Loading...
SR-9-C (19) , -0...- _ __ ~ LUTM:SF:PF:cg/lcp2.word.ppd OCI 1 5 1991 ,. COUNCIL MEETING: October I, 1991 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: city Staff SUBJECT: Recommendation to Approve Land Use and Implementation Plan of Local Coastal Program INTRODUCTION On April 16, 1991 the city council conducted a public hearing to review the Draft Local Coastal Program (LCP). At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council directed staff to conduct a public workshop to gather public input, and requested changes to the draft document. The draft LCP presented to the Council herein reflects changes as requested by council and revisions made as a result of the pUblic comments. This report outlines the significant changes made to the document and includes as an attachment the previous staff report outlining the background and purpose of the LCP. . Staff recommends that the city Council conduct a public hearing on the document and approve the LCP so that it may be forwarded to the Coastal Commission for review and certification. BACKGROUND A Local Coastal Program (LCF) is required by state law. This draft LCP incorporates revisions requested by the City Council at the meeting of April 16, 1991, the California Coastal Commission and the Planning Commission and includes revised standards - 1 - 9- C- OCT 1 5 '991 - --- resulting from the adoption of the 1988 zoning Ordinance and Proposition s. The City Council reviewed the LCP and held a public hearing on April 16, 1991. The Council requested modifications and clarification of specific policy language and changes to the maps. council members also directed staff to modify and add goals to the document which better reflect the City's policies related to development. Specifically, the initial goals were modified with language to identify persons of all socia-economic levels with regard to the provisions of public recreational opportunities. A new policy was added to encourage the preservation of low and moderate income housing in the Coastal Zone (Policy #5). The prior policy limiting residential parking in the beach parking lots was removed and replaced with a policy (Policy #25) that allows resident permit parking in the beach parking lots on a monthly basis. A new policy was added (Policy #84) that provides for new development standards for parcels along Pacific Coast Highway between the Santa Monica Pier and the northern City limits. In addition to the above, changes were made to the Implementation Plan that reflect changes made to the land use and development policies. Public Workshop Comments A wide variety of issues were discussed (see attachment F ) and expressed at the June 1, 1991 public workshop. Many of the comments and issues raised by the public were already addressed - 2 - - in the document I however some modifications have been made to better clarify the policy language. However, other issues were not included such as increasing public safety and security, litter and loitering in the beach particularly near the south beach barbeque pi ts, bicycle safety, off-hour use of beach parking lots for resident event parking, over-night parking at meters for residents, the posting of ocean water quality test results, and the issuance of permits for new alcohol outlets. These are more generic citywide issues and should not be addressed in the LCP. The issue of Sea View Terrace as a public right-of-way was discussed extensively, however the LCP still identifies the walk street as a means for public access to the coast. City staff and Coastal Commission staff believe this is a basic Coastal Act policy issue. Pacific Coast Highway Standards Council asked staff to provide new policy language to modify the development standards in the area bounded by Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) to the west, the Pier to the south, and the City limits to the north. This area is predominantly zoned Rl and R4 and the Coastal Commission staff has recommended limiting development and intensification of residential uses. However, if this occurs the only residential uses permitted would be single family development with no ability for the development of multiple family units. This position is not consistent with the City's policies to encourage a mixture of housing opportunities - 3 - ----- and therefor staff is proposing that the area be zoned a mixture of R2B and RVC. The R2B District would be established on all existing residential parcels. Parcels under 40 feet in width would be limited to one unit per parcel. Parcels wider than 40 feet would be permitted one unit for every 1500 square feet of lot area. The development standards would be consistent with the interim standards approved by the Council, with the exception of lots over 40 feet in width. Parcels with greater width that could accommodate more intense development would be limited to 23 feet in height for a flat roof and 30 feet in height for a pitched roof. This new policy would create one zoning district for all residentially zoned parcels and will lead to more compatible development in the future. Preservation of Affordable Housinq A new section was added to the Implementation Section outlining the City's responsibility in implementing the Mello Act, Government Code section 65590. Policies 75 and 76 set forth the pOlicy while the implementation section contains the action required to achieve implementation based upon the opinion prepared by the City Attorney's office. City Attorney Review and