SR-8-A (140)D~,~ 1q3~
~~,~~ S
~ ~
~
PCD SF KG DM DJ f 1planlsharelcouncillstrpt1ta98004 FEB ~~~
Council Mtg February 2, 1999 Santa Monica, California
TO Mayar and City Council
FROM City Staff
SUBJECT Recommendation to appro~e an ardinance amending section
9 04 O8 p2 07a(c) at the Santa Manica Municipal Cod~ ta ir~crease the
minimum lot width requiremant from 5D feet to 10a feet and to require a
minrmum lot depth of 'I75 feet for R1 zoned parcels located within the
area bounded by the center lines of First Caurt Alley, Se~enth S#reet,
Mor~tana Place North AIley and Adelaide Drive
INTRODUCTION
Proposed is a Text Amendment to amend Section 9 04 08 02 070(c} af the Zonrng
Ordinance regard~ng the minimum lot size for those lats zoned R1 Singie Family
Residential withm t1~e portion of the Paf~~ades Tract bounded by the center hnes of
First Court Alley, Se~enth Street, Montana Place North Alley and Adelaide Dri~e
Currently a m~nimum 50 foat lot width and a mir~imum 10a foot lot dep#h are required for
all parcels within the R1 District The proposed amendment woulcf specify a minimum
lat width dimensior~ of 100 feet and a minimum lot depth d~mensian ot 175 fee# for the
R1 parcels within this neigt~borhood located west a# 7`h Street and narth of Montana
Avenue The subJect area is largely characterized by wide streets, deep front yard
setbacks, large parkways, and parcels that exceed the 50 foot x'[50 foot dimensions
typically found in San#a Man~ca's R1 Districts
~
~
- 1 -
~~-~~
BACKGROUND
On December 16, 1997 the C~ty Council adapted ~nterim Ordinance #1892(CCS)
Based on extensive findmgs regard~ng fhe character and scale of the Palisades Tract.
thjs 45-day interim ordmance established a moratorium on subdi~isions in the area
bounded by First Court AHey, Seventh Street, Adelaide Dri~e, and Montana Avenue,
pending re~isions to the Zoning Ordinance to change the minimum lot width from 50
feet ta 100 feet for R-1 lots within this area, and declanng the presence of an
emergency Dn January 27, 199$, the Council adopted Qrd~nance #1897 {CCS} (see
Attachment D) extending the moratorium fior an additional 48 months At their March
24, 1998 meeting, the Council directed Planning Staff to research and prepare a zoning
ord~nance amendment on th~s land use issue for Planning Cammissian review and
recommendation The Plann~ng Commission adopted a Resolution of Intention on
October 7, 1998, and, pursuant to a public hearing on Nov~mber 4, 1998
recommended that the Council adopt the text amendment language proposed m
Attachment C
TEXT AMENDMENT
Thrs amendment wauld modify 5ection 9 U4 08 02 07Q{c} of the Zoning Ordmance
regardmg minimum !ot size for the R1 Single Family Residentia! District within the area
~ounded by the center l~nes of F~rst Court Alley, Seventh Street, Montana Place North
Alley and Ad~laide Dr~ve (hereafter the "pro~ect area") ThES section currently requires
a mmEmum 50 fa~t lot width, and a minimum 1 UO #oa# lat depth for all parcels within the
R1 Distnct The proposed amendment would specify a min~mum lot w~dth dimens~on af
- 2 -
1 p0 f~et, and a mirnmum lo# depth dimens~on of ~ 75 feet for parcels located within the
pro~ect area
ANALYSIS
The Pafisades Tract was originally developed in 1905 with 100 foot wid~ straets, 40 foot
front yard setbacks, 10D foot wide parcel frontages, and 200 foot parcel depths The
pro~ect area is distinctive in that it ~s unlike other R1-zaned areas in the City, which
typicafly consist af 60 to 80 foot wide streets, 20 to 3q-faot front yard setbacks, 50-foot
wide parcel frontages, and 150-foot parcel depths The pro~ect area was originally
designed wath an intent to accommodate large homes with cQns~derable yarcf and
garden areas, and has been s~bstantialiy develaped ~n this manner TF~e tract was
subsequently expanded eastward ir~ 'l912 Howe~er, fhat portion of the Palisades Tract
was no# de~eloped ~n the same scale and character as t~e ori~~nal Palisades Tract and,
therefore, is not included in the propased text amendment As of 1983, there were 125
homes in the Palisades Tract, four of which were architecturally significant and
determmed to be mdi~idually eligibEe for National Register (histaric) status In addition,
all but eEght o# the 125 single family homes contribute to the histonc character of the
distrrct Some of the homes in the Palisades Tract were designed by note~ architects,
including John Byers, Greene and Greene, and Robert Farquhar
Due to the large lot sizes and open space features, the Palisades Tract pravides more
open space than any other residentia! neighborhood in the City, and attracts many Ciiy
residents and ~isitors who en~oy walkmg and cyclf~g in the pleasant ambience of the
- 3 -
neighborhood This is sigmficant, in that the City ~s extremely dense, with a population
of approximately 90,Q~4 people within a land area of ~~ast eigh~ square miles The C~ty
is a highly desira~le place tv work or ~isit due to its ocean side location, fine climate,
urban facilities and service and entertainment ver~ues, resulting in numerous ~isitors to
t{~e area on bath weekdays and weekends Given the City's density, the ambience
created by #he Palisades Tract's open space and di~erse architecture serves as an
important asset to the entire communi#y
Secause of these unique issues, the Councd onginally directed Staff to ~repare a
resalution of intentian to amend the Zoning Ordir~ance to increase the minimum ~ot
width to 1~0 feet for the area baunded by First Court Alley to 7th Street, and Montana
Avenue to the north C~#y limits At t~e Planning Commissior~, #he lan~uage was further
clarified by adcf~ng a minimum lot depth of 175 feet to protect the exi5ting depths To
ensure that this proposed ardinance addresses R1 properties within the Palisades Tract
west of Se~enth Street, staff re-examined the baundaries in the inter~m ord~nance and
recommends that the permanent standards clarify fhese boundanes as follows
the area bounded by the center lines of First Court AIIey, Seventh Street,
Montana Place North Alley and Adelaide Drive
Additionally, in order to capture all R1-zoned parcels within this area, staff recommends
that the min~mum parcel depth be set at 'l75 feet. Th~s depth was selec#ed beca~se,
wit~ the exception of the ten ~ats bordering Goose Egg Park, (which ha~e mmimum lot
depths ranging from 107 feet to 153 feet) the lats in the pro~ect area are a minimum of
'E75 feet in depth These boundaries are shor-vn or~ Attachment B, the Palisades Tract
- 4 -
Map The proposed text modifications are provided in Attachment C
The pro~ect area ts located within the R~ District North of Montana area, and therefore
is also sub~ect to the de~elapment standards {e g, buEEding height, parcel co~erage,
