SR-8-E (30)LUTM:SF:cg/morord.legal.plan
Council Meeting: November 19, 1991
TO: Mayar and City Council
FROM: City Staff
~
~~~;, ~ • , ~~
Santa Monica, California
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt an 4rda.nance to Extend the
Maratorium on Multifamily Residential Development
INTR~DUCTION
On March 26, 1991, the City Council adopted Ordinanee Number 1577
which established a six month moratorium on multifamily
residential development in order to allow further investigation
af Propasition R implementatian alternatives, In September 199~,
the Council extended the ordinance an additional four manths. As
a result vf this action, the znterim ordinance wi~l expire on
January 10, 1992. This report recommends the Council adopt an
ordinance extending the effective date of the moratorium for an
additional three months, until April 10, 1992.
BACKGROUND
The City Cauncil, the Planning Commission, as well as other
groups in the comrnunity, believed that the process ~or eva~uating
Proposition R ixnplementat~on alternatives shauld invo~ve an
analysis and public review process. Originally it was
anticipated this process would be aecomplished within a six month
period and therefore the moratorium ordinance was to expire in
six months.
~~
_ 1 _ ~'sFt1 ~, - ^ '~ .
During the last eight months staff has been reviewing data ~rom a
variety of sources, reconciling the information to ensure that
each City department and division is using the same data base.
In addition staff has been meeting with interested graups to
discuss the information, and two meetings have been held by the
Planning Coaunissian.
The Planning Commission on October 16, 1991 eonducted a public
hearing and on October 25, 1991 discussed their concerns related
to the implementation of Proposition R. Planning Cammissianers
Morales, Polhemus~ Pyne, and Rosenstein voted in favor of asking
the City Council to extend the existing moratorium ordinance for
2-3 months so that the Commission could thoroughly review the
information contained in the Summary Report, T~chnical Analysis,
and financial proformas. The Commission wauld then conduct
another public hearing on December 11, 1991 to farmulate their
recommendations to the City Council. Commissioners Gilpin and
Chair Mechur voted no, Commissioner Nelson was absent on ~ctober
25th.
The City Council must decide if the existing moratorium ordinance
should be extended to accommadate the Planning Commission's
request. Should the Council decide ta provide additional time
far the Planning Co~ission, staff recommends the Council adopt
the attached ordinance. Adaption of this ordinance will extend
the moratoriuzn to April 10, 1992.
- 2 -
BUDGET/FINANC~AL
The recommendation for this report daes not have a budget impact.
REC~MMENDATION
Should the Council agree to provide additianal time far PZanning
Commission review and camment, staff recommends the Council adopt
the attach~d ordinance.
Prepared by: Paul Berlant, Director of LUTM
S~zanne Frick, Planning Manager
- 3 -
CA:RMM:11566c/hpc/pc
City Council Meeting 11-19-9~ Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING A
MORATORIUM aN MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
WITH CERTAiN EXEMPTIONS IN ORDER TO
COMPLY WITH PROPaSITION R
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION l. Findings and Pur~ase. The City Council finds
and declares:
(a) On November 5, 1990, the voters of the City af Santa
Monica approved Prapositian R, adding Section 630 to the City
Charter to read as follows:
The City Council by Ordinance shall at all
times require that not less than thirty
percent (30%) of all multifamily-residential
housing newly constructed in the City on an
annual basis is permanently affordable to and
occupied by 1ow and moderat~ income
households. For purposes af this Section,
"low income household" means a household with
an incame not exceeding sixty percent (60~)
of the Los Angeles Caunty median income,
adjusted by fami].y si~e, as published from
- 1 -
time to time by the United States Dapartment
of Houszng and Urban Development, and
"moderate income hou5ehold" means a househald
with an income not exceeding one hundred
percent (100~) of the Los Ange~es County
median income, adjusted by family size, as
published from time to time by the United
States Department of Housing and Urban
Development. At ~east fifty percent (50~J af
the newly constructed units required to be
permanently affordable by this Section shall
be affordable to and occupied by low income
households.
{b) On December 29, 1990, the City published notice that on
January 8, 1991, the City Council would consider issues relating
to the implementation of Proposition R including whether the
thirty percent (30~) requirement af Propositian R ca~ld be met on
site or off site, whether an in-lieu fee would be permitted, and
whether the thirty percent (30~) requirement had to be met on a
project by praject basis. This notice also provided that at the
January 8. 1991 meeting, the City Council would consid~r
directing staff to prepare an ordinance t~ implement Proposition
R.
(c) City Staff prepared a staff report far the January 8,
1991 City Council meeting identifying the issues that had ta be
addressed as part of the implementat~on of Proposition R,
suggesting a process for obtaining public input, presenting City
Staf~'s resolution of issues raised lay Praposition R's
_ 2 _
implementatiQn, and recammending that staff be directed to
prepare an ordinance implementing Proposition R.
{d) At its January 8, 1991 meeting, the City Council
directed staff to prepare an ordinance implementing Proposition R
and to return the ordinance to the City Council on February 26,
199~.
(e) The Santa Manica Planning Eommissian, as well as ather
groups in the community, believed the schedule for the return of
the drdinance did not provide opportunities for adequata review
of various alternative strategies for implementing Propositian R.
(f) At its meeting on February 19, 1991, the City Council
decided to reconsider whether an ordinance should be prepared and
scheduled for its next regular meeting a general discussion of
implementing strategies.
