The URL can be used to link to this page

SR-400-005 (19) ~~~~ -~ ~ ~00~ PGD:AA:AS:F:~Gi#yPlanning\Share\COUNCIL~STRPT12005~Downtown Design - CounciLdac Council Mtg: ~Jovember 8, 2005 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Introduction and First Readirrg of an Ordinance Implementing Modifications to Downtown Qesign and Development Standards 1NTRC}DUCTION This report recommends that the City Councii conduct a public hearing and introduce for first reading an ardinance #o implement revisions to the design, development and afF- street parking standards fvr the Downtown. The ardinance is included as Attachment A_ BACKGRCJUND Qn September 13, 2005, Council conducted a public hearing regarding patential revisions to the design and development standards for #he Downtown. FolEowing the public hearing and discussion, Council directed staff to returr~ with an ordinance that would modify the Downtowr~ design and development standards ir~ the following areas: 1. Require minimum 18-foot floor-ta-#loar heights on the ground level of buildings in the Bayside {BSC) Dis#rict and ~ 5-foot floor-to-floor ground level heights in the C3 {Downtown Commerciaf) and C3C {Downtown C}verlay} districts; 2. Modify the landscaping requirements in the C3 and ~3C districts; 3. Modify the off-street parking requirements for small markets and restaurants; 4. Modify #he access requirements for off-s#reet parking; 5. Require delineation between the ground flaor and upper levels in the design of street-front building facades; 6. Address the treatment of new construction that is adjacent ta structures that are cansidered historic resaurces; and 7 1 ~Q~ -~ ~ ~~-~5 7. Review the propased standards and their impacts on the developmenfi of places af worship. ANALYSIS Minimum graund leve! floor-to-floor heighfs: The Council directed staff to prepare ordinance language to require minimum 18-foot floor'-to-floor heights on the ground level of buildings in the Bayside {BSC) Distric# ar~d 15-foot floor-to-floor ground-level heights in the C3 (Dawntown Cammercial) and C3C {Downtown Overlay) districts. The minimum ground-level floor heights are intended #o enhance pedestrian orientation and better accommodate street-oriented uses such as retail and restaurants which require higher ceiling heights to account for such things as ven#ing and duct work and to allow for mezzanine levels, particularly within restaurants. Although not expressly identified by Council, staff believes that an associated requirement that ground-fioar grades correspond with adjacent sidewalk grades is necessary to ensure that the Council's abjectives for ground-floor, sidewalk-arientation is achieved. The praposed ordinance includes this requirernent Existing development star~dards in the Downtown limit the building height but not the number of stories if at least one floor is residential. Without an accommodation for additional building height, the increased graund-floar heights for the antire ground floor could result in orte fewer floor of devefopment in the Downtown as the upper floors are "squeezed" to accommodate #he ground levels with greater flooe-to-floor heights. The squeeze is nat expected to create adverse irnpacts on the production of housing, excep# 2 on Seventh Street, where building heights are currently limited ta 50 feet. In assessing these potential impacts, staff reviewed the in#ormation used in the 200Q-2005 Housing Element Update relative to the inventary of existing sites suitable for housing development. This ir~formation indicates that at present there are 24 such parcels on Seventh Stree# which have the potential to accommadate approximately 638 residences based on current developmen# standards and trends in the area. The elimination of one flaor of residential to accommodate ir~creased ground-floor height could potentially resuft in the loss of approximately 148 residences or 23 percent of the patential total number of residences along Seventh Street; however, the potential for approximately 490 new housing units remains at these sites. In additior~, as most Downtown residential projects involve on-site or aff-site inclusionary affordable residences (rather than payment of in-lieu fees}, the proposed madifications could result in the production of fewer affordable residences. A five-foot increase in the maximum allowable height on Seventh Street in this area is expected #o alleviate the loss of housing potential. In other areas of the Down#own potential loss of units is less likely. Based on recent devefopment trends, little recent residential development has occurred in the BSG district. Parcefs in the G3 and C3C district located between 4th Court and f>t" Court, Colorado Avenue to Wilshire Batalevard permit building heights ranging between BO feet and 76 feet, so the impacts an housing produc#ion is not expected ta be significar~t. Staff believes that increasing the graund floar heights and the assaciated loss of housing poten#ial is not contrary to the Housing Element and the ~ity's required 3 cantribution to regional housing production, as multi-family housing production within the City has outpaced that required to achieve the Ci#y's fair share of regional housing needs. h~onetheless, the potential reduction of housing does represent a policy choice with regard to residential apportunities in the Downtown. Modify fhe landscaping requirements in the C3 and ~3C districts The Council also discussed the impacts of required site landscaping on the pedestrian environment in the Downtown and directed s#aff to include language in the ordinance that would modify the landscaping requiremer-ts in the C3 and C3C districts. Current Code requires that a landscaped area equal in square footage to 1.5 times the parcel's street frontage be installed between the building and the adjacent publie sidewalk. The Council's direction to stafF was to modify the requirements for landscaping in the can#e~ct of the pedestrian orientation of the area. Various approaches could be taken to addressing landscaping requirements. C}ne approach is to eliminate the specific numerical requirement #or landscaping in the C3 and C3C districts, and instead require landscaping pursuant to general directian. Such an appraach is intended to provide guidance in encouraging designers to approach landscape design as an integral element of building design. Recommended ordinance language related #o this approach follows: Subject to the review and approval of ~he Archifecfura! Review Board, landscaping sha11 be provided and incorporated into the pedestrian-oriented design elements required pursuant to SMMC Secfion 9.C?4.10.02.440. Landscaping is encouraged in front of expanses of blank wa11 along the building's sfreet-frant. Landscaping is discouraged rn fronf of sforefront dr"splay windows. 4 The City Attorney's Office has advised that this appraach may be inappropriate because it does not establish objective standards, as is cammon within ordinances. C}bjective standards could be accomplished through aligning the numerical requirement for landscaping in the C3 and C3C districts with the pedestrian-orientation requirements for those districts. Under this approach, 25 square feet af landscaped area would be required for every 50 #eet of frontage to reflect the pedestrian-ariented design standard requiring a minimum of 7p% of the ground floor fa~ade contain pedestrian-oriented design elements, including public entrances and eight-#aot display windows. Given the pedestrian-oriented design standards and #he fact that starefront display windows and entrances are generally required to comprise a majority af ground-floor street-fron# fa~ades, #he remaining parcel street-frontage that will require landscaping is significantly reduced. The resulting landscaped area standard is approximately ane-third of the generai code requirement for landscaped area, In addition, requiring landscaping along expanses of blank walls at the street-front and prohibiting landscaping in front of street- front display windows is congruent with an approach based ort clear, objective standards. Recommended ardinance language related to this approach follows: Subject ta fhe review and appravaJ of the Architectural Review Board, a landscaped area of 25 square feet per 5Q feet af parcel street frontage shall be provided and incorporated into the pedestrian-oriented design elements required pursuant to Section 9.04, ~0.02,440. The required area may be provided in any configurafion except fhat landscaping shall be required in front of blank walls along the building°s sfreet-front and prohibited in front of storefront display windows. Under either approach, staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board may modify these requirements if the modifcation enhances the pedestrian-orientation of the proposed project. 