setback areas, and proaection requirements) created by emergency Qrdinance #1921
{CCS) Althvugh the proposed text amendment would effecti~~ly prevent further
subdi~ision of lots with~n the pro~ect area, it does not atherwise affect the standards
established by the emergency inter~m ord~nance Staff belie~es the development
standards established by the emergency interim ordinance and the praposed parcel
dimension amendment for the portians of the Palisades Tract west of 7t" Street address
separate issues The emergency ~nter~m ordmance relates exclusi~ely to the scale and
massing of single family home de~efopment The proposed text amendment is
intended to protect the unique character of the R1 parceEs within the Palisades Tract
PLANNING COMMISSIQN RECOMMENDATEON
The Planning Commission held a public hearing an t~is Text Amendment on Na~ember
4, ~ 998 A[though no members of the public spoke at this hearing, a s~gnifican~ number
af peapfe testified at public hearings before the Plannmg Commission and City Council
~on appeal) last year when two lat spiits were propflsed (and subsequently den~ed} at
502 and 518 Georgina The Landmarks Commiss~on also expressed cancerns o~er the
same two lot splits when it reviewed the demol~tion permits for the homes on these two
lots This testimany, in part, led to the Council's eventual adoption of the inter~m
ordinances prohibit[ng the subdivision of lots in the Palisades Tract
- 5 -
At t~e No~ember 4, 1998 Planning Commissinn hearing, the Commiss~on approved a
motion recomme~ding that the C~ty Co~ncil approve the proposed Text Amendment as
recommended by staff with the clarification that the tex~ amendment only include those
parcels which are currently zoned R1 Ti~is distinction was made by the Commission
since the properties withm the proposed boundaries located along San Vicente
Boulevard are zoned R2 (Low Density Multiple Residential), and the propert~es fronting
Ocean Avenue are zoned R4 (High Density Mult~ple Family Residential) In response to
the Commission's comments, staff has reexamirted the boundaries of the area affected
by the proposed text amendment, and confirmed that all of the R2-zoned lots with
frontage an San Vicente, and those R-4-zoned lots fronting Ocean Avenue (with the
exception o~ one smgle family residence) are de~eloped w~th multi-fam~ly res~dentiai
units Therefore, staff recammends that the westErn boundary be mo~ed to First Court
Alley rather than the centerlEne vf Ocean A~enue to exclude the R4- zoned parcels
along the Ocean AWenue frontage The R2-zoned lots are still excluded from the text
amendment, as the language only refers to R1-zoned parcels This minor change is
re~lected in the proposed ordinance The text amendment would nat apply to the multi-
family zoned properties, which cansist almost entirely of sites developed with multi-
family dwellmgs (See Attachment B, which includes building footprints for ali parcels
withm the sub~ect area These footprints help to provide a distinct~on between single
family and multiple family de~elapments) Minutes from tl~e November 4, 1998
Planning Commission arE pra~ided as At~achment E
- 6 -
MUNiCIPAL CDDE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANGE
The proposed Text Amendment is cons~stent with the Municipal Code and in conformity
wath Goals and Ob~ectives of the General Plan Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9 04 08 02.020 pro~ides in rele~ant part, °the R1 ~istnct serves to maintain and protect
the existing character of the res~dential neighborhood," and Pplicy 'i 10 1 of the Land
Use and Circulation Element states in relevant part, "encourage the development of
new housmg in all existmg residential distr~cts, while still protect~ng the character and
scale of neighborhoods " The proposed text amendment is consistent with these
prov~sions because Et will prevent fu~ther subdivision of the R1 zflned parcels m this
ne~ghborhood and thereby maintam the characterist~c 140 foot parcef frontage and 175
foot parcel de~th which contributes significantly to the qua~ity and spec~al characteristres
of this partion af the Palisades Tract neighborhood as one with wide streets and
parkways and large parcel frantages and depths enabling it to continue to
accammodate large homes with large yards and ample open space
CEQA STATUS
The proposed Text Amendment is ca#egorically exempt from the pro~is~vns of CEQA
pursuant ta Section 15305 of the State Implementation Guidelines ~Class 5) which
alfows for mmor alteratians in land use limitatians in areas with an a~erage slope of less
than 2U% which do nat result ~n any changes in land use or density The praposed
pro~ect invol~es a fully subdivided residential neighborhood The proposed pro~ect
would not result in any changes to the existing sir~gle family residential land use, and
would not result in changes ir~ density in that the proposed pro~ect would effectjvely
- ~ -
prevent further subdivfsion of land within the boundar~es of the pro~ect area Further,
given the na~ure of this pro~ect, there is ~o possibili#y that the prap~sed pro~ect may
have a significant effect ~n the environment Consequen#ly, the pra~ect ~s exempt
pursuant to Section '1 ~061(b)(3) o~ the State fmplem~nta#ion Guidelmes
BUQGET/FISCA~ IMPACT
The recommendation presented m this report does not have any budget or fscal
impact
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Pursuan# to Go~ernment Ca~e fi5091, notrce of the p~bl~c heanng was publis~ed in the
Argonaut, at least 10 days prior to the hear~ng (see Attachment A}
CQNCLUSION
Compared to the rest of the R1 Distr~ct located north of Montana A~en~e, the pro~ect
area Es distmguished by larger parcel sizes combined w~th wide streets typ~cally
extending 100 feet, deep front yard setbacks, and large parkways Histor~cally, this
portion of the Palisades Tract was la~d out in this manner in arder to accommodate
large homes surrounded by a substantiaf landscaped area In Santa Manica, this type
of parcel canfiguration is found only in the Palisades Tract, and the proposed text
amendment is des~gned ta preserve the histaric layout of this subdi~ision
- 8 -
By amendir~g the Zonmg ~rdinance to effect~~ely prevent further reduction of lot sizes in
the pro~ect area, this text amendment will ensu~e that future de~elopment and
impra~ements in this area will be compatible and consister~t with the existing
neighbarhaod scale, character, and parcel configuration As detailed by the findings
below, lot splits in contravention of th~s text amendment would severely impact the
existing character and scale of #his un~que neighborhood
