any other requirements imposed by this Section, no demolition of buildings or structures, the original permit for which was issued more than 50 years before the date of filing of the demolition permit application, shall be permitted unless the following requirements have been met: ( 1) Within 7 days of recelpt of all filing materials for a demolitJ.on permlt for such structures, the city shall transmit a copy of such application to each member of the Landmarks Commission. Filing materials shall consist of a completed application form, site plan, eight copies of a photograph of the bUllding, and photo verification that the property has been posted with a notice of intent to demolish. (2) If no application for the designation of a structure of IDeri t, a landmark, or a historic district is filed in accordance with Municipal Code sections 9.36.090, 9.36.120, or 9 . 36 . 130 within 60 days from receipt of a complete application for demolition, demolition may be approved subject to compliance - 4 - . with all other legal requirements, including this Section. (3) If an applicat~ for structure of merit -r__ ~ designation is flIed in accordance with Municipal Code Section 9.36.090(a) within 60 days from receipt of a complete application - for demolition, no demolition permit may be issued until after a final determination is made by the Landmarks Commission, or the . City Council on appeal, on the structure of merit designation application. The structure of merit application shall be processed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Municipal Code Section 9.36.090. (4) If an application for landmark designation is filed in accordance with MunicJ.pal Code Section 9608(a) within 60 days from receipt of a complete application for demolition, no demolition permit may be issued until after a final determination is made by the Landmarks CommJ.ssion, or the City Council on appeal, on the apP'licatlon for landmark designatlon. The landmarks applicatlon shall be processed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Municipal Code section 9.36.120. (5) If an application for historic district designation is filed in accordance with Municipal Code Section 9.36.130(a) within 60 days from receipt of a complete application for demolition, no demolition permit may be issued until after a final determ1.nat1on is made by the Landmarks Commission or the City Councl.l on appeal, on the application for historic district designation. The historic district application shall be processed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Municipal Code Section 9.36.130. - 5 - - ------- -- . . SECTION 3. Any provis1on of the Santa Monica Municipal Code ~~ or appendices thereto inconsisten~i~h the provisions of this ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and not further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to - effect the provisl.ons of this ordinance. 4 If any section, subsection, SECTION 4. sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent Jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remalning portions of this Ordlnance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared to be invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall be come effective 30 days from its adoption. APPROVED AS TO FORM: .~i~~ ~EPH LAWRENCE \ C ~ng C~ty Attorney - 6 - . . ..::1"'"__ ~ - Adopted and approved this 13th day of October, 1992. - ~ I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance No. 1654 (CCS) was duly and regularly introduced at a meeting of the City Council on the 29th day of September 1992; that the said Ordinance was thereafter duly adopted at a meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of October 1992 by the fOllowing Council vote: Ayes: Councilmembers: Abdo , Genser, Holbrook, Katz 1 Olsen, Vazquez, Zane Noes: Councilmembers: None Abstain: Councilmembers: None Absent: Councilmembers: None ATTEST: .-(' 7 ~~/j)~ ~ ~ City Clerk'