5 Modify the off-streef parking requirements for smaU markefs and resfaurants: In order to encourage a variety of activities and uses, including small restaurants and neighborhood markets, Council directed staff fio bring the parking requirements for these uses in line with other commercial uses. Markets and restaurants located in the BSC district do not have ta provide off-street parking as they are located within the Bayside Parking Assessment Distric#. For businesses located elsewhere, current Code requires 1 parking space for every 225 square feet of markets that are 5,000 square feet or less (the requirement is greater for larger markets}. Restaurants are required to provide: • 1 parking space per 75 square feet of dining and service area, • 1 space per 50 square feet af separate bar area; and • 1 space per 3C}0 square feet of support area, Regular retail, office and service businesses require 1 parking space per 300 square feet of floor area. Pro~iding an-site parking in the Downtown is expensive, as parking spaces are ger~erally located within subterranean parking garages. As a result, developers of mixed-use buildings generally lease their commercial spaces #a retail, affice ar service uses because a sufficient number of parking spaces has not been provided ta accommodate uses such as markets and restaurants that have a greater off-street parking requirement. Therefore, Downtown residents have a limited variety af businesses that serve their r-eeds. 6 UVithin the proposed ordinance, off-street parking requirements fior markets and res#aurants {without separate bar areas) that are 2,5t}(} square feet or less in the Downtawn are modi#ied to be consistent with the requirements far retail, office and service businesses. Standardizing the parking requirements makes sense from a number of perspectives. First, the Downtown area is the focal point far transi# in the City which reduces the need for vehicular travel. Second, the Downtown is also home to a large number of visitors, employees and residents who are potential patrans af these businesses and who would also not use vehicles. Third, there is a significant number of public parking structures in the area, including the soan-to-be-apened Main ~ibrary parking structure that would serve these businesses. Finally, from a practical standpoint, #he on-site parking spaces that are provided for these and other cammercial businesses are generally not utilized by patrons since vehicular access to the parking spaces is generafly from the rear alley and difficult to find. Reducing the off-street parking requirements for markets and restaurants 2,500 square feet or (ess wiN rtot significantly afFec# the supply of available on-street or off-site parking spaces because of the sma11 size of the establishments. Staff believes that #he proposed modificatian ta the off-street parking requirements for these businesses will provide opportunities for a greater variety of neighborhaod-serving uses in the Downtown, including small markets and restauran#s. Moreover, the parking standards will ensure adequate parking for emplayees of the establishments. ~ Modify the access requiremenfs for off-street parking: The Council direct staff to limit access to aff-street parking in the Downtown to alleys, restricting access and curb cuts from the street. This recommend~tion is intertded to enhance the pedestrian environment in the area by eliminating vehicle-pedestrian canflicts at #he sidewalks. The proposed ordinance language, which is identica~ to that reviewed by the Gouncil on September 13, 2005, does permit a modification to this requirement subject ta the review and approval of the Transportation Planning Manager and Zoning Administrator. Require delineativn between ground floors and upper levels in street-frant design: Council directed staff to propose ordinance language that would require a clear street- front distinction between the ground floor and upper floors of buildings. Staff has develaped three potential approaches to achieve this goal. t~ne approach is to simply state this objec#ive within the ordinance, as follows: In any new ;building or existing buildings with a recanstrucfed sfreet-front fa~ade, fhere sha11 be a clear delineation between the ground f/oor and the upper floors which is complementary fa the overall design of the building fa~ade. The City Attorney's OfFice has advised that i~ wauld be preferable for the ordinance to also provide examples of inethods #o achieve this delineation. The proposed ordinance language to achieve these objectives reads as follows: ln any new building or existing building with a reconstructed sfreef-front facade, fhere sha1l be a clear delineation be~ween the ground floor and the upper floors which is complerrrenfary to the overall design of fhe building fa~ade. Such delineation may include, but is not limifed to, design elements such as articulation, ehange in plane, change in co/ors and materials or fenestrafion. 8 The primary concern with this appraach is that is may resu{t in unintended design responses, such as ground floors that are recessed away from the sidewalk or exaggerated variations in materials. A third approach is to recognize that the proposed requirement for higher ground-floor floor-to-floor heights, in concert with the pedestrian-oriented design requirements which result in sidewalk entrances and increased glazing at the graund fioor, may be sufficient to create the desired delineation. Address the freatment of new constructlon adjacent to hisfaric resaurces.• The Council foNowed recommendation of inembers of the ~andmarks Commission in directing staff to propose development standards modifica#ions that wo~ald address the potential adverse impacts af new development or new construction that is adjacent ta buildings that are considered historic resources. The new standard requires that r-ew buildings or new cons#ruction that is within a 5-foot vertical distance from the carnice of the adjacent histaric resource be set back 10-feet from the adjacent side property line and the adjacent side wall of the new building or new construction have the same level o# fnish and detail as the front fa~ade. The ordinance language recommended by staff alfaws for a madification of this requirement by the Planning Commission, or the Architectural Review Board in the absence of Planning Commission review, if the modification enhances compatibility between the two buildings and compliance with the Secret2try of Interior's Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. 9 Review impacf of proposed sfandards on places of worship: Finally, in response to concerns raised by a member of a church located in the Downtawn, the Council asked staff to reUiew the proposed development standards #o~' their impac#s on the development of places of worship. Staff has reviewed existing development standards and the proposed modificatians and there are sufficient pravisions for modifications to these standards ta a11ow for the develapment of churches and other places of worship in the Downtown, including rnodifications to the requirements related to ground flaor height, pedes#rian orientation, fa~ade design and adjacent his#oric resources. Architec#ural Review Board input The Architectural Review Board {ARB) received public input and discussed the praposed modifications at their meeting of flctober 17, 2005. The public input and discussion focused on the impacts of the minimum 18-foot floor-to-floor heights on the ground level of buildings in the Bayside {BSC} Qistrict and 15-foot #loor-to-floor ground level heights in the C3 (Downtawn Commercial) and C3C {Qowntown Overlay) districts. The Board agreed with the public input that the minimum ground floor heights da not benefit the buildir~gs along the alley frontage and should be tied ta the ground flaor commercial ~ses. In addition, the Board disc~assed the impacts of the minimum ground filoor height requirements on affardable housing prajects. The BSC district requires pedestrian oriented uses wi#hin the frant 75 feet of the grc~und flaor of structures. The C3G district requires that buildings be designed at the ground ~o floor to accommadate pedestrian Qriented uses to a minimum depth af 50 feet from the front of the structure. The C3 district requires pedestrian oriented design of the s#reet- front fa~ade. In response to the ARB discussion, staff recommertds that the minimum 18-foot ground level floor-to-flaor height be applicable to the front 75 feet af buildings in the BSC and the minimum 15-foot ground-floor height be applicable ta the front 50 feet of buildings in the C3 and G3C districts. If these minimum graund level flaar-ta-floor heights were limited ta the front portions of the ground floor on1y, the impacts on housing praduction noted earlier could be reduced. This recommendation has been incorparated in#o the propased ordinance. The other issue related to #he minimum ground-floor heights discussed by the Baard dealt with the impacts on afFordable hausing pro~ects which may or may not include ground floor commercial uses. The Bt~ard was concerned that the increased ground floor heights could increase overall building heights above 50 feet {except on Seventh Street) which would require Type 111 construction, which is considerabiy more expensive and thus more burdensome to developers of affordable housing in the Down#own, The praposed ordinance incorporates the recommended exemption for affordable hausing. It is anticipated that the Baard will consider a formal recommendation an the proposed standards at their Navember 7, 2005 meeting which will be forwarded directly to the Council. 11 Development Review Threshold Recent direction from the Council has facused primarily on new Downtawn design standards. Through the Land Use Element and ~oning fJrdinance update process, review threshalds and application types and procedures will be considered comprehensively for the City as a whole. Therefore, the 7,5C10 square foot developmer-t review threshold for the Downtown established by Ordinance No. 2124 (CCS} is retained in the proposed ordinance. Prajects that exceed 7,504 square feet would require a Development Review Permit approved by the P{anning Commission or Council on appeal prior to ARB. In addition, the Development Review Permit threshold contained in Ordinance No. 2124 (CCS) for afFordable housing projects and certain categories of mixed-use prajects and residential projects that provide affordable off-si#e units would be retained at 30,400 square feet. General Plan Consistency The proposed text amendments are consistent with and reinforce the City's L~nd Use Element (LUE) palicies and objectives. Specifically, policies and objectives for the Downtown Core and Dawntown Frame ~and Use Districts are inter~ded to maintain #he Downtowr~ as the center of pedestrian aetivity for the City. The proposed ordinance is consistent with policies contained in the Land Use Element. Specifically, Policy #3.3.1 calls for maximizing provisians for pedestrian amenities at the ground floor street frontage, Policy #3.3.2 calls far ensuring the continuity af the sidewalk by limiting curb cuts, locating parking behind buildings or below grade and 12 Policy #3.3.C requires ground floor frontage to feature pedestrian oriented design features. Requiring greater floor-to-floar ground floor spaces ensures more useable ceiling heights and more functional and airy cammercial spaces, especially for res#aurants. Circulation Element PoHcy #4.7.8 requires City policy maximize the use of existing public parking in the Clowntown ar~d Palicy #4.T.9 encourages parking access from existing alleys that do not abut residential neighborhoods. A small reductian in the required on-site parking requirements for small markets and restaurants is consistent with this poficy as the use of the Dawntown public parking structures will be enhanced with the reduction in the requirement for private parking spaces. In additian, the limitation of curb cuts cantained in the ordinance will require alley access for on-site parking in the commercial and mixed-use Downtown area. The Land Use Element also cantains urban design policies and abjectives, specifically Policy #3.1.1 and Policy #3.1.3 which govern building form. These policies call far minimizing the perceived mass of buildings and the consideration of the character of historic resources in the design of new buildings. The proposed ordinance requires a clear delineatian befinreen the ground floor and upper floors of buildings which is consistent with Policy #3.1.1. Consistent wi#h Policy #3.1.3, the proposed ordinance requires special treatment to new buildings and new constructian that are praposed next to buildings that are considered historic resources. 