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council hv~d a public hearing and ~ntroduce for first
reading an ordinance amendmg Section 9 04 08 02 070(c} to mcreas~ the minimum lot
width requirement from 50 feet to 100 feet and to increase the mmimum lot depth from
100 feet to 17~ feet for parcels located in the R1 single family distnct withm #he area
bounded ~y th~ cenfer lines of First Court Alley, Seventh Street, Montana Place No~#h
Alley and Adelaide Dri~e, as specrfied in Attachment C w~th the fallowir~g f~ndings
TEXT AMENQMENT FINDINGS
1 The praposed amendment to the Zonmg 4rdmance is consistent in principle
with the goals, ob~ectives and policies, land uses and programs specified in the
adapted General Plan in tha~ Polacy 1 1 ~ 1 of the Land Use and Circulation
Elemen# prov~des in rele~ant part to "Encourage the de~elopment of new
housing in all existing residential districts, while still protect~ng #he character and
scale of neighbarhoods " PreservatFOn of the neighbarhood character and scals
would result #rom this text amendment based on the fallowing fmdings
(a) The Palisades Tract was originally subdi~~ded ~n 1905 and is a unique and
distmctive neighborhood Among its special charactenstics are 100 foot
wide streets, as oppased to the 50 foot to SO foot wide streets typical for
other R1 zoned areas of the City, parcels with 100 feet of street frontage,
as op~osed to the #ypical R'! parcel street frontage of a0 feet, 200 faot
parcel depths, as opposed to the typical 150 foot deep parcels faund
- 9 -
throughou# most of the City, 40 foot front yard setbacks, as opposed to
the 20 foot to 30 foot front yard setbacks in most of the ath~r R1 areas of
the City, and parkways and sidewalks whECh are on average 25 feet in
width Each of these features have a direct and su~stantial impact on the
character and scale of the neighbarhood
(b} The Palisades Tract was designed to accommodate large homes with
large yards and it was developed consistent with this design
Consequently, the Palisades Tract presently contains large, old homes
surrounded by substantral yards and gardens
(c) As a result of ~ts broad streets and pathways, iarge lots, old homes, ample
yards and gardens, and substantial setbacks, the Palisades Tract
prov~des more open space t~an any ot~er residential neighbarhood ~n the
City
(d) The City itself is extremely dense with a land area of ~ust 8 square miles
and a populat~on of approximately 90,000 peaple Moreo~er, t~e
combination of an ocean side location, fine c~~mate, ~igorous economy
and urban facilities, serv~ces and entertainment ~enues make t~e City an
extremely desirable place to work or visit Consequently, on any
weekday, approximately 200,000 persons are present in the City, and an
weekends, t~is number frequently climbs to 400,Oa0 or more Population
density and cangestion bath present threats to the quality of life in the
City Gi~en the C~ty's density, the Pal~sades Tract and the open space it
provides are a unique asset to th~ City
{e} Between 'E947 and the early 1970's, a r~umber of subdivisions of the
parcels occurred in the Palisades Tract These lot splits were appro~ed
admrn~strati~ely as a matter of right In 1976, the City Cauncil adopted
Qrdinance 1024 which repealed the r~ght to sui~divrde lots as a matter of
right and required public notice of a ~ariance applicatian to appro~e iot
splits under certain conditions In 1984, the City Caunci! adopted
Ordinance 1294 to implement the State Subdi~ision Map Act and requrre
Plannmg Cammission approval a# subd~~ision requests SEnce 1976, no
lot split has been appro~ed in the Palisades Tract Consequently, more
than fifty percent of the original 100 foot parcels in the Palisades Tract are
still ~ntact and the or~gmal character and scale of the tract has been
maintained Hawever, the loss of any additional 1 QO foot parcels would
ad~ersely and irre~ocably serve to change the character and scale of the
Palisades Tract Reducing Iat width fram 100 feet to 50 feet would reduce
the required s~deyard setback by 50%, res~alting in less open space
between homes and greater deWelapment d~nsity Addi#ionally, retaining
the existing minimum lot sizes could result in reducing an existing 1 a0 foot
wide parcel mto two 50 foot w~de parcels This would be inconsistent with
the ang~nal design and plan for the character and scale of the Palisades
Tract, and the resulttng de~elopment wo~ld be out of scale with the
ma~ority of the other properties in the neighborhood
-ia-
2 The public health, safety and general welfare require the adoption af the
proposed amendment to the Zoning 4rdinance in that Santa Manica Muniapal
Code Sect~on 9 04 0$ 02 010 provides in relevant part that "#he R1 Distnc#
serves to mamtam and prot~c# the existing character of the res~dential
neigh~orhood," and these qualities cannot be preserved and pratected in this
portion of the Palisades Tract without further preventing the subdivisions of R1
zoned lots within the area bounded by the center lines of First Court Alley,
Seven#h Street, Mantana Place North Alley and Adelaide Dr~ve Subdivisaon of
lots within this unique area of the City wo~ld detrimentally ~mpact the scale and
character of this portion of the Paiisades Tract which is an exceptionai City asset
en~oyed by residents and visitors to the City who walk and bicyc~e in this
neighborhood due to its special open space character Appra~al of lat splEts less
than the mmimum standards established by this proposed text amendment
would ~rrevers~bly alter the essent~al character and scale of the Palisad~s Tract
and depri~e the city of a unique and essential resaurce
Prepared by Su~anne Frick, Director
Karen Ginsberg, Plannmg Manager
David Martin, Senior Planner
Donna Jerex, Associate Planr~er
Planning and Community De~elopment Department
Attachments
A Public Hearing Notice
B Pa{isades Tract Map
C Proposed Ordinance
D Ordinance #1897(CCS}
E Planning Commission Minutes ('i 114198)
F '~PLAN'~SFiARE'•CDUNCIUSTRPT•TAg8C~04 '.'VPD
- 11 -
ATTACHMENT A
~~ ~_ ~.u
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY C4UNC1~
Subject: A Public Hearing wEll be held by the City Council on the following request
Applicat~an for a Text Amendment to modify Section 9 04 08 02 070{c)
(Property Development Standards} of Part 9 04 08 02 (R1 SEngle Family
Res~dential District) ta increase the minimum lot width requirement from 50
feet ta 100 f~et and to require a minimum lot depth of 175 feet for R1 parcels
located in the R1 Single Family Zoning District, within the area bounded by
the center lines of First Court Alley, Seventh Street, Montana Place North
Aliey and Adelaide Drive {Planner ponna Jerex)
APPLICANT: CITY OF SANTA M~NICA
WHEN: Tuesday, February 2, 1999 at 7:OD p.m.
