SR-400-004
1
L/cc-- PC 0/
~
B13
APR 1 1 1989
CjED:DKW:bz
council Mtg: April 11, 1989
Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and city council
FROM: city Staff
SUBJECT: zoning Ordinance Cleanup I Text Amendments
INTRODUCTION
Proposed is the minor modification of a variety of sections of
the Santa Monica Municipal Code to clarify the newly-adopted
zoning ordinance. Staff recommendation is for introduction and
first reading of the Text Amendments as submitted.
BACKGROUND
The new zoning ordinance became effective on September a, 1988.
Since that date, staff has become aware of a variety of minor
inconsistencies needing correction in the text of the new
ordinance. A number of simple corrections are proposed in this
staff report. Additional modifications will be proposed at a
later date. These will include other language clarifications, as
well as pOlicy issues which have arisen as a result of the
provisions of the new ordinance.
The
specific modifications to
zoning ordinance
sections
identified in this staff report were legally noticed as required
by the Municipal Code.
The Council may alter the recommended
- 1 -
e-g
APR 1 1 1989
...
amendments, but amendments to other sections can only be made at
future hearings noticed for that purpose.
On February 15, 1989 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the proposed amendments. No members of the public
spoke. The Commission approved the proposed amendments with two
minor wording changes which staff supports and has incorported.
MOdifications
Each of the recommended modifications are discussed below.
Actual text is shown on Attachment A. The proposed text
amendments are provided in ordinance form in Attachment B.
1) section 9000.3. Definition of Landscaped Area.
In this definition, the words "... but not including walkways,
driveways, patios, and other landscaping," are repeated twice and
should only be present once.
2) section 9000.3. Definition of Residential Care Facility.
In this definition, the number 60 lacks a reference to age. This
is proposed to be added.
3) section 9010.6.(a) Rl Property Development Standards.
The ambiguous neither or both" language and related wording would
be eliminated to clarify that the special setback must be
provided for any new construction in excess of 14 feet in height.
In addition, the words "above 14 feet" would be inserted to
- 2 -
clarify that the calculation of the setback begins at the 14-foot
height rather than ground level.
4) section 9010.6. (i) Modifications to Setbacks Above 14 Feet in
Height.
Presently, the code precludes homes with existing non-conforming
setbacks from even applying for a hearing before the ARB, even if
the non-conforming aspects of the building have no relation to
the requirements for setbacks above 14 feet. The words "provided
the entire structure complies with the setback requirements for
structures below 14 feet in height" would be deleted to allow
such buildings to be considered on their merits by the ARB.
5) section 9011.6.(a) R2R Maximum Building Height
In the preparation of the zoning ordinance, the roof pitch figure
was inadvertantly assigned the percentage (%) rather than the
degree (0) sign. This would be corrected.
6) section 9019.6. C3-C Property Development Standards
Language would be added to clarify that the standards of the
Third Street Mall specific Plan rather than the C3C zoning
provisions apply within that Plan's area.
7) section 9024.2 CP Permitted Uses
The words II including at the ground floor" would be added to
reflect the Hospital Area specific Plan's intent to allow
residential uses at the ground floor.
- 3 -
8) Section 9040.3(b) Building Height and Exceptions to Height
Limit
section (1) would be modified to delete the word "chimneys" so
that chimneys in the R1 district can be permitted to exceed the
R1 height limit. section (3) (d) would be modified by the
deletion of the word "not" which is a typographical error. In
addition, a section (5) would be added to this section stating
that "In all districts, chimneys may extend no more than five
feet above the permitted height in the District."
9) section 9040.5. Build-to-Line
The unnecessary words "at least" would be deleted.
10) section 9040.8(a) Fence, Wall, Hedge, Flagpole
The word "parallel" would be replaced with the more appropriate
word "adjacent."
processing Procedures
The proposed Text Amendments are categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Santa
Monica Guidelines for Implementation. Class 5(12). The proposed
Text Amendments are also exempt from any fees.
The procedures for the processing of Text Amendments are
specified under SMMC Section 9120.4. Within 60 days of an
application being deemed complete, a public hearing before the
Planning Commission must be scheduled. The Commission has
conducted such a hearing, has made the required findings, and has
- 4 -
t
recommended approval of the amendments. The city council may, by
Ordinance, effect the amendment.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendations of this report have no budget/financial
impact.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city Council introduce for first
reading the ordinance approving the Text Amendments set forth in
Attachment B and according to the following findings.
FINDINGS
1. The proposed amendments are consistent in principle with the
goals, objectives, policies, land uses and programs specified
in the adopted General Plan in that they correct minor
inconsistencies in the newly-adopted zoning ordinance, and
will clarify the City'S land use standards and procedures.
2. The public health, safety, and general welfare require the
adoption of the proposed amendments in that minor corrections
to the zoning ordinance are needed to facilitate the orderly
regulation of development in the city.
Prepared by: D. Kenyon Webster, Principal Planner
DKW:cg
hp/zoclea2
04/03/89
Attachments: A: Text Amendments shown in strike-out/bold text
B: Ordinance for introduction and first reading
- 5 -