13 Staff believes that increasing the ground floor heights without increasing building heights and the patential consequent lass of housing production would r~ot be contrary to the Housing Element. Specifically, the ~ity's contribution to regiona) housirtg production would not be affected as multi-family housing production within the ~ity has significantly outpaced that required to achieve the City's fair share contribution goal. Specifically, the City's regional "fair share" or housing unit goal as contained in the current Housing Element is 2,208 units. With 2,215 units completed and 566 units with building permits issued through June 30, 2005, the City has already greatly exceeded its housing unit production gaal. In addition, the ordinance language recommended by staff allows for a modification of this requirement by the Planning Commission, or #he Architectural Fteview Board in the absence of Planning Commission review. Conclusion The gaal for the Downtown is for a higher-quality pedestrian-oriented environment. The proposed te~ct amendments provide modifications ta development and desigr- standards that meet public policy inte~ntior~s to enhance the pedestrian experience in the Downtown. CEQA STATUS The project is categoricafly exempt (Class 5} from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Sectian 153C}5(a} of the State Implementation Guidelines in that the project involves a minor alteration in the land use limitations on parcels which have a slope of less than 20°!o ar~d does nat result in any change in land use or density. The proposed ordinance 14 enac#s madifications to existing development and off-street parking standards and the incorporation of design standards for buildings within the Downtown that da not increase the allowable floor area or modify the land uses permitted within the area. In addition, the modifications to the off-street parking requirements for small markets and res#aurants is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 which cavers the operation and permitting of existing priva#e structures and facilities involving no or a negligible expansion of use_ The praposed ordinance will not permit any expansion of an existing private structure or facility. In addition, the propased ardinance is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15061 {b)(3) which states that anly projects that have a potential for causing a significant effec# on the environment are subject to environmental review. Modifications ta building fa~ade and pedestrian-oriented design standards and the incorparation of development standards that require consideration of adjacent historic resources will not have significant environmental effects and will enhance the pedestrian environment in the Downtown. In addition, the modifications to the ofF-street parking requirements for small markets and restaurants in the Downtawn will not have a significant effec# on the environment since the Downtown area is the focal paint for transit in the City whieh reduces the need for vehicular travel and is home to a large number of visito~s, employees and residents who are potential patror~s of these businesses and wha would also not use vehicles. In addition, there is a significant number of public parking structures ir~ the area, including the saon-to-be-apened Main ~ibrary parking structure 15 that would serve these businesses and, from a practical standpoint, the on-site parking spaces that are provided for these and other commercial businesses are generally not utilized by patrons since vehicular access ta the parking spaces is generally from the rear alley and difficult to find. PUB~IC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to Government Cade Section fi58C}4, notice of the public hearing for the Te~ct Amendment was published in the "California" Section of the Los Anqeles Times newspaper at least ten cor-secutive calendar days prior to the hearing. Notice of the public hearing was also sent ta all neighborhood organizations, and posted on the City's Web site. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment B. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendation presented in this repart does not have any budget or fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATIC-N It is recommended that the Council intraduce for first reading the ordinance cantained in Attachment A. Prepared by: Andy Agle, Interim Director Amanda Schachter, Planning Manager Paul Foley, Principal Planner City Planning Division Plannir~g and Community Development Department ATTAC H M ENTS: A. Proposed Ordinance B. Notice of Public Hearing 'I B ATTACHMENT A PROPt7SED C}RDINANGE 17 F:iMunicipalLawiShareILRWSiBARRl'~Downtow~DesignOrd.dac City Cauncil Meeting 11-08-45 Santa Monica, California QRDINANCE NUMBER {CCS} (City Gour~cil Series) AN URDINANGE C}F THE GITY GQUNCI~ OF THE ClTY QF SANTA MONICA MODIFYING THE DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN, AND OFF-STREET PARKINC STANDARDS FGR PROJECTS DEVELC7PED WITHIN THE BSCC}, G3, AND C3G Z(~NING DISTRICTS, INC~UDING, BUT NQT LIMITED TO DESIGN STANQARQS FQR GRQUND FLOQR HEIGNT~, BUI~DING STREETFRONTS, ~RNQ~CRPING, SIDEWALLS ADJACENT TO HISTORIC RESOURCES, AND OFF-STREET PARKING AND ACCESS REQUIREMENTS 1IVHEREAS, since the early 1990's the City has promoted housing by creating s~bstantial incentives for developers to build such housing in the downtown area; and WHEREAS, during recent years, the City has experienced a boom in downtawn construction; and WHEREAS, some of the developers have taken advantage of the oppar~un'rty to build multiple, large, identical or nearly ide~tical projects on adjacent lots or on lots in close proximity pursuant to administrative appravals; and WHEREAS, these projects have often had a substar~tial impact on residents and businesses in the vicinity; and WHEREAS, the larger scafe developments have created adverse ~esthetic impacts which have affected the existing pedestrian scale ar~d character of the dawntown neighborhaods; and 1 WNEREAS, in light of these concerns the City Council adopted Clydinance Number 2058 (CCS) on November 12, 2002 which modified the development review thresholds for the BSG, C3, and C3C districts, Ordinance Number 2084 {CCS} on Navember 26, 2~02 which eactended the provisions of flrdinance Number 2058 {CC~} up to and including June 26, 20Q4 and 4rdinance Number 2124 (CCS) which esctended the provisions af C}rdinance Number 2058 {CCS) up to and including March 2007; and WHEREAS, these interim ordinances lowered the development review thresholds to 7,500 square feet in these distric#s; and WHEREAS, these interim ordinances provided staff with the time to reexamine the development and design standards curren#ly in plaee in the downtown area and propose changes as appropriate to improve the design, quality, and livability of development, #o create more precise development standards thereby achieving a more efficient and predictabie review process for applicants; and WHEREAS, the City hired ROMA Design Group to assist staff in developing these new standards; and WHEREAS, RQMA conducted individual intenriews with community members invalved in the dawntawn development process including architects, properky owners, developers, the Bayside District Corporation, ARB members, and Planning Commissioners; and WHEREAS, a community-wide workshop was held on Juiy 24, 2403 to discuss issues of concern and gather information; and 2 WNEREAS, the Planning Commissian and the Architectural Review Board conducted a joint meeting to discuss the propased amendments on September 10, 2003; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing to preliminarily review the proposals on October 28, 2003; and WHEREAS, the proposed te~ amendment would establish development standards and guidelines tha# better achieve the creation of an attractive streetscape environment and a strong sense of neighborl~ood as well as a more livable mixed-use district while maintaining the pedestrian orientation a# the downtown and WHEREAS, on March 3, 20Q4, the Planning Cammission held a public hearing to adopt a Resolution of Intention which stated the Commission's intention ta recommend madifications of the Gity's Zaning Ordinance to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2004 and March 24, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinances and recommer~ded that the City Council approve the proposed ordinances with certain specified madifications; and WHEREAS, the Gity Council considered the proposed ordinance on September 13, 20p5; and WHERERS, in light of the on-going update o~ the Land Use and Circulation Elements which will look at development in the Downtown in a much more comprehensive manner and until such time as the Land Use and Circulation Elements are updated and the policies af the ~and Use and Circulation Elements are impiemented by an amended Zoning Ordinance, the Gouncil directed staff to retum with more modest madificatians to current standards ta include minimum ground floar 3 heights, deslgn standards for building facades, landscaping, reduction in the reqcaired off-street parking for small neighborhood markets and restaurants, and treatment of new constructian adjacent to historic