WHERE: Main Public Library, Auditorium
1343 Sixth Street, 5anta Monica, California
HOW TO COMMENT
The City af Santa Monica encaurages public comment You may comment at the C~ty
Cauncil pubiic hearing, or bywrit~ng a letter Written information receiWed before 3 00 p m
on the Wednesday before the hearing wil~ be given to the City Council m the[r packet
Information received after that time will be gi~en to the City Council prjor to the meeting
Address your letters to City Glerk {Re Text Amendment #98-004}
1685 Ma~n Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
MQRE INFORMATI~N
If you want additional information about this project or wish to re~iew the pro~ect,
please contact Donna Jerex at (3'~ 0) 458-8341. The Zoning Ordinance is a~ailable at
the Planning Counter during business hours or a~ailable on the City's web site at
www. pen.ci.santa-monica.ca.us
The meeting facility is access~ble If you have any special needs such as sign language
interpreting, please contact the Office of the Disabled at (310) 458-8701 Santa Monica
Bus Lines #1, #3, and #7 serve the Main Library The meeting facility is handicapped
accessible
~ ~ - ~ ~. 3
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 650D9(b}, if this matter is subsequently
challeng~d in Court, the challenge may be limited to only #hose issues raised at the Public
Hearing described in this notice, or in written carrespondence delivered to the C~ty of Santa
Monica at, or pnarto, the Public Hearing
ESPANQ~
Esto es una noticia de una audiencia publica para re~isar applicac~bnes proponiendo
desarrollo en Santa Monica Para mas informacion, fa~or de Ilamar a Carmen
Gutierrez al numero {31 Q) 458-8349
APPROVED AS T4 FQRM
KAREN GIN ERG
P[anning Manager
F iPLAM,SHARE~COUNCIL'~NOTICES'~98TAfl04 ~vpd
+,:~• ~l;~+~
ATTAC~NT B
y ~;
~ Y- ~ 1 ~
- - - -- - - --- - - -- `~ ~ ~
- - - -- - - - ~° a ~
IIOL - - - OUS - - - ppT ~ ',' ~ ~ ~ ~
7AV IVNVJ.NONI '~• •' a ~ ~
_ _ T r• B
: _ ~ ~ ~
I~~ ~ '~ ~-+ ~ "~ ~~ `~k.'`~~~_' ~~ ~ ~i~.J~~~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ; -- °'~ ~ ~
_ ~ ' _ - ~j., ~y ~
'~AV S3Q1~SI'IYd _ - y~. ~
~ -;~ ~~. ~~: ~ ~~~ ~` s~ ~~'~ ~~ ~ ~ o 0
;~
` --1 . ^ - c° ~ ~o
~~~'i : 3~ 0 :7 U : ^ ^ ~~ ~ • F _ , . p a _ r/~i' ~ S
g~~'~-r'~'',L7~L~~+~1~ te I~~ ~:~ ~~~ ~ - ~ a
~--~ . , ~i I ~` _ _ ~
~nr~ ~s~v ~ ---
~; r~~,~ , E -~ ::
~~ iF'. ~-~ `~~ ~-~} ~~ s~j , :' ~-~' ~ ~~ A : ~ li?~ • ~ ~ -
~~ j ~ a ~ . I~ ~
~+ : ~-±~ ~ Y
_ - ~~ f': _ T I : ' ~ ` R _ ~ ~ ~ `_'
r y' ~ Q+'~ ~' ~'`~t%~i~r ~" Q~ r ~ 1 ~ , 8 ~~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ -
~ ~C.~~~'~~~~~~ ~~'~-~,_.~.~i~~~~-~; ~ ~ ~
- ~nv ~.., d.i.~x~n~ ~ ~ __ --
:.
- ~~ ~'~~~~~.-s~, ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ : ~
~ ` .~ , o • , . ~-+. .~ s r~~ ~j ~ ~
- • , . ^ ~ ~'' T--~ ~ ~ ~ i. i ri r' ~ r 1 i ' _ ;
~1 r ;_.~ : ~ • ~ ~ .. ~ I
~ ~ n ~~ s n~. ~a~ ~ L ~t ~' ~' ^ a~!'~D~ ~'ii..../~ : .' d~~ •' ' ~
:~ ;~: ~~ a~. ~~~ ~: :.~. . . ..
~, .
~~ ~, ~~~~~ _
..
~.~.. ~ _ ..
, ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ :~ ~,~: ~i, ~~~~4{~.~~~_~~'~'~ ~ :
:a S'~ ^~ ~. , y ~ ~; ~ , f` _-
rs C.3 , d 2~ •~R~ t~ ~1 a 1 ~r"~ ~
. : ~ ~ 4`~}
F~+ n -i ~ F ~
,~~ --- ~ ~ ~ a X~ ~ i.~ ~ ~:-€S ~ ~ ~~~ ~ `I , l ~j _~~~ / .• --
~ - ,~ i ~ ~ ~~',~~~..~.~~L] t.E ~ ~
~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ y .
~ , , ~ .u ~na w~w _ _
. ~ d~~ ' ~ ~ a ~' ~ - .
~ ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~~: ~ ~ ~ ``-- ~ ~ ~ ~ } ~~ ~, ~ + ~ ~ -
t ~ J _.__~ i_'_'-4~,~--~~ ~~ r - ~ . '
~ ~ °Q ~ ~: ~ ~ ~; i ,~~~~ j ~ ~`` ~ - . :i
~~ a : S ; ~ ,4 ~ I {{ ~ ;~i `~~ ,I~,~
~ ~~~~:~,~y~ ~~~~, ~,~t.~ ; ,
~~
'~
~ ~
~ ~ ~"
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~~
~ ~~
~~
~~ ~ ~
~
~
U~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~,
ATTAC H M E N T C
~T 4~f~;
f lattylmumVawslbarrylsub3 per
City Council Meetmg 2-2-99 Santa Monica, Califoriua
ORDINANCE NUMBER (CCS)
(City Counc~I Senes)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF SANTA MOIVICA
AMENDING SECTION 9 04 08_OZ ~70 OF TI~ SANTA MQNICA MUNICIPAL
C4DE TO INCREASE THE MINIlvIUM LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENTS FROM
54 FEET TO 100 FEET AND THE NIINIMUM LOT DEPTH REQUIltEMENT5
FROM 100 FEET TO 175 FEET FOR R1 ZONED PARCELS WITHIN THE
AREA BOUNDED BY T'I~ CENTER LINES OF FIR~T COURT ALLEY,
SEVENTH STREET, MONTANA PLACE NORTH
ALLEY, AND ADELAIDE DRIVE
WI~REAS, the area of the City bounded by Seventh Street, Adelaide Dri~e, Fust Court
Alley, and Montana Place North Alley is lvcated witlun the Palisades Tract which was origina~Iy
subdivided in 1905, and
WI~REAS, this area constitutes a un~que and distincti~e neig~borhood, and
WHEREAS, among the Pal~sades Tract's special characteristics are 100 faot wide
streets, as apposed to the 6D foot to SO foot wide streets typical for other R1 zoned areas of the
City, parcels with 100 feet of street frontage, as opposed to the typical R1 parcel street frontage
of 50 feet, 175 foot parcel depths, as opposed to the typical 150 foot cieep parcels found
thr~ughou~ most of t~e C~ty, 40 foot front yard setbacks, as opposed to the 20 foot to 30 foot
frflnt yard setbacks in most of the other R1 areas of the City, and parkways and sidewalks which
are on average 25 feet in width, and
~. • ~ ~
~ ~
WI~REAS, each of these features has a direct and substantial impact on the c~aracter
and scale of the neighbarhoad, and
WI-~REAS, the Palisades Tract was designed and developed to accommodate large
homes with large yards, and consequentjy, the Palisades Tract presentIy contains large, old homes
surrounded by substantial yards and gardens, and
WHEREAS, as a result of ~ts hroad streets and pathways, large lots, ald homes, ample
yards and gardens, and substantial setbacks, the Pal~sades Tract provides mare open space than
any other residential neighborhood in the C~ty, and
WHEREAS, the City itself is e~rtremely dense with a land area of just S square miles and a
population of appro~mately 90,040 people, and
WHEREAS, the combination of an ocean side location, f~ne climate, vigorous economy,
and urban fac~lit~es, services and entertainsnent venues make the C~ty an extremely desirable place
to work or v~srt, and
WHEREAS, on any weekday, approximately 300,000 persons are present in the City, and
an weekends, tkus number freguently clirnbs to SOO,U00 or more, and
WHEREAS, population density and congestion both present threats to the quality of life
in the Ciry, and
WHEREAS, g~ven the Crty's density, the Palisades Tract and the open space it provi~es
are uruque recreational and aesthet~c assets, providing a ne~ghbarhood m which City res~dents and
vis~tors frequently walk and bicycle due ta rts special ambience, and
WI~REAS, although the Paiisades Tract was subsequently expanded in 1912 eastward,
