SR-400-002 (33)
~.. "
..
I 0 f>l
Santa Honlca, Californ1a, SeptePlber 27, 1977 OC1 11 \971
,.
.
t/tJO -' 010 Z-
.
TO: The Mayor and Clty Councll
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Planning CommlSSlon Recommendation Regardlng R1 Uses.
Introductlon
ThlS re~ort transffilts the Planning COffiPllSS10n's recommendation
that no change be made ln the number of unrelated persons per-
mitted to reside together as a family.
Background
On July 12, 1977 the City Councll requested the Plannlng Com-
misslon to reV1ew the number of unrelated persons permltted to
reside together as a famlly and make reco~mendatlons for any
changes they belleve 1ndicated. In compliance w1th this request,
the Plannlng Commisslon has undertaken a review of the Zoning
Ordinance as it pertalns to the definlt10n of a faffilly and per-
ffi1tted uses in the Rl District. In the course of ltS consideration
the Planning COIDPllssion held two PubllC Hearlnqs, one on August 1st
for obtalning general public comments regarding the subject and
another on September 12th for purposes of hearing testlmony on
a speciflc proposal to consider reduclng the number of unrelated
persons from SlX to a lesser number. In the course of the two
Hearlngs, approximately 50 persons addressed the Commlssion, the
vast ma]Orlty of who~ were in Opposltlon to changlng the eXlsting
Ordlnance. At least an equal number of COIDPlUnlcatlons were re-
celved regarding the matter.
1 0 ~
OCT 1 1 1917
"'-
.
.
TO: The Mayor and C1ty Councll
- 2 -
September 27, 1977
Followlng the last Hearing, the Comrn1ssion voted to recommend
that no change in the present six unrelated persons be made but
that the Plannlng staff and City Attorney1s offlce submit sug-
gested amendments at the earllest practical date aimed at re-
solvlng inconsistencies and shortcomlngs in the present Ordinance
in line wlth the Commlssion's dlScusslon.
Alternatlves
Inasmuch as the Planning COMID1SS10n's recornmendatlon is In re-
sponse to a C1ty Councll request, the legal requ1rement for
Planning Commisslon Review has been accompllshed and the Councll
has the alternatives of (1) deferrlng further actlon untll the
Plann1ng Commlssion has completed the proposed clarlfying re-
VlS1ons, and/or (2) proceeding with a proposed amendment by di-
recting the Clty Attorney to prepare an ordlnance altering the
number of unrelated persons permitted.
The pros In favor of the first alternat1ve include the receiving
of Plannlng Commlssion suggestlons clarlfYlng and l.mprovlng the
language contalned in the Ordinance to better reflect the lntent
of the Councll. The Clty Counc1l wlll still have the option of
reduclng the number of unrelated persons or any other portlon.
The cons 1nclude some delay, est1mated at from Slxty to nlnety
days.
The pros ln favor of the second alternatlve lnclude Counc11 action
at the earllest posslble ti~e, wh1le the cons lnclude the possibllity
that subsequent Commlssion recommendations wlll be of beneflt to
.~
.
.
TO: The Mayor and C1ty Councl1
- 3 -
September 27, 1977
the City Counc1l.s evaluation and avoid amending the sa~e
ordinances tWlce.
Recommendatlon.
In Vlew of the absence of signiflcant urgency, the pend1ng
action of the Planning Commiss1on and the C1ty Counc1l's rlght
tOlnltiate changes at that t1me, lt lS respectfully recommended
that the flrst alternatlve be selected and further action deferred
untll the Planning Commission has considered and forwarded their
subsequent recommendations.
Prepared by: James Lunsford
JL:bt
----:l-~- --- ----...... ---- - --_.._..._--~ ---~-~.-----...... --- ---.-. -....- --~---------- r:--
taining to uses allowed in the Rl District and the number of unre-
lated persons permitted to reside therein as a family and the Plan-
n1ng Commiss1on having held two PubllC Hearings on August 1, 1977
and September 12, 1977 for purposes of considering proposed amend-
ments, hereby finds as follows:
1. No significant need for reduclng the number of unre-
lated persons permitted to reside together as a family
within the definition of Section 9106 of the Municipal
Code has been demonstrated.
2. A substantial majority of the persons testifying before
the Planning Commission at each of the Public Hearings were
opposed to any change in the number of unrelated persons
permitted under the current regulations.
3. A nUMber of inconsistencies and inadequacies exist in
the present definitlons and regulatlons which could be
eliminated by certain amendments to both Sections 9102 and
9106 relating to definitions and uses perm1tted in the Rl
Dlstrlct.
SECTION 2. The City Planning Commission, therefore, respectfully
recommends that the Honorable City Council initiate no change in
the present number of unrelated persons permitted to reside together
as a family and, further, that the Planning staff and City Attorney's
office submit new recommendations to the Planning Commission clari-
fYlng these definitions in accordance with the COmMission's discus-
sion, to be submltted at the earliest possible date.
SECTION 3. This recommendation together with the Findings and copies
of the varlOUS communications received by the COTIIDission in the course
of its evaluation shall be forwarded to the Honorable City Council
for their review and conslderation.
DATED this 12th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1977
..
~~..Ird;tWd~ }
-DONALD (;. ~LCbLM, Ch~
City Planning Co~ission
City of Santa Monica
I, J~lliS LUNSFORD, Secretary of the City Planninq COmMission, hereby
certify that the above action was taken by the Planning commission
on September 12, 1977 by the following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Gould, Hotchkiss, Katz, Schneider,
~1alcolm
NOES:
Commissioners Lonsinger and Savage
ABSENT:
None
~~
(/g~...ES LU'f-JSfO.~1::ff Secretary
City Plann~ Commission
City of Santa Monica
.,/