resaurces; and WHEREAS, empirical evidence suggests that an-site parking spaces for smalf commercial businesses, pa~ticutariy those in mixed-use buildings, are not u#ilized to their full extent as the spaces are difficult #a access sinee access to the spaces is generally pravided from the rear alley; and WNEREAS, reducing the off-street parking requirements for markets and restaurants 2,5Q0 square feet or less in size will not adversely impact the supply of available on-streefi or off-site parking spaces because of the small size of the establishments; and WHEREAS, the proposed ordinance is consistent in principle with the goals, abjec#ives, palicies, land uses, and programs specified in the adapted Land Use Element of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, ~and Use 4bjective #1.3 states: "Reinfarce Downtawn as the focus of the City, supporting fihe greatest concentration of activity, " Land Use Policy #1.3.4 s#ates that: "In the Downtown Care area, require that a majority of ground floor street firontage on a block by block basis be active pedestrian-oriented uses.... in order to promote pedestrian activity at the ground floor and in the Downtown Frame area, require pedestrian-oriented design features for all ground floor street frontage," ~anc# Use Policy #1.3.5 encourages residential uses in the Qowntown other than at the ground level and er~courages the provision of neighborhood commercial uses to serve the Downtown residential comrnunity; and 4 WHEREAS, Land Use Element Policy #3.3.1 calls for maximizing provisions for pedestrian amenities at the ground floar street frontage, Policy #3.3.2 calls for ensuring the continuity af the sidewalk by limiting curb cuts, lacating parking behind buiidings or below grade and Policy #3.3,6 requires ground fioar frontage to feature pedestrian oriented design features; and WHEREAS, requiring greater floor-to-floor heights at the ground level enhances pedestrian-ariented uses through mare useabie ceiling heights and more fiunctional and airy commercial spaces, espeeially for restaurants; and WHEREAS, the I~and Use Element also contains urban design policies and objectives, specifically Policy #3.1 _'f and Policy #3.1.3 which govern building farm; and WHEREAS, these palicies call far minimizing the perceived mass of buildings and the consideration of the character of historic resources in the design of new buildings; and WHEREAS, the praposed ordinance requires a clear delineation between the ground floor and upper floors of buildings which is cansistent with Policy #3.1.1 and Poliey #3.1.3 since }he proposed ordinance requires special treatment to new buildings and new cons#ruc#ion that are proposed next to buildings that are considered histaric resources; and WHEREAS, the proposed ordinance is also consistent in principle with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted Circulation Element of the Generaf Plan; and 5 WHEREAS, Circulation Element Policy #4.7.8 requires City policy maximize the use of existing public parking in the Downtown and Policy #4.7.9 encourages parking access fram existing alleys that da not abut residential neighborhoods. WF~EREAS, a small reduction in the required on-site parking requirements for small markets and restaurants is consistent with these policies as the use of the Downtown puk~lic parking structures will be enhanced with the reduction in the requirement for private parking spaces and the limitation of curb cuts contained in the ordinance will require alley access for on-site parking in the commercial and mixed-use Downtown area; and WHEREAS, ihe public health, safety, and general welfare require the adoption of the proposed amendment in that #he propased te~ct amendment, which proposes new project design and off-street parking standards, will provide for an enhanced pedestrian- oriented environment in the Downtown and help ensure for the sensitive treatment of new canstructian th~t is adjacent to historic resources, NOW, THEREFORE, TNE CITY COUNCIL QF THE GlTY OF ~ANTA MONICA DC}ES HEREBY QRDAIN AS FC}L~C7WS: SECTI(JIV 1. Santa Monica Municipal Cade Section 9.04.08.15.060 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 9.04.08.15.460 Property develapment standards. All property in the BSC Dis#rict shall be developed in accordance with the following s#andards: fi (a} Maximum Building Height and FAR. Maximum building height, number of stories and floor area ratio shall be determined as follows: District Maximum Maximum Maximum Height Number of FAR Stories BSC-1 5fi' 4 3.0 BSG-2 5fi' 4 3.0 BSC-3 5G" 4 3.0 BSC-4 45" 3 2.0 Notwithstanding the above: (1 } There shall be no limi#atian on the number of stories of any hatel, parking structure, or s#ructure containing at least one floor af residential use, so long as the height does not exceed the maximum number of feet permitted in this Section. (2} Floor area devoted to residential uses shall be discounted by fifty percent for the purposes of floor area ratia calculation. (3} Parcels of fifteen thousand square feet ar less within the Passageway Qverlay Zone, as depicted in the Bayside District Specific Plan, may be developed to a maximum height af eighty-four feet, and a 3.5 FAR pravided the #ollowing conditions are me#: (A} The tap twa floors are t~sed exclusively for residen#ial purposes; 7 (B} All inclusionary units required by Chapter 9.28 of this Code are provided on- site; (C) Parking for the residential uses is provided on-site, notwithstanding Section 9.04.1 d.08.034(m); (D} A passag~way dedicated to the City of Santa Manica as a recorded easement is provided; (E) The dedicated passageway is a minimum af twelve feet in width and is well lighted and visually unobstructed from the Promenade to the alley; (F} There shall be anly one dedicated passageway permitted an each side of each bloek; however, dedicated passageways existing as of the efFective date af the ardinance cadified in this Section shall not count toward this limit. (4} Wi#h the approval of a developmen# review permit, parcels over fifteen thousand square feet within the Passageway Overlay Zane, as depicted in the Bayside District Specific Plan, may be developed to a maximum height of eighty-four feet, and a 3.5 FAR provided the following conditions are met: (A) The top two floors are used exclusively for residential purposes; (B} All inclusianary units required by Chapter 9,28 of #his Cade are provided an- site; 8 (C) Parking for the residen#ial uses is provided on-site, notwithstanding Section 9.04.10.08.030(m); (D} A passageway dedicated to the City of Santa Monica as a recorded easement is provided; (E} The dedicated passageway is a minimum of twelve feet in width and is well ligh#ed and visually unobstructed from the Promenade to the alley; (F} There shall be only one dedicated passageway permitted on each side of each block; however, dedicated passageways existing as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this Sectian shall nat count toward this iimit. (5) With the approval of a development review permit, parcefs in the BSG2 and BSG-3 Districts may be develaped to a maximum height af eighty-four feet, and a 3.5 FAR provided the following conditions are met: {A} The top two floors are used exclusively for residential purposes; (B} All inclusionary units required by Chapter 9.28 of this Code are provided an- si#e; (C} Parking for the residential uses is provided on-site, notwithstanding Sectian 9.04.10.C}8.030(m). {fi} With apprvval of a Development Review Permit, in the BSC-2 Distric#, existing legal nanconforming buildings an different parcels may be connected by a bridge which 9 exceeds height limitations and FAFt limitatians for such parcels provided #hat the following conditians are me#: (R} The bridge contains no usable area other than that reasanably necessary for pedestrian circulation; {B} The height of the bridge is no higher than the existing buildings; {C} The bridge would not be detrimental to pu~lic health or safety; (D) Appropriate covenants or restrictions are recorded with the County Recorder's Office which state the intention of the owner(s} to develop the parceis as a single buildir-g site in accordance witf~ Section 9.Q4.Qfi.{}1 Q(g) of this Code. (b) Building Stepbacks. For new structures or additions to existing structures, any portion af a building elevation fronting on Second Street, Third Street Promenade or Fourth Street, above thirty feet in height shall be stepped back at a 3~6.9 degree angle rneasured from the horizontal. For buildings located in the Passageway Overlay Zone, there shall be no additional stepback requiremer~t above f'rfty-six feet of building height. In addition, for parcels one hundred feet in depth measured from V1/ilshire Boulevard, Arizona Avenue, Santa Monica Boulevard or Broadway (cross streets), any portian of a building elevation fronting on the cross street, above thirty feet in height, shall be stepped back fifteen feet from the cross street. The Architectural Review Board may a[low the fifteen-foo~ stepback to be provided anly for the portion of the building above forty-five feet in height if the Architectural Review Board determines that such a 10 stepback is necessary to maintain the district's existing charac#er and to pravide visual contin~aity with nearby structures. {c) Minimum Parcel Size. For all zoning classifications in the BSC District, minimum parcel size shall be seven thousand five hundred square fee#. Each parcel shall contain a minim~~m depth of one hur~dred fifty feet and a minimum width of fifty feet, except tha# legal parcels existing on the effective da#e of the ordinance codif'red in this Sectian shall not be subject to this requirement. (d} For all zoning classifications in the BSC District, a development review permit is required far any new development of more than ##i-~~ seven thousand five hundred 7( ,~~0) square feet of floor area and far any developmen# with rooftop parking, except the following projects shall be subiect to a development review permit if in excess of thirtv-thousand (30,000) sctuare feet: (1} Proiects that cantain a minimum of eiqhtv percer~t {80%) of floor area devoted to multi-family residential use provided that at least twentv percent (20°l0) of the housinq units are deed-restricted or restricted by an aqreement approved by the Citv for occupanc~y hauseholds with incomes of sixty percent (fi0°lo) of inedian income or less or at least ten_percent (10°10} of the housinq units are deed-restricted or restric#ed by an aqreement approved by the ~i#y for occupancy by househalds with incomes af fifty percen# (50°l0~ of inedian income or less. The required percenta~e of affordable housing units shall not apply to any State density bonus units provided in the project. 