that portion of the Pal~sades Tract was not developed in the same scale and character as the
2
n
~.« ~~,~~
ongmal Pal~sades Tract and ~s not included within the scope of th~s ordinance, and
WHEREAS, between 1947 and the ear~y 1970's, a number of subdivisions of the parcels
occurred in the Palisades Tract hav~ng been appraved administratively as a matter of nght, and
WHEREAS, in 1976, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1 ~24 which repealed the nght
to subdivide lots as a matter of nght and requ~red publ~c notice of a variance ap~l~cation to
approve lot sphts under certain conditions, and
WI~REAS, m 1984, the C~ty Council adopted Ordinance 1294 ta ~mp~ement the State
Subd~v~sion Map Act and require Planrung Commission approva! of subdi~isian requests, and
WHEREAS, s~nce 1976, no lot spht has been approved in the Palisades Tract which has
resulted in the ma~or~#y of the onginal 1 DO foot parceis m the Palisades Tract stitl being mtact anci
the angmal character and scale of the tract stil( being maintained, and
WF~REAS, the loss of any additional I00 foat parcels would advers~ly and irrevocably
change the character and scale of the Palisades Tract for the following reasons (1} Reducing lot
w~dth from i 00 feet to 50 feet would reduce the requ~red sideyard setback by 50%, resulting ~n
less open space between homes and greater development density {2} Reducing lot width would
also result in the remo~al of older homes in the neighborhood and (3} Spl~tting an existing 100
foot u~de parcel mto two 50 foot wide parcels would be mconststent with the anginal des~gn and
plan for the character and scale of the Palisades Tract, and
WHEREAS, w~th~n the past two years, real estate values ~n the City have risen
significant(y, and the Ciry has recerved two applicatians for subdiv~sions of lots m the Pahsades
Tract, and
~R r ~
`~J~,U
WHEREAS, the Crty antic~pates that ather apglicat~ons will be forthcoming, and
V4'I~REAS, in response to these facts, the City Counc~l adopted Or~inance Number 1892
(CCS) on December 16, 1997, w}uch ordinance established a 45 day moratarium on subdivisions
m the area bounded by Ocean Avenue, Seventh Street, Adelaide Drive, and Mflntana Avenue,
pending this revision to the Santa Moruca Mumcipal Code, and
WHEREAS, on January 27, 1998, ~he City Council adopted Ordinance Nurnber 1897
(CCS) wlvch extended the moratorium for an addit~onal 4S months, and
WHEREAS, on March 24, 1998, the City Council directed staff to research a~d prepare a
permanent Zoning Ordinance amendment, and
WHEREAS, m order to ensure that t~~s proposed ordinance addressed all Rl properties
within the Pal~sades Tract west of Seventh Street, staf~'reexamined the boundaries m the uiterim
ord~nance and recommended that the boundanes be estabiished as the center lines of Qcean
Avenue, Seventh Street, Montana Place North and Adelaide Dnve, and
WHEREAS, on October 7, 1998, the Plamm~g Comm~ssion adopted a Resolution af
Intention givmg notice of its ~ntent~on to conduct a public hearing to consider a recommendation
to amend the Zomng Ordinance in accordance with the City Council direction, and
WI~REAS, on No~ember 4, 1998, the Plar~mng Cammission held a publ~c hearing on the
proposed zorung text amendment and recommended that Section 9 44 OS 02 070 ofthe Santa
Monica Mun~c~pal Code be amended ta mcrease the rrvnimum lof w~dth reyu~rement fram 50 feet
to 100 feet ar~d the minimurrt Iot depth requirement from I00 feet to 175 feet for Rl Zoned
parcels located urltlun the boundary descnbed above, and
4
"` ' ° ~ ~~ ~: ~
WI~REAS, in response to Camrr~ssion comments, staff recommendec3 to the Crty
Council that the western houndary of the area affected by thts proposed amendment be the
centerline of F~rst Court AIIey rather than the centerlfne of Ocean Avenue, and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Ordinance
Text Amendment on February 2, 1999, and
Wf~REAS, the City Council finds and declares that the proposed arnendment is
consistent in pnnciple with the goals, objectives, polic~es, land uses, and programs specified m the
adopted General Plan, spec~fically, Policy 1 10 1 of the Land Use and Circulation Element, which
provides in relevant part that the Czty sha~l "Encourage the development of new hausing m all
eaustmg resident~al djstncts, w~ule still protectmg the character and scale of ne~ghborhoods," anc!
WI~REAS, preservation of the ne~ghborhood character and scale wauld result from t~us
text amendment based on the detailed findings set forth above, and
Wf~REAS, the Crty Council finds and cieclares that the public health, safety and general
welfare requrre the adoption of this proposed ordinance in that Santa Monica Munic~pal Code
Section 9 04 08 02 O10 provides in relevant part that "the Rl Distnct serves to ma~ntain and
protect the ex~sting character of the residential neighborhood" and these qual~ties cannot be
preserved and protected in the above=described portion of the Palisades Tract without further
preventing the subdi~isian af iots within tfus area, and
WHEREAS, subdivtsion of lots within this area woulc3 detr~mentally impact the scale and
character af this pon~on of the Pal~sades Tract wtuch is an eXceptional C~ty asset en~oyed by
residents and visrtors, and
~L k 4 ~r ~ ~
WHEREAS, approval of lot splits less than the zrun-mum standards establ~shed by tlus
proposed ordinance would irreversibly alter the essential character and scale of the Palisades Tract
and depnve the City of a uruque and essential resource
NOW, THEREFQRE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MOrIICA
DQES HEREBY ORDAiN AS FOLLOWS
SECTION 1 Section 9 04 08 02 470 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code ~s amended to
read as follows
9.04.08.02.~70 Property de~elopment standards.
All properry m the R1 District shall be deveiaped m accordance with the
fol~ow~ng standards
{a) Maximum Building Height.
(1} Two stones, not ta exceed 28 feet, which ~ncludes all building
elements except chimneys and required vents;
(2) On lo~s of more than 20,Q00 square feet with a minimum front parcel
lme dimension of 200 feet, the height shall not exceed 35 feet for a pitched
roof or 2$ feet fvr other types of roofs
(b) Maximum Unit Density. One dwelling unit per parcel, except where
a Use Permrt has been approved for a duplex as perm~tted by Section
9 04 08 42 440{a)
6
ar +a `~ k~ F..i ~
{c) Minimum Lot Si~e. 5,000 square feet. Each parcel shall contain a
rnynimum depth of 144 feet and a mimmum width of 50 feet excep# for
lines of First Court A11ey to the west,
Seventh Sireet to the eas#, Mantana Place North Alley to the south, and
feet and a nunimum depth of 17S feet. that-Any parcel exishng on the
effechve date of this Chapter shall not be subject to this requirement.