Comments The City Attorney reviewed the draft LCP and made a number of recommendations for changes to the text. These changes have been incorporated into the document and were mostly minor in nature to clarify ambiguities or inaccuracies. As recommended by the City Attorney new development policies # 81 and #82 were added to - 4 - ensure that the authority to prohibit or limit development and the standards by which it may be built rests with the city council and the people of Santa Monica. Policy #81 states that the City council or the people may "by ordinance, resolution, initiative, referendum, or charter amendment" prohibit or limit any type of development. Policy #82 makes it clear that any development standards contained in the LCP are not to be considered entitlements but maximum development intensities and that the city council and the people "by ordinance, resolution, initiative, referendum, or charter amendment" may reduce any development standards. OTHER RECOMMENDED CHANGES In addition to the changes noted previously, staff is recommending changes to facilitate the pier Development. Presently the development standards for the Pier are 2 stories 30' with a 1.0 floor area ratio. As part of the Pier development, a fun zone with a ferris wheel and roller coaster are proposed. Both of these features exceed the 30' height limitation on the Pier. Therefore, in order to accommodate these structures, staff is recommending the following changes to the policy and Implementation sections: policy 89: Building height shall not exceed 2 stories 30 feet above the Pier deck and the floor area ratio shall not exceed 1. O. Amusement rides shall not exceed a height of 1151 above the Pier deck. New Zoning Districts - 5 - As a result of establishing new standards for Pacific Coast Highway and the residential area between the Pier and Pi co Boulevard, and implementing the general policies of the LCPt several new zoning designations will need to be added to the Zoning Ordinance. The following are the proposed new zoning designations and required development permits: 0 Coastal-Zone Overlay District. This overlay covers all properties in the Coastal Zone and triggers the requirement for a Coastal Development Permit. 0 R2B Low Density Multiple Residential Beach District. This district is intended to provide a low density multiple family residential neighborhood designed to prevent burdens on public facilities, to afford protection from the deleterious environmental effects of larger scale development and to protect the existing character and state of the residential neighborhood in the beach area. 0 R3R Medium Density MUltiple Family Coastal Residential District. This district is intended to provide a broad range of housing within medium density multiple family residential neighborhoods free of disturbing noises, excessive traffic, and hazards created by moving automobiles. This district is also intended to prevent burdens on the public facilities that larger scale developments create, to protect the area from deleterious environmental effects and maintains the existing character and state of the residential neighborhood adjacent to the beach. - 6 - 0 Coastal Development Permit. This replaces the permit application to the Coastal Commission and outlines the administrative and appeal processes. 0 Administrative Coastal Permit. This permit would apply to development projects that require administrative approval. The procedures are spelled out for such permits. 0 Local Coastal Program. Future amendments to the LCP are inevitable as modifications to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance I and other policies occur. This section outlines the procedures to prepare, amend, and adopt the LCP. In addition, miscellaneous amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are necessary to implement specific pOlicies. Those amendments are identified in the Implementation Section of the Draft LCP. Potential Conflicts with Coastal Commission with the some of the revisions lllade to the document, it is anticipated Coastal Commission staff will have difficulty in recommending approval of the document. Specifically, Coastal staff has indicated they will not support resident parking in the public beach parking lots, they may not support the proposed multiple family designation along Pacific Coast Highway, and they may not support the new policies recommended by the City Attorney, policies 81 and 82. Until the document is forwarded to the Coastal Commission, the exact position of the Coastal commission staff will not be known. Staff will keep the Council - 7 - - ------ - ' - - informed of the progres s of the LCP and any issues the Coastal Commission may object to in the document. CEQA The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exempts preparation of Local Coastal Programs from environmental review, pursuant to Section 21080.9 and 21080.5 and Division 20, Chapter 6 of the Public Resources Code. As per the provisions of both, this program contains the elements and analyses required for certification of the Land Use Plan of the LCP. The majority of the LCP Policies reflect existing city policies contained in the Zoning Ordinance, Land Use and Circulation Element, Ocean Park Rezoning, North of wilshire Rezoning, and Proposition s. with the exception of Proposition S, each of the documents were analyzed through a separate EIR that provided information and evaluated impacts. ADOPTION PROCESS Timely adoption of the LCP by the City and