1'I {2) Affordable housing projects in which ane hundred percent (1 QO%) of #he housinc~units are deed-restricted or restricted by an aqreement appraved bv the Citv for occupancy by households with incomes of eiqhty percent (80°l0) af median income or less. (3) The repuiremer~ts of subdivision ~1~ of this sub~ectiort (d) ma}~also be met throu~h the ~rovision of ofF si#e affordabfe housing units subiect to the follawing provisions: ~A~ The number of off-site affardable housinq units provided by the proiect shall be at least #wentY-five percent (25%} qreater than the number of on-site units that would have been provided by the proiect to meet the requirements of subdivision (1) of this subsection {d) of this Sectior~. (B} The off-site affordable housing units shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of subsections (b) throuqh ~g} of Section 9.5f.06~ of this Code. ~C} The off-site affordable housinq units shall be located in an affordable housing proiect in which ane hundred percent {100°l0) of the housinq units are deed-restricted or restricted bv an agreement approved by the City in accordance with the follawing affordability levels; (i) At least _ fifty percent (50°!0~ of the housin,g units in the affardable housing project shall be affordable to law ~60°l0 of inedian income) or verv low (50°l0 of inedian income) income households, and 12 ~ii) The remaininq housinq units in the affordable housinq proiec# sha11 be affordable to moderate (140% of inedian income} law or verv low income h~usehalds. ~D} The affordable hausinq pro,~ecfi shall be developed to the maximum allowable filoor area for the zone in which the pro[ect is develaped consistent with the CitX's architectural design standards. Square footage devoted ta residential use shall be reduced by fifty percent when calculating whether a development review permit is required. SECTlON 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.~4_08_15.470 is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec#ion 9.04.08.'15.070 Special project design and development standards. !n all zoning classifications in the BSC District the following special project design and development standards shall apply: (a) In anv new buildinq or existing building with a recor~structed streetfront f~ade #here shall be a clear delineation between the qround floor and the upper floors which is complimentar~t to the overall desiqn of the buildinc~ farade. Such delineatiort may include~ but is not limited to design elements such as articulation, chanqe in plane, change in colors and materials, or fenestration. 13 (b) The qround flaor entries shall be at the same prade as the adiacent public sidewalk. The finished filoor level of the qround floor shall be no more than six {fi) inches abave or belaw the grade of the adjacent sidewalk. {c) The c~raund floor level flaor-to-floar height shall be a minimum of eiqhteen (18,} fee# within th~ front seventy-five (75~ feet of the building. Affordabfe housinq proaects as defined in Sectian 9.04.02.030.425 shall nat be subiect to this subsection ~ (d) The Planninq Commission, ar the Arehitectural Review Board in the absence of Planninct Commission review, mav modify the reauirements of subsections (b) and (c) above if the fallowin~ findin~s of fact can be made in an affirmative manner: (1) That the strict application of the pravisions of this Chapter wauld result in practical difficulfies or unnecessarv hardships inconsistent with the general purpase and intent of this Chapter or that there are exceptional circumstances ar conditions applicable to the proposed development that do not appl r}_,qenerallv to other develapments covered by this Chapter; and (2) That the grantinq af an exception would nat adversely affect surroundinq properties or be detrimen#al to the district's pedestrian-ariented environment. (ae} Ground floor uses shall be pedestrian-oriented uses for a minimum depth of seventy-five feet measured from the front of the structures. 14 {bf} In any new or recanstructed building, a minimum of seventy percent of the building facade at the stree# frontage at the graund floor level shall be designed wi#h pedestrian orientati~n, in accarc#ance with Section 9.04.10.02.440 of this Chapter, unless precluded by the presence of significant existing architectural features. (sg) In any new or reconstructed building, clear untinted glass shall be used at the ground floor level to allow maximum visual access to the interior of buildings. Mirrored ar~d highly reflective glass s~tall not be permitted at any level of a structure. t~h} In any E~ew ar reconstructed building, walk-up facilities shall be recessed and provicie adequate queuing space to avoid interruption of the pedestrian flow. {ei} Security grills at the street level shall be designed as an integral component of the building, shall be of the roll-down type, shall have an apen web sufficient to provide visibility to the in#erior when the grill is in the closed position, and shall be placed to the interiar of the outside glass. ~} For new buildinqs or additions to exis#incLbuildinqs that are ad~acent to buildin~s identified as historic resources, all partions of the new buildinq or addition lacated within a five L) foot vertical distance from the cornice of the adiacent historic resource shall be stepped back ten feet from the adjacent side • property line and the adjacent side wall shall be designed with the same level of finish and detailinq as the front fa~ade of the new construction. The Plannir~q Cammission, or Architectural Review Board in the absence of Planninq 15 Commission review may modify this requirement if #he followinq findinqs of fac# can be made in an ~~ffirmative manner: (1 } The propased modification enhances the compatibility of the new construction and the historic resource~ and (2} The prot~osed modifica#ion camplies with the Secre#at~.,of Interior's S#andards for the R~:habilitation of Nistoric Structures. SECTION 3. Section 9.04.08.18.060 is hereby amended to the Santa Monica Municipal Code to read as follows: Section 9,84.08.18.Ofi0 Property development standards. All property in the C3 District shall be developed in accordance with the fallowing standards: ~a} Maximum Building Heigh#. Three stories, not ta exceed farty-five feet, except for the following: (1} Far parcels in the area bounded by 5th Caurt, fith Court, Golorado Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard, the maximum height shall be five stories, sixty feet; provided, there is no retail abave the first floor and only residential uses above the second floor. ~2} For parcels in the area bounded by fth Court, ?th Court, Colorado Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard and the north side of Wilshire Boulevard betweer~ 2nd ~treet and 7th Street, the r~aximum height shall be four stories, fifty feet; provided, there is no retail above the first floor and only residential uses above the second floor. 1fi There shall be no limitatian on the number of stories of any hotel, detached parking s#ructure, or structure con#aining at least ane floor of residential use, so long as the height does not exceed the maximum number of feet permitted in this Section. (b~ Maximum Floor Area Ratio. 2.0, except that in the area bounded by ~th Court, 7th Court, Colorado Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard, and the area an the north side of Wilshire Boulevard between 2nd Street and 7th Street, #he FAR for commercial square footage shall not exceed 1.5. Floar area devoted ta residential uses shall be counted at fifty per~ent. (c) Minimum Lot Size. Seven thousand five hundred square feet. Each parcel shall contain a minimum depth of one hundred fifty feet and a minimum width of fiifty feet, except that parcels existing on the effective date of this Chapter shall not be subject to this requirement. (d} Front Yard Setback. Landscaping as required pursuant to the provisions of . . ~ectian 9.04.08.18.Q65{f}. (e} Rear Yard Setback, None, except: ~1} Where rear parcel line abuts a residential district, a rear yard equal to: 5` + (stories ' lot width) 5{J' The required rear yard may be used for parking or loading #o wi#hin five feet of the rear parcel line; ~rovided, the parking ar loading does not extend above the first 17 floor level; and pravided, tha# a wall not less than five feet or more than six feet in height is erected and maintained along the rear commercial parcel line. Access driveways shall be permitted to perpendicularly cross the required rear yard; provided, the driveway does not exceed the minimum wid#h permitted fior the parking area. A required rear yard sha11 not be used for commercial purposes. (2} That needed to accommodate landscaping and screening for a rear yard buffer required pursuant to the provisions of Part 9.Q4.10.04. (fl Side Ya~d Setback. None, except: ~1} Where the interior side parcel line abuts a residential distric#, an ir~#erior side yard equal to: 5' + Sstories " lot width) 50' The interior side yard may be used for parking or loading no closer than five feet to the interior side property line; provided, the parking or loading does not extend abave the first floar level; ar-d provided, a wall nat ~ess than five feet ar more than six feet in height is erec#ed and maintained along the side commercial parcel line. A required interior side yard shall nat be used for access ar for commercial purposes. {2) That needed #o accommodate landscaping required for a street side yard, landscape buffer an~ screening pursuant to the provisions of Part 9.04.10.04. 