(d) Maximum Parcel Coverage. 40 percent except that parcels between
3,001 and 5,000 square feet may have a parcel coverage of 50 percen~, and
parcels of 3,000 square feet or smaller may have a parcel coverage of 60
percent
{e) Front Yard Setback. As shown on the OfFicial Distnchng Map of
the City, or, if no setback is spec~fied, 20 feet
(~ Additio~al Front Stepback Above 14 Feet in Heigh~ Far new
structures or additions to existing structures, any portion of the front
building elevation abo~e 14 feet exceeding 75 percent of the maximum
buildable front elevat~on shall be stepped back from the front setback line
an addi~ional average amount equal to four percent of parcel depth, but in
no case resuthng m a required stepback greater than 10 feet
As used m this Chapter, "maximum buildable elevation" shali mean the
,~ ~_ ~.. '~ ~ ~
maximum p~tent~al length of the elevation pernutted under these
regulanons, which mcludes parce~ width or length (as applicable), minus
required m~nimum setback
(g) Rear Yard Setback, 25 feet.
(h) Additianal Rear Stepback Above 14 Feet in Height. For new
structures or addiaons to exisnng structures, any portion of the rear
building elevarian above 14 feet exceeding 75 percent of the maximum
buildable rear eleva~ivn shall be stepped back fram the rear setback line an
additional average amount equal to four percent of parcel depth, but ~n no
case resulting m a required stepback greater than 10 feet
(~) Side Yard Setback. Ten perce~t of the parcel width or a minimum
of ~iree feet six mches, whichever is greater, but in no case greater than 15
feet {See alsa Sect~an 9 04 10 02 190 )
~j} Additional Side Stepbacks Above 14 Feet in Height. For new
structures or addihons ta exishng structures, any porhon of the side
building elevanan above 14 feet exceeding 50 percent of the rnaxim3un
buildable side ele~ahon shall be stepped back from the s~de setback line an
addirional one faot for every 2 feet 4 inches abo~e 14 feet of building
height to a maxunum height of 21 feet
8
~~ `U~~
(k) AdditionaE Side Stepback Above 21 Feet in Height No portion of
~ie bwldmg, except permitted projections, shall intersect a plane
commencmg 21 feet in height at the minunum sideyard sethack and
extendmg at an angle of 45 degrees from the vertical toward the intenor of
the site
(1) Front Yard Paving. No more than 54 percent of the reqnired front
yard area including driveways shall be paved, except that lots with a width
of 25 feet or less may have up to 60 percent of the required front ya~d area
paved
(m) Modificatians to Step6acks Aba~e 14 Feet in Height. The stepback
requ~rements of subsect~ons (#}, (h), {~}, and (k} af this Section may be
modiified subject to the revrew and approval of the Architectural Review
Board if the Board finds that the modification will not be detrimental to ~he
property, adjo~ning properties or the general area m which the property is
located, and the objechves of the stepback requ~rements are satisfied by the
provision o£ alternat~ve stepbacks ar other building features which red~ce
effecrive mass to a degree comparable to the relevant standard requkrement
(n) Driveways. No mare than one dri~eway per parcel to a public street
shall be permitted on parceis less than 100 feet in width
9
~ ,~ .,
~ T ~r ~
(o) Basements and Subterranean Garages. No basement or
subterranean garage shall extend into any required yard setback area, except
for any basement or garage located beneath an accessory building which is
otherwise pernutted w~thin a yard area, if such basement, semi-subterranean
or subterranean garage is lacated at least five feet frorn any properiy line
(p) Access to Subterranean Garages and Basements.
(1) Up ta a~otal of 54 square feet af area in the s~de and rear yards may
be utihzed for lightwells or stairways to below-grade areas of the main
buildmg and any accessory buildmgs,
(2) No more #han three feet of excavahon below grade far a dri~eway,
stairway, doorway, hghtwell, windaw or other such element to a
subterranean or semisubteiranean garage ar basement shall occur in the
front yard setback area. This reqwrement may be modxfied by the
Architectural Review Board for parcels with an elevation rise of five feet
from the frant property line to a paint fifty feet towards the interior of the
srte if it finds that topagraphic cond~rions necess~tate that such excavat~an
be permitted
(c~ Roof Decks. Roof decks shall be set back at least three feet from the
minimum sideyard setback The height of any railings or parapets
10
~ ° • +.~ ~ .r
associated wlth such roof decks may not exceed the ma~ci.mEUn allowable
buildmg height for ~he structure.
SECTION 2 Ordmance Number i897 (CCS) is hereby repealed
SECTION 3 Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereta
incons~stent wsth the pro~nsions of this Ordmance, to the extent of such inconsistenc~es and no
further, ~s hereby repealed or mod~fied to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of t~us
Ordmance
SECTION 4 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, ar phrase of tlus ~rdmance ~s
for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decisian of any court of competent
~unsdiction, such decision sha~l not affect the val~d~ty of the remamjng portions of this Ord~nance
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 uncanstitutional without
regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or
unconstitutional
SECTION 5 The Mayor shall s~gn and the C~ty C(erk shall attest to the passage of this
Ordinance The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the offieial newspaper
11
"" ~'~c
;
witlun 15 days after its adop~ion This Ordinance shall become effective 3a days from its
adoptton
APPROVED AS TQ F~RM
MARSHA J~N~~MOUTRIE
Crty Attorney ~1
12
p~ - ~ ~.J
ATTACHMENT D
r~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~
y+j~u
l '
,
f lattylmunillawslbarrylsubd2 mar wpd
C~ry Council Meeting 1-27-98 Sar~ta Mornca, Californ~a
4RDlNANCE NUMBER i 89 7(CCS}
(Ciry Caunc~l Senes)
AN 1NTERiM ORD~NANCE OF THE CITY COUNCII.OF THE CITY OF SANTA MDNICA
EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ON SUSDIVISI4NS IN 'THE AREA BOLINDED
BY 4CEAN AVENUE, SEVENTH STREET, ADELAIDE DRIVE,
AND MONTANA AVENUE PENDING REVISI~NS TO THE
ZQNIlVG DRUINANCE CHANGING THE MINiMUM LOT
WIDTH FROM FIFTY FEET TQ ONE HUNDRED
FEET FOR AN R-1 LOT WITHIN THE ABOVE-
DESCRISED AREA, DECLARING THE
PRESENCE 4F AN EMERGENCY
THE CITY COUNCIL QF TI~ CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS
SECTiON 1 Findmqs and Purpose The City Council finds and declares
`\ (a} The area of the City boun~ed by Seventh Street, Ocearr Avenue, Adelarde I}r~ve, ana
Montana Avenue is located vv~tlun the Pal~sade5 Tract whECh was o~ginally subd~vided tr~ 1905
and ~s a uroque and d~st~nct~ve ne~ghborhoad
(b} Amang the Pa~zsades Tract~s spec~al chara~censtics are l00 faot wide streets, as
opposed ta the 60 foot ta 80 foot wide streets typical for ather R1 zaned areas ofthe C~ty,
parcels w~th 100 feet of street frontage, as apposed ta the typ~cal R 1 parcel street frontage af 50
feet, 200 foot parcel depths, as opposed to the typ~cat I50 foot deep parcels found throughout
most of the City, 40 foot front yard se#backs, as opposed to the 2D foot to 3D foot front yard
setbacks m most ofthe other R 1 areas af the City, and parkways and sidewalics which are on
~~ ~ i'~~.