(g) On March 5, 1991, the City Council directed the City
Attorney to prepare an ordinance prohibiting the filing of
applications for market-rate residential housing until such time
as the Council adopts an ordinance implementing Proposition R
excepting from the prohibition any project in which thirty
percent (30~} af the units constructed on site are available to
low and moderate income persons as provided for in Proposition R.
(h) On March 26, 1991, Ordinance Number 1577 (CCS) was
adopted imposing restrictions on new multifamily housing to
enstxre compliar~ce with Proposition R. This ordinance will
expire on September 26, 1991.
(i) On April 3, 1991, the P~anning Commission reviewed an
outline developed by staff on the issues and information that
- 3 -
wauld be presented as part o€ tha analysis on the alternative
impiementatian strategies.
(j ) In ~id-September, a report will be issued by staff on
the "Proposed Implementation Strategy Under Proposition R."
(k) During the period between mid-September and November
il, 1991, the public will have the opportunity to review and
commant on the report "Proposed Implementation Strategy Under
Prapasition R" and attend hearings before the Planning Commission
and City Council.
(1} On October 16 and October 25, 1991, the Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing and formulated a
recommendatian to the City Council. The Planning Cflmmission
requested a two or three month extensian of the existing
moratorium ordinance on mu~tifamily residential development to
allow far further pub~ic review and Planning Commissi~n
consideration.
(m) The fol~awing ordinance is necessary to enable the City
to meet the requirements of Prvposition R. Proposition R
mandates that on an annual basis not less than 30~ af al~
mu~tifarnily residential housing newly constructed in the City be
permanently affordable to low and moderate income households.
Historically, multifamily residential hausing developed in the
City has fallen far short of this 30~ requirement. This trend
continues to date. Thus, unless this emergency moratorium is
extended, and only projects providing 30~ affordalole housing
consistent with Proposition R are exempted, the City will not be
able tv meet the mandate of Propositian R. This ordinance
- 4 -
ensures that the City will comply with Proposition R while
studying approaches f~r lang-term imple~entation of the measure.
SECTION 2. Moratorium.
{a) Subject to the exemptions set forth in Section 3 of
this Ordinance, a moratorium is hereby placed on the acceptance
for processinq of any applications for appro~al of tentative
tract maps, tentative parcel maps, administrative approvals,
develop~ent review permits, conditional use permits, or any
ather City permits for the erection, construction, moving, and
excavation and grading for, any multi-family residential
building or structure.
(b) Subject to the exemptians set forth in SectiQn 3 of
this Ordinance, the Planning Cammission and City staff are hereby
directed to disapprove a~l app~ications filed after March 5,
1991, for approval of tentative tract maps, tentative parce~
maps, administrative app~ovals, development review permits,
conditional use permits, or any ather City permits for the
erection, construction, moving, and excavation and grading for,
any multi-family building or structura.
SECTION 3. Exemptions. The following applications are
exempt from the provisions of Section 2 of this Ordinance:
{a) Applications for approval af permits involving the
erection, construction, enlargement, demolition, or moving of,
and excavation and grading for any multiple dwelling development
intended for rental housing for persons of low and m~derate
income or far seniar citizens, and which development is financed
by any federal, state or City housing assistance program ar owned
- 5 -
by any non-prafit organization, provided a deed restriction is
recorded rEStricting the development to such purpose.
(b) Applicatians for approval of permits involving the
rehabilitation or en~argement af existing dwelling units.
{cj Applications for projects filed priar to March 6, 1991.
{d) Applications far appraval of permits involving the
construction and excavation and grading for, projects where the
following requirements are met:
{1} The applicant proposes that thirty percent (30~)
of the total number units to be constructed on site by the
applicant, excluding any density bonus units the applicant is
entitled to under Government Cade Section 65915, shall be
permanently affordable to and occupied by low and moderate income
households as provided for in this subsection.
(2} For purposes o~ this subsectian, "low income
household" means a household with an income nat exceeding sixty
percent (60~} of the Los Angeles County m~dian income, adjusted
by family size, as published from time to time by the United
States Department of Housing and Urban ~evelopment, and "moderate
income household" means a household with an income not exceeding
one hundred percent (100~) of the Las Angeles County median
income, adjusted by family size, as published from time ta time
by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Develapment.
(3) At least fifty percent (50~) of the newly
canstructed units required to be permanently affordab~e by this
subsection shal~ be affordable to and occup~ed by I~w income
households.
- 6 -
(4} The provisions of Municipal Code Section 9423(b),
(c), (d), {e}, and (f), Municipal code section 9427i and
Municipal Code Section 9428 shall be complied with as to such
inclusianary units.
(5) Prior to the issuance of a building permit far a
project exempt under this subsection, the applicant sha~l submit
deed restrictions or other lega~ instruments setting forth the
obligatians af the applicant under this subsection far City
review and approval. Such restrictions shall be effective for
the lifetime of the project.
(6) The requirements of this subsection shall be made
conditions to the approval of any appiication filed pursuant to
this subsection.
SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall be af no further farce and
effect vn April 10, 1992.
SECTION 5. Any pravision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code
ar appendices thereto inconsistent wi.th the provisions of this
Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and not further,
are hereby repealed or m~dified to that extent necessary to
affect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by a decision of any court af any competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall nat affect the validity af the
remaining portians of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each and
- 7 -
every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid ar unconstitutional withvut regard to whether
any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared
invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. 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 pub~ished once in the official newsp~per
within 15 days after its adoptian. This Ordinance shali become
effective 30 days from the date of adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~ W~ i
ROBERT M. MYERS
City Atto~ney
- 8 -