18 (3} A ten-faot setback from an interior property line shall be required for portions of buildings #hat contain windows, doors or other openings into the interior of the building. An interi~r side yard less than ten feet shall be permitted if provisions of #he Uniform Building Code related to fire-rated openings in side yards are satisfied. (g) Development Review, A development review permit is required for any development of mare than #~~y` seven thousand five hundred 7f ,500) square feet of floor area, except , , , the foilowinq pro~ects shall be subject to a develapment review permit if in excess of thirty-thousand ~0,000} square feet: (1} Proiects that contain a minimum of eic~htv percent {80°10) of floor area devo~ed to multi-farnily residential use provided that at least finrentv percent (2~°l0) of the housinq units are deed-restricted or restricted by an aqreement approved by the City for occupancy by households with incomes of sixty percent (60°!0) o# median incame or less or at least ten percent (10°/fl) of the housinc~ units are deed-restricted or restricted bv an aqreement approved by the City for occupancy by househalds with incomes of fiftv percent (5Q°14~ of inedian incame or less The required percentage of affordable housinq units shall not apply to anv State density bonus units provided in the projec#. 19 ~2} Affordab~e housing projects in which one hundred percent (10Q°lo) of the housinq units are deed-restricted or restricted by an aqreemen# approved by the City for occuqancv by households with incomes of eic~hty percent (84°l0) of median income or less. j3} The requirements af subdivisian (1} af this subsection (q} may also be rnet through the provision of off-si#e affordable housin~ unrts subiect to the following provisions: (A) The number of off-site affardable housin~ units provided by #he project sha1E be at least twentv-five percent (25°!0) greater than #he number of on-site units that would have been provided by the praiecfi #o meet the rectuirements of subdivision (1) of this subsection (q} af this Section, (B} The off-site afFordable housinq units shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of subsections (b) throuc~h (q} af Section 9.56.060 of this Code. ~C~he off=site affardable housinq units shall be located in an affordable housinq pro~ect in which one hundred percent ~100°10) of the housinq units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the Citv in accordance with the followin~ affordability levels: !i~ At least fiftv percent 5~%} of the housing units in the affardable housin~ project shall be affordable to low {60°~0 of inedian income) or verv !ow 50°10 of inedian income income households and 20 (ii) The rem~ininq housing units in the affardable housinq project shall be affordable to moderate {100°l0 of inedian income), low or verv low income households. (D) The affordable housing proiect shall be developed to the maximum allawable #loor area fc-r the zane in which #he project is developed consistent with the City's archi#ectural desiqn standards. Square foatage devoted to residential use shall be reduced by fifty percent when calculating whether a develapment review permit is required. (h) Maximum Uninterrupted Building Facade. Every one hundred feet of building facade at the street frontage shall con#ain at leas# one public entrance or o#her publicly accessible pedestrian-oriented use. (i} Ground floor street frontage of each structure shall be designed with pedestrian-orientation in accordance with Section 9.04.10.a2.444 af #his Chapter. {j} The Planning Commission may exempt municipal buildings from the requirements af subsections (h} and (i) of this Sectian if both of the follawing ~ndings of fact can be made in an affirmative manner: {1) That the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties ~r unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter or that #here are exceptianal circums#ances or conditions applicable to the proposed development that do not a~ply generally to other development covered by this Chapter; 21 (2) That the granting of an exception would not adversely affect surraunding properties or be detrimental to the district's pedestrian oriented environment. SECTION 4. Sectian 9.04.08.18.065 is hereby added to #he ~anta Monica Municipal Code to read as follows: Sectian 9.Q4.08.'18.OG5 Special project desiqn and develapment standards. {a) In anv new buildina or existinq buildinq with a reconstructed streetfront facade, there sha11 be a clear delineation be#ween the ground floar and the upper floors which is complimentarv to the overall desi~n of the building fa~ade. Such delineation mav include, but is not limited to desiq~ elements such as articulatian change in plane chanqe in colors and materials, or fenestration. ~b) The qround floor entries shall be at the sarne grade as the adjacent pubfic sidewalk. The finished floor level af the c~round floor sha11 be no mare than six {6) inches above or below the grade of the adiacent sidewalk. (c) The qround floar levei floor-to-floor height shall be a minimum of fifteen~l5~ feet within the front fiftv (5p) feet of the building. Affordable housing projec#s as defined in Section 9.04.02.030.025 shall not be s~bject #a this subsection (c): 22 (d) The Planning Commissian, or the Architectural Review Board in the absence of Plannin~ Commission review, may modif~the requirements of subsections (b and c~ of this Section if the follawinq findinqs af fact can be made in an affirmative mar~ner: {1) That the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter wauld result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter or that there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the ~roposed development that do not a~ply generally to o#her developments couered by this Chapter; and (2) That the grantinq of an exception would not adversely affect surroundinq proqerties or be detrimental to the district's pedestrian-oriented environment. (e} For new buildings or additions to existinq buildings that are adjacent to buildinc~s #ha# are considered historic resources all ~aortians of the new building or addition within a five f5) faot vertical dFS#ance from the cornice of the adiacent histaric resource shall be s#epped back ten fee# firom the adjacent side propertV line and the ad~acent side wall shall ~e desiqned with the same level of finish and detailinq as the front fa~ade of the new construction. The Planninq Commission or Architectural Review Board in the absence of Planning Cammission review may modifv this requirement if the fallowinq findinqs of fact can be made in an affirmative manner: (1) The proposed modifcation enhances the campatibility of the new construction and #he historic resouree~ and (2) The propased madificatian complies with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Rehabilifiation of Histaric Structures_ 23 (fl Subiect to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Baard, a landscaped area of finrenty-five ~25} square feet per fifty ~50} feet of parcel street frantage shall be t~rovided and incorporated into the pedestrian-oriented desi~n elements required pursuant to Sec#ion 9.04.10.02.440. The required area may be pravided in any confiquration excet~t that landscaping shall be required in front af blank walls along the building's streetfront and prohibi#ed in front of storefront display windows. The Architectural Review Board may madify this landscapin~ requirement if the followinq findinq af fact can be made in an affirmative manner: ~1~The modifica#ion to the requirements set forth in subsection (~f of this Section would enhance the aedestrian-orientation of the proposed proiect and is consistent with the qeneral purpose and in#ent of the Santa Manica Municipal Cade and the General Plan. SECTION 5. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.20.070 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 9.04.08.20.070 Special project design and development standards. (a) In any new building or existinq buildinq with a reconstructed streetfront facade, there shall be a clear defineation between the qround floor and the upper floors which is complementary to the overall design at the buildin~~ade. Such delineation maY include, but is not limited to, desiqn elements such as articulation~ chanqe in plane chan~e in calors and materials or fenestratian. 24 (b~ The ground floor entries shall be at the same ~rade as the adiacent public sidewalk. The finished floor level of the ,~round flaor shall be no more t~an six (6) inches above or below the grade af the ad~acent sidewalk. ~) The ground floor level floar-#o-floor heiqht shall be a minimum of fifteen (15} fee# withir- the front fiftv (50) feet of the buildin~. Afforda~le housing proLects as defined in Section 9.04.02.030.025 shall not be subiect to this subsectian (c}. (d) The Planning Commission, or the Architectural Fteview Board in the absence of Planning Commission review, may modify the requirements of subsections (b) and (c) above if the fallawing findings of fact can be made in an afFirmative manner: {1~ That the strict applicatian of the provisions of this Chapter would result in praetical difficulties or unnecessary hardshi~s ineonsistent with the ,qeneral purpose anc! intent of this Cha~ter or that there are exceational circumstances or conditions applicable ta the proposed developmenf that do not apply enerally to other developments covered by this Chapter; and {2) That the _ rq anting of an exceptian would not adversely affect surroundinq properkies or be detrimental to the district's pedestrian-oriented er~vironment. {e} Far new buildinc~s or additians ta existing buildings that are adjacent to buildings tha# are considered historic resources, all portions of the new buildinq or addition within a five (~) faat vertical distance from the carrrice of the adiacent historic 25 resource shall be stepped back ten feet fram the adjacent side ~roperky line and the adjacent side wall shall be desiqned with the same level of finish and detailinq as the front fa~ade of the new construction. The Planning Commission or Architec#ural Review Board in the absence of Planninq Commissian review, may modifv this requirement if the following findinqs of fact can be made in an affirmative manner: ~1} The proposed modification enhances the comc~atibility between the new canstruction and the historic resource~ and ~2} The proposed modification complies with the SecretarV of interior's Standards for the Rehabili#ation of Historic Structures. (af} Ground