1
average 25 feet in width Each of these features has a direct arid substant~al impact on the
charactes and scale of the ne~ghbarhood
(c} Ttte Pal~sades Tract was desjgned to accommodate large homes with large yards and it
was developed consi5tent with t}us des~gn Consequently, the Palisades Tract presently conta~~s
~arge, ald hames surrour~ded by substant~al yards and ~ardens
(d} As a result of rts broad streets and pathways, iarge lots, oid homes, amgle _yards and
gardens, an~ substantial setbacks, the Pahsades Tract pravides more open space than any other
residential neighborhaod in the Crty
(e) The character and scale of the ong~nal Paiisades Tract make ~t unique in t~e City The
Ci-~ ,tself is extremely densC w~th a land area of~ust S square rniies and a popufatlon of
approwmate~y 90,400 people Moreover, the comb~nauon of an acean s~de locatjon, fine cl~mate,
~•:4oraus economy, and urban facilities, serv~ces and entertainment ~enues make the City an
e~ctrem , destrab~e place to work or visit Cansequently, an any weekday, appraxlmateiy
2d0,000 persons are present ~n the C~ty, and on weekends, th~s number frequentiy cl~mbs to
400,000 or mare Populat~on dens~ty and conQest~on both present threats to the qualrty of l~fe m
the Crty
(~ G~ven the City's dens~ty, the Pal~sades Tract and the open space ~t prov~des are unzque
recreatio~al and aesthetic assets City residents and visrtars frequentEy walk and bicycle m thts
neighborhood due to ~ts spec~al amb~ence
(g) The Pal~sades Tract was subsequently expanded in 19I2 eastward Hawever, that
poman of the Palisades Tract was not de~e~oped in the same scale and character as the ong~na~
Pal~sades Tract and is not ~nc~uded in the moratonum
_. ~~~~
r~
{h) Between 1947 and ihe early 1970's, a number of s~bdznsions of the ~arce~s occurred
in the Palisades Tract These 1ot sp~its were approved adrrunistratrvely as a matter of ng~t In
1976, the City Council adopted Ord~nanee 1024 which repealed the nght to s~bd~vide lots as a
matter af nght and required publ~c not~ce of a variance applicat~on ta approve ~at splits under
certafn cond~tions ~n 1984, the City CflunciI adopted Ord~nance 1294 to implemer~t the State
-- Subd~vis~on Map Act and require Piaruung Comm~ss~on approval of sub~iv~s~on requests Since
I976, no lat split has been appro~ed in the PaI~sades Tract Consequent~y, the ma~onty
of the original 100 foot parcels in the Paltsades Tract are still intact and the ong~nal character and
scale of the tract has been mauntained However, thf, loss of any addiuonal 104 foot parcels
would adversely and irrevacably serve to change the character and scale of the Palisades Tract
Reducing lot wid~h from 140 feet to 50 feet would reduce the requ~red sideyard setbacic by SQ%,
resulting in less open space between homes and greater de~elopment density Reducing lot vv~dth
wauld also result in the remo~al of ol~er homes ~n the neighborhood Addit~onally, reducing an
eausting 100 foot w~de parcel into two SO foot wide parcels would be ~ncans~stent r+v~th the
onginal des~gn and plan far the character and scale of the Pal~sades Tract
(i) W~tIun the past eiQht months, real estate values in the City have nsen sign~ficarit~y, and
the Cjty has rece~ved two appl~cations for subdrvrs~ons of iots ~n the Pal-sades Tract The City
anttcipates other applicatians will be forthcoming
U) A text amendment has been fiied to modify the m~n~mum lot width standards m th~s
area fram 50 feet ta 140 feet Before the Zoning Or~inance is amended, the potential for
approva! of lot spl~ts p~ses a cur,rent and immed~dte threat to the publ~c health, safety, and welfare
of the residents The apprQ~al of permits for svch development wouid result in a threat to public
health, safety, and welfare m thai such approvals could ~rreversibly a~ter the essential character
~~~
~
and scale of the Pa~sades Tract and depnve the Cttv af a untque and essenual resource, as
deta~~ed above
(k) Ir~ light of the above-rtzentioned concerns, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number
1892 (CCS) an December 16, 1997, which ord~nance establ~she~ a 45 day moratonum
(1} Pending the study and pass~ble amendment of the zorung Ordmance, ~t ~s necessary, on
an mtenm basis, to establish a moratanum on subdiv~s~ans ~n that port~on of the Pa~~sades Tract
descnbec~ above
SECTIDN 2 Moratonum
(a} A moratonum is herebv placed on the acceptance for process~ng of any app~:cat~an far
approva~ of ~lanning, building, en~neenng, or other C~ty permits for subd~v~sions ~n the area
bour~~ed by Ocean Aver~ue, Se~enth Street, Adela~de Dn<<e, and Mantana Avenue
(b) City staff i5 hereby directed to disapQrove all appl~cauons fi~ed after November 25,
_ 1997 fc~r appraval of plann~ng, buikd~n~u, en~~neer~ng, or other Crty permits for subdi~~sior~s ~n the
area bou~ded by Ocean A~enue, Seventh Street, Adefaide Dnve, and Montana Avenue
SECTION 3 Tlus ord~nance shalY be of no further force and effect forty-e~ght (48)
months frorn the date of rts adopt~on, unless pnor to that date, after a pvblrc heanng, not~ced
pursuar~t to Santa Manica Mur~c~pal Code 5ection 9 04 20 22 050, the C~ty Counc~l, by ma~onty
vate, extends the moratonum
SECTION 4 Th~s orc}~nance is declare~ to be an urgency measure adopted pursuant to
the pravis~ans of Section 9 44 2Q 16 060 of the Santa Manzca Mun~ci~al Code and 5ection 615 of
,
~
~ `" E`~ ~
~~
the Santa Matica City Charter As set farth ~n the findings above, tlus ord~r~ance is necessary for
presernr~g the public ~ealth, safety, and we~fare, and the appraval of any add~t~onal subdivisians
would result ut a threat to pub~ic i~ealth, safety, or welfare
SECT~ON 5 Any pro`nsion of the Santa Monica Muruc~pal Code or append~ces thereto
~nconsistent v~nth the prov~sions of tius Ordmance, to the extent of such inconsistenc~es and no
further, is hereby regealed ar mad~fied to that extent necessary to effect the prov~s~ans of tlus
Ordinance
SECTION 6 If any section, subsecuon, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ord~nance is
for any reason held to be inval~d ar unc~nst~tutFOnal by a decrs~an af any court of competent
}unsdactian, such aec~sion shall not affect the ~al~dity of the remaining pomons of thts Ord~nance
The City Council t~ereby declares that it woulc~ have passed this Ord~r~ance and each and every
_ section, subsectton, sentence, c~ause, or phrase not declared ~nvalid or unconstitut~ona! w~thout
regard to wheiher any portion of the ordinance would be subsequentl~ deciared sn~~alid or
uncoristitut~onal
IF ~+ ~
s.. V -d -y
U ~
SECTIOIr 7 The Mayor s~all s~~n and the Cit~~ Clerk shall atte5t to the passage of this
Ordinar~ce The Czty Clerk shall cause the same to be puhl~shed once in the of~ccal newspaper
witt~n 15 days after its adopt~on This 4rdinance shall becomc effect~ve upon ~ts adoption
APP~ZOVED AS TO FORM
~'~}, l~,/,` .~.'~-`
r i~J~(.t~~~~ ~i:: ~~ti~~ ' `~c
MAF SHA JONE~ MOUTR~E
C~tS~ ~ttorney
_ } L;,~..