certification by the Coastal Commission are critical for several reasons. First, preparation and adoption of Santa Monica's LCP is a long-overdue accomplishment, one whose process began over thirteen years ago. During this time, over 58% of all coastal jurisdictions have had LCFs certified by the state. In Los Angeles county, Santa Monica remains one of only four cities (out of eleven coastal cities) that have not had at least an LUP certified. Years of delay have left Santa Monica behind other - B - --~- cities in fulfilling its legal obligation and obtaining total permit authority over its coastal development. Second, the California Coastal Conservancy has approved $1,000,000 in assistance to the City for restoration of the pier Carousel Park. However I by the terms of the agreement, the City cannot encumber $850,000 of these funds until an LCP is certified. This situation has created a continuing negative balance in the pier fund and resulted in significant costs for santa Monica, as the city had to utilize its own General fund monies for the project. The Conservancy has notified the City of its intention to cancel the grant if the City does not adopt an LCP in a timely fashion. Similarly, potential Conservancy funds for other common area improvements on the pier cannot be accessed until the LCP is certified. Finally, the City has been awarded grant monies of up to $57,305 from the state for preparation of the Implementation Plan section of the LCP. This agreement reimbursed the City for work completed up through September 10, 1990. Potential for future grants may be contingent upon timely progress in adopting the LCP. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Notice of the public hearing before the City council was advertised in the The outlook on August 27, 1991. Notification of the public hearing was also mailed on August 27, 1991 to all persons who attended the public workshop, to over 500 persons on the City's general notification list, the Neighborhood Support - 9 - Center, and to representatives from the neighborhood organizations. A copy of the notice is attached for Council review. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT Approval of this document will not result in financial or budgetary impact other than those noted above regarding grant monies. CONCLUSION In light of the development policies in Santa Monica, which have changed with the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance, the Land Use and Circulation Element, Housing Element, and Proposition S, the LCP reflects existing policies. Once the LCP is adopted, any future changes to development standards or policies will result in amendments to the LCP as well. The LCP represents a body of information, analysis, and policies that for the most part, have been reviewed and analyzed since 1987. Since that time, the community, regulatory agencies, the Planning conunission and the California Coastal Commission have all had input into the formation of the LCP. Accordingly, the revised document modifies the 1987 version by making it consistent with new City policies. Ultimately, it is a document designed to comply with the state's coastal Act and result in a certified Local coastal Program for the City of Santa Monica. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City council: - 10 - 1- Conduct a public hearing on the proposed Local Coastal Program. 2. Adopt the attached resolution and forward the document to the California Coastal Commission for review and certification. Prepared by: Paul Berlant, Director of LUTM Suzanne Frick, Planning Manager Paul Foley, Associate Planner Attachments: A. Resolution Approving Draft LCP B. August 1991 Draft LCP c. April 9, 1991 City council staff Report D. Comments and issues from June 1991 Public Workshop E. Public Notice - 11 - jI:l E-i H jI:l H ::r: :x: ~ -- ----- --- - City council Meeting: 10/1/91 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NO. (City council Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADOPTING THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND TRANSMITTING THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION WHEREAS I in November, 1990, the City staff submitted a draft Land Use Plan to the Planning Commission: and WHEREAS, on November 14 and 28, December 6 and 19, 1990, and January 23, 1991, the Planning Commission held public hearings on the Local Coastal Program and approved it with certain modifications: and WHEREAS I on April 16, October 1, 1991, and October 15, 1991 the City Council held a public hearing on the Local Coastal Program and adopted it with certain modifications I NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION l. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 305101 the City council certifies that the adopted Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program, attached hereto, is intended to be carried out in a manner in full conformance with the California Coastal Act, and that it contains, in accordance with guidelines - 1 - --------- - - - ---- - -- --- ------ - established by the Coastal Commission I materials sufficient for a thorough and complete review. SECTION 2. The City Council does hereby authorize the transmittal of the approved Local Coastal Program to the California Coastal commission for its consideration. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROBERT M. MYERS city Attorney w/lcpres 10/10/91 - 2 - ---- ------- U 8 H p:j H :r:: :><: I"iI ------------- - ---- -- - -- -- -----