floor street frontage of each structure shall be designed with pedestrian orientation in accordance with uection 9.Q4.1 ~.02.440 of this Chapter and desigr~ed to accammadate pedestrian-oriented uses ta a minimum depth of fifty feet from the front of the structure. (g} Subjeet to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Board, a landscaped area af twenty-five ~25~ square feet per fifty {50} feet of parcel street frar~tage shall be provided and incorporated in#o the pedestrian-oeiented desic7n elements required pursuant to Section 9.04.10.42.444, The required area may be provided in anv confiiquration except that landscaping shall be required in front of blank walls alan~ the buildinc~'s streetfron# and prohibited in front of s#orefront displav windows. The Architectural Review Board may modi~jr this landscaping requirement if the follawing findinq of fact can be made in an afFirma#ive manner: 26 ~1} The modification to the requirements set forth in subsection (g) of this Section would enhance the pedestrian-orientation of the proposed proiect and is consistent with the general purpose and in#ent of the San#a Monica Municipal Cade and the General Plan. (bh) A development review permit is required for any new develapmen# of more #han ~~ seven thousand five hundred 7~ ,500} square feet af floor area and for any develapment with roaftop parking~ except the following pro~ects shall be subject to a development review permit if in excess of thiy-thousand ~30,000~ F s~uare feet: ~1 } Projects that con#ain a minimum of eighty percent (80°l0) of floar area devoted to mul#i-family residential use,_provided that at leasfi iwenty percent (2a°1o} of the hausinc~ units are deed-restricted or restricted by an aqreement approved by the Cit~r for occupanc~r by households with incomes of sixty percent {60°fo} af inedian incame or less ar at least ten percent {10°l0} af the housing units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the Ci#x far occupancv bV households with incomes of fifty percent (50%~ of inedian income or less. The required percentage of affordable housinq uni#s shall no# applv ta any State dens'rty br~nus units provided in the project. (2) Affardable housinq pro~ects in which one hundred percent ~100%} of the housing units are deed-restricted or restricted bv an aqreement appraved bv the Citv for occupancy by households with incames of eic~htk ,percent (84°l0} of mediart income or IESS. 27 ~3} The requirements of subdivision (1} of this subsection (h) mav also be met throu~h the pr•ovision of off-site affordable housinq uni#s subiect to the fallowinq provisions: (A) The number of off-site affordable housing units ~rovided by the proiect shall be at least finrentv-five percent (25°f~) qreater than the number of on-site units that would have been provided bY the_project to meet the requirements of subdivision (1) of this subsection (h} af this Section. (B~ The off-site affordable housing units shall be developed in aecordance with the requirements of subsections ~b) throuql~ (q} of Sectiorr 9.56.060 of this Code_ (C) The off-si#e affordable hausing units sha11 be located in an afFordable housinq proiect in which one hundred percent (100°l0) of the housin~ units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreemer~t approved bv #he City in accordar~ce with the following affordability levels: (i) At least fiftv ~ercent (5Q%} of the housinq units in the affordable housing pro~ect shall be affordable to low {60°10 of inedian income) or very low ~50°l0 of inedian ir~came) incame households, and (ii) The remaininq housinq uni#s in the affordable housinc~project shall be affordable ta moderate {100°!0 of inedian income), low ar very law income househalds. ~I~The affordable housinq pro1ec# shall be developed to the maximum allawable floor area for the zone in which theproject is developed consistent with the City's architectural desiqn standards. 28 Square footage devoted ta residential uses shall be reduced by fifty percent when calculating whether a development review permit is required. SECTIC>N 6. Sant~a Manica Mur~icipal Code Sectian 9.04.1 Q.04.064 is hereby arnended to read as follows: Sectian 9.d4.10.p4.060 Required landscape area for building sites. ~a) In all residential districts, including the RVC District, a minimum af fifty percent of the required front and side yard setback shall be landscaped, except that for parcels less than fifky feet in width, fifty percent of one side yard shall be landscaped. In C}P-1, C}P-2, QP-3, and QP-4 Districts, all areas not cavered by sidewalks, driveways, porches, garages or buildings, shall be treated as landscaped areas, as defined in this Ghapter. (b} In the C2, „ „' C4, Cfi and BGD Districts, a landscape area equal in square footage to one and one-half times the street frontage of the parcel shall be pravided adjacent ta each public street right-of-way. The required area may be provided in any canfiguration except that no portion of the building sha11 be located between the landscape area and the public right-of-way and only areas within ten feet of the parce! line shall coun# toward this requirement. For purposes of this Section, landscape areas shall be cansidered to be in-ground planters and shall not include hardscape. The landscape requirements for the C2, ~~~~, C4, C6 and BCD Districts may be madified subject to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Board if the Board determines that an alternative landscape configuratian would meet the abjectives o# this requiremenfi. The Architectural Review Boarci may require either more or less 29 landscaping than w~uld otherwise be required by this ~hapter if the following findings are made: (1 } That the strict applicatian of the provisions of Sectian 9.04.1 fl.44.06C?(b) wauld resul# in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of the Santa Monica Municipal Cade and the Land Use Element ar that there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the proposed project tha# do not apply generally ta other sites covered by the Section; (2~ That the granting of a~andscape Setback Adjustment would not adversely affect public welfare, and would not be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the surraunding area; {c) For all new construction or major remodeling in the C5 Special Office District, a landscaped area at least fifteen feet wide shall be provided and maintained immediately adjacent to all property lines adjacent to streets or rights-of-way except in required driveway or other access areas. SECTIaN 7. Santa Monica Municipa[ Cade Section 9.04.10.Q8.040 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 9.04.10.08.Q40 Number af parking spaces required. Parking space requirements are indicated in Table 9.04.10.08.040. 30 TABLE 9.04.10.~8.Q40 RESIDENTIAL (FA = f[oor area) Use Minimum C1ff-Street Parking Requiremen# Artist studio 1 space for each 754 sq. ft. of residential area, minimum of 1 space. 1 space for each 404 sq. ft. af manufacturing space. 1 space for each 300 sq. ft. of retail gallery space. Visitor spaces 1 space per 5 res'sdential units (applies to projects of 5 ar more residential units}. Boarding homes 0.5 space per unit plus ane guest space per 5 units. Boarding hames deed 0.25 space per unit plus one restricted to law and rryaderaie guest space per 5 units. income Condominiums: Studio, no bedrooms 1 cavered space. 1 or more I~edraoms 2 covered spaces per Unit. Visitor spaces 1 space per 5 units {applies to prajects of 5 or mare units}. Maximum Percent Compact Spaces Allowed None 40 40 40 40 40 None None 44 31 Congregate housing 1 space per 5 beds. 40 Detached single family units 2 spaces in a garage per dwelling unit. Detached single family units 2 spaces in a garage which on lats of 30 ft. or less in width may be in a tandem arrangement. Detached single famify units 2 spaces in a garage per an Pacific Coast Hwy. narth af dwelling unit. ' Santa Monica Pier {LCP ' Subarea 1a} Visitor spaces 2 per dwelling unit {may be Domestic violence shelters Fraternity-type housing with sleeping facilities Homelsss shelters Multi-family residential: , Studio, no bedrooms 1 bedroom 2 or mare bedrooms Visitar spaces tandem). .5 space per bedroom. 1 space per bed. 1 space per 10 beds. 1 covered space. 1.5 space per unit. 2 spaces per unit. 1 space per 5 units {applies ta prajects of 5 or mare units). Any surface parking shall be provided in the rear half of the residential lot. None None None None 40 40 40 None None None 40 32 Muiti-family housing deed- restrict ed for accupancy by low and moderate incame households Studia, no bedrooms 1 space per unit. 40 1 bedroam 2 bedroorr, or largsr Visitar Seniar group housing and senior housing ! Senior group housing and seniar housing that is deed restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the City #or low and moderate incame 1 space per unit. 1.5 spaces per unit. 1 space per 5 units {applies to projects of 5 or more units). 0.5 space per unit plus 1 guest space per 5 units. 0.25 space per unit plus 1 guest space per 5 units. Single-room occupancy 0.5 space per unit plus 1 guest space per 5 units. Single-room occupancy deed 0.25 space per unit plus 1 restricted to law and moderate guest space per 5 units. income ( Transitional housing 0.5 space per bedroom plus 'I guest space per 5 units. 40 40 4Q 4Q 4C} 4fl 40 40 33 Ct7MMERCIAL (FA = floor area) Use Minimum Oif-Street Parking Maximum Percent Requirement Compact Spaces Allowed Automobile rental 1 space per 504 sq. ft, of FA plus 1 4~1 agency space per 1,000 sq. ft. of outdoor rental starage area.* Automobile repair 1 space per 500 sq. #t. of non-service 4~ bay FR pius 2 spaces per service bay. * * No required off-street parking space shall be used for sale, rental or repair of autos. Automobile ssrvice 3 spaces ifi for full service station, 1 station with ar space if for self service stat'son, plus 1 without mini-mart space for each 100 sq. ft. of retai#, and requirements for automobile repair where applicable Automobile sales 1 space per 40Q sq. ft. of flaor area for showroom and office, plus 1 space per 2,040 sq. ft. of exterior display area and requirements for automobile repair where applicable, plus 1 space per 300 sq. ft. for the parts department. 