41 V
"1 ~
~~:~-%~i
~
Robert Halbrook, Mayor
5tate of Californsa )
Counry of Los Angeles } ss
C~ry of Santa Momca )
I, Maria M S[ewart, Crty Clerk of the Ciry of Sanca Mon~ca, do hereby cert~fy that the
foregamg Ordinance No 1897 (CCS) was mtraduced far f~rst reading and was adapte~ on
Janua , 27. ~998 by the following vote
Ayes
iv'oes
Council rr._~nbers Ebner, Feu~tem, Gree~berg, O'Connor, Rosenstein
Council members None
Abstain Council members None
Absent Council members Genser, Holbraok
ATTEST
, ~ A . `~ ^ ~~ ~
Mar~a M Stewart, City ~°lerk
L ; -, .-,
' ,~ r
ATTACHMENT E
j ;,
Plannin~ Commission
No~ember 4, 1998
Cammissianer Bradley asked rf the windows w~ll be clear g[ass. Ms.
.`t~rex answered m the affirmative
` ~;
;
Cam ssioner Zinner made a motifln to approve CUP 98~6 and
Tentati~ Tract Map 526~3 with s#aff's findings, conditior~s` and with
carrectians s noted ~n the Supplement Staff Report TF~,~}motian also
included the Ilowing canditions: that the applicant-~he required to
submit a flow a dramage analysis [hydrology r~port) prior to the
issuance of buildmg erm~ts, and that ARB be d~re~ed ta pay particular
attentian ta the rooftop nclosures ~"~
\ '
Cornm~ssio~er Kanny secondel~~he motEOny'~
.\ .
The mation was approved by the f~oN~yGing vote:
AYES Bradley, Breisch, Gruber, Kar~S~T,~Weremiuk, Zinner;
ABSENT Parlee. . ~ `\
B. Conditianal Use Permit 98~~31, Vestiny Teh$ati~e Parcel Map No.
25276, 838 Tenth Stre,et ! R2-NW {Low D~,s~ty Multiple Family
Residential - North of,-'C/Vilshire Overlayy Dis~ric#,~;4pplications for a
Conditional Use Perrr~~t~and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to permit the
canstruct~on of a two story, 7r35D square foot, 4-unit~~ondomrnium
pro~ect wrth a 9,space su6terranean parkinq garage accessec!-~from the
rear alley Zor,r(nq: R2-NW {Low Density Multiple Family Resi~ntiai -
North of W~I~h~re O~erlay} D~str~ct. {Planner Laura Beck} Applican~_ R.
Nikkhess,a~, Architect.
i ~.
Co ~ssioner Zinner made a motion to approve CUP 98-031 and ~\
V st~ng Tentative Tract Map 25276 as submitted. Commissioner ~
Bradley seconded the motian, wh~ch was appro~ed by vaice ~ote
8.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Text Amendment 98-004, Text Amendment ±o modify Section
9 04 ~$ ~2 070(ct {Property Development Standards) to Part
9.04 08 02 (R1 Single Family Residential Distnct} to mcrease the
min~mum lot widtn requirement from 50 feet to 140 fee~ and to require
a minjmum lot depth of 175 feet for parcels located in the R1 Sinqie
Family Zan~nq District, wit~~n the area bounded by the center lines of
Ocean A~enue, Se~enth Street, Montana Place North Alley and Adela~d~
Drive ~Planner Danna Jerex) Applicant: City of Santa Monica.
Following the staff repart, Chair Weremiuk asked staff abaut the 175
foot !ot depth requirement and whether all lots ~r~ the tract rneet this
requirement Ms Jerex stated that this figure was selected because it
is the smallest lot depth in the tract
4
~ ~;~t~
~
Pla~nin~ Commission
No~emher 4, 1998
Commissioner Gruber asked if any of the lots on ~cean A~enue are
actually zoned R-1. Ms Jerex stated that all tF~ose properties ar~ zo~ed
R-4 Comm~ssioner Gruber asked why they were included ir, the Text
A~nendment Ms. Schachter stated that the properties on Ocean
Avenue are part of the Palisades Tract, however they can be excluded
from the Text Amendment
Commissioner Gruber inqu~red abaut replacement on the legal non-
conform~ng parcels along Dcean Avenue. Ms. Frick stated that the legal
non-conforming parcels must comply with the new requirements and
may not be subd~vided She also stated that #he natice did nat include
the R-4 parcels a{ong Ocean A~enue and should not be included as part
of the Comm~ssGOn's consideratian.
Commissioner Gruber rr~ade a motion to support the staff report
recommendations with the exclusion of the Ocean Avenue R-4 parcels
Commissioner Breisch seconded the motian
Commissianer Zinner asked if the R-4 and Ocean Aven~re references will
be omitted This was conf~rrrzed. Cha~r Weremiuk asked staff to mform
the Commission whether ar not the R-4/0cean A~enue issue will be
revis~ted.
Commissioner Gruber commented on the prior discussions on this area,
then stated for the record tf~at he daes not feel this Text Amendment
goes #ar enough
Commiss~oner Breisch stated for the record that he is pfeased that
Commissianer Grubar came around to his way of think~ng
The mation was approved by the followEng ~ote
AYES• Bradley, Breisch, Gruber, Kanny, Weremiuk, Zinner;
ABSENT ParEee,
~._
B. Appe 98-014~ of ARB 98-251 ~ 1202 Third Street Promenade,
Appeal of the Arc i Ftevi~w Bflard's approvai of buildinq desigr~,
coiors and materials ~ARB 98-2~ 9-}-~#~r t~eYformer J C. Penny Buildina
located at 1202 Third Street Prorr~e~ade-~la~ appeal is based on the
appellant's concern that the~r-e~o~al af the terr ca ott~ trim surraundmq
the existinq storefron~nd the cavering of the ex~stinq car~aqy with
stainless steel vy,~~"eopardrze the bu~ld~nq's eliqibilrty to be reqist~red ~s
a nation~a dmark APPELLANT: Pam O'Conner & Ste~e Frew;
APP~l~ANT: Banana Republ~c
~EAL WITHDRA WN.
5
-' ~ ~