40 Auto washing {self- 2 spaces for each washing stall, not None service or coin including the stall. operated} General office 1 space per 300 sq. ft. af FA. 4Q Hotels, ma#els 1 space per guest roam plus 1 spaee for each 200 sq. fk. used for meetings and banquets. Other uses such as bars and restaurants which are open to the general public shall provide parking as required by #his Section. 40 34 Lurnber yards, plant 1 space per 300 sq. ft. of FA for nurseries interiar retail plus 1 space per 1,000 sq. ft. of autdaor area devated ta display and starage. Market of less than 1 space per 225 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft., liquor store Markets 2.500 sq. ft. 1 space per 300 sq. ft. ar less in the BSC[?~ C3 and C3C districts Markets with floor area greater than 5,000 sq. ft. 1 space per 250 sq. ft. Restaurant: Restaurants 2.500 1 space per 300 sq. ft 4Q 40 4a 40 40 sq. ft. or less with no separate bar area located in the BSCD. C3 and C3C districts Restaurant 'I space per 300 sq. ft. af support area, 1 spaee per 75 sq. ft. of service and seating area apen to custamers, and 1 space per 50 sq. ft. of separate bar area. Fast food, take-out , 1 space per 75 sq. ft. of FA. Minimum drive-in , drive- of 5 spaces must be provided. through restaurants Bars and nightclubs 1 space per 50 sq. ft af FA. (dance halls, discos, etc.} Portions of restaurants that include bars shall be calculated using this standard. 40 44 40 35 Retail: Retail, general and 1 space per 300 sq. ft. of FA. 40 service Retail, fumiture and 1 space per 500 sq. ft. af FA. 40 large appliance EDUGATlONAL1CU~TURA~ (FA = floor area) Use Minimum Off-Street Parking Maximum Percent Requirement Compact 5paces Allawed Auditoriums 1 space per 4 fixed seats. ~~ Day care: Small family day Na requirement abave that required far Not applicable care home the existing residence. Large family day Na requiremen# abave that required for Nat applicable care home the existing residence. PreschooE nursery 1 space per 500 sq. ft. af building 40 schools, day care area. centers excluding largelsmall family day care Librariss 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of FA. 4a Museums and 1 space per 300 sq. ft. af FA. 4~ galleries Private elementary 10 spaces plus 1 per classraam. 40 SCh4QIS ~s Private junior high 30 spaces plus 1 space per schools classraom. Private high schoo~s 50 spaces plus 4 spaces per classroom. Private colleges, 1 space per 80 sq. ft. of assembly area professional {including cCassraom area) ar 1 space business or trade per each 4 fixed seats, whichever is schoals greater. Stadiums 1 space per 5 seats. HEA~TH SERVICES (FA = flaor area) Use Minirnum Off-StreetParking Requirement Convalescent homes, residential care facilities cammunity care facilities, rest hame, residential facilities for ~ or more persons 1 space per 5 beds. Hospice facilities Hospitals and medical centers Massage 2 spaces. 1 space per 2 beds plus 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of FA far outpatient use. 1 space per 340 sq. ft. af FA. 4Q 40 40 44 Maximum Percent Compact Spaces Allowed 44 40 44 $7 Medical and dental 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of FA. offices and clinics including physical therapists, acupuncturists and chiropractors, 1,000 sq. ft. or greater tatal FA per building Medical and dentai 1 space per 3C1(~ sq_ ft_ of ~A. offices and clinics incEuding physical therapists, acupuncturists and chiropractors , less than 1,Q00 sq. ft. #otal FA per building 40 40 Mental hea#th 1 space per 300 sq. ft. 40 prafessianals Residential care No requirement beyand that required facilities with a for the residence. capacity af 6 or fewer residents Veterinarians, 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of FA. animal and veterinary hospitals Not applicable 44 38 INDUSTRIA~ USES (FA=flaor area} Use Minimum Off-Street Parking Maximurn Percent Requirement Compact Spaces Allowed Film praduction studio 1 space per 400 sq. ft. of st~dio 40 production space, 1 space per 300 sq. ft. af editing FA, 1 space per 300 sq. ft. of administrative offiee. Light and limited 1 space per 400 sq. ft. of FA far 40 industrial manufacturing manufacturing plus 1 space per 300 sq. ft. of FA for affice use. Mini-warehousingl 3 space per 4,000 sq. ft. of FA 44 storage far manufacturing plus 1 space per 30Q sq. ft. af Ff~ for office use. Warehouse . 1 space_~er 1,000 sq. ft. 40 39 COMMERCtA~ ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION {FA=floor area} Use Minimum Off-S#reet Parking Requirement Maximum Percent Compact Spaces Allowed Bawling alleys Billiard or poal parlors, roller or ice skating rinks, exhibition halls and assembly halls without fixed sea#s, including assembly areas within community centers, private cl~bs, lodge halls and unian headquarters 2 spaces per lane, plus 50°lo Of requirements for related commercial uses. 1 space per 8Q sq. ft. of FA of assembly area. Health clubs, indoor 1 space per 80 sq. ft. of exercise athletic facilities and area, 1 space per each 300 sq. exerciseldance studios ft. of locker room/sauna/shower area, plus applicable code requirement far other uses. Theaters, cinemas (single and multi- screen) and other places of assembly 1 space per 4 fixed seats or 1 space per 80 sq. ft. of FA of assembly area, whichever is g reater. Tennis, handball, racquetball and other athletic caurt facilities 2 spaces per court plus 1 space per 80 sq. ft. of spectator area ar 1 space per 4 fixed seats, whichever is greater. 40 4Q 44 40 40 40 MISGELLANEOUS (FA=floar area} Use Minimum Qff-Street Parking Requirement Maximum Percent Compact Spaces a~ioW~a Plac~s of worship and other places of assembly including martuaries, banquet facilities and canvention facilities 1 space per 80 sq. ft of FA of assembly area, ar 1 space for each 4 fixed seats, whichever is greater, plus requirements for ather uses as applicable. 40 SECTIQN 8.Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.08.090 is hereby amended to read as fallows: Section 9.04.10.08.090 Parking access in non-residentiaf districts. The following parking access requirements shall apply to the Commercial and Industrial Districts: {a) Proiects in the BSC, ~3 for that area located betweer- #he centerlines of Colorado Avenue to the south and Wilshire Boulevard to the narth, and C3C zoninq districts shall access on-site parkinq from the alley and ~non-residential or mixed use projects located in other commercial zoning districts requiring ten or fewer parking spaces shall nat be permitted to have any new curb cuts for purposes of providing c~n- site parking spaces, except where a project meets at least one of the following conditions: 41 (1 } The site has no adjacent side ar rear alley having a minimum af iwent}r feet wide right-ofi-way; (2} The topography or configuration of the site, or placement of existing buildings to remain on the site, precludes reasanable alley access to a sufficient number of parking spaces to the extent that use of the property is restricted beyond otherwise applicable development standards, as de#ermined by the Zoning Administrator and Transportation Planninq Manaqer, or Planning Commission or City Council, depending upan which body is charged with making the determination; (3) The average slope of the parcel is at least five percent; {4} A residential district is located directly across any alley that would be used for access; (5} The praject includes one or more of the following uses: automobile service station, automobile or vehicle repair, hotel or motel, drive-in or drive-through business, high volume use as determined by the Zoning Administrator; ~6} The Zoning Administrator and the Transportation Plannin„g Manaqer determine that a curb cut is apprapriate due to traffic, safety or circulatian concerns. (b} If curb cuts are necessary, curb cut widths sha11 be kept to the minimum width required. (c) On lots with adequate alley access, prajects with new buildings ar substantial remodels shall be required to repface any existing curb cuts and 42 driveway aprons as required by the Environmen#al and Public Works Management Department. SECTlC?N 9. Any provisian of the Santa Monica Mur~icipal Code or appendices thereto incansistent with the prouisions of this 4rdinance, to the e~ctent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that exten# necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 10. The provisions of Sections 2 and 3 af C>rdinance Na. 2124 (CCS) are hereby repealed. All other provisions of shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 11. If any section, subsectior-, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid ar unconstitutional by a decision of any court of campetent jurisdiction, such decision shall nat affect the validity of the remaining portions of this t~rdinance. The City Council hereby declares that it woulc! have passed this Ordinar~ce and each and every sectian, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not dectared invalid or unconstitutional withaut regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutianal. 43 SEGTI(~N 12. The Mayor shall sign arrd the City Clerk shall attest to the passage af this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause #he same #o be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall became effective 30 days from its adoption. APPROVED AS TO FORM: MAR A J N S MOU RI City Attorne 44 ATTRCHMENT B M1IOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF A PUB~IC HEARING BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY CC?UNCI~ SUBJECT: Downtown Devefopment and Design Standards Ordinance A public hearing will be held by the Gity Council #a consider the following request: introduction and first reading af an Ordinance madifying the development, design, and off-street parking standards for projects develaped within the BSCD, C3, and C3C zoning clis#ricts, including, but not limited to, clesign standards for ground floor heights, building streeffronts, landscaping, sidewalls adjacent to historic resources and off-street parking and access requirements. DATERIME: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2005 AT 6:45 p.m. LOCATION: City Council Chambers, Second Flaar, Santa Monica City Hall 1685 Main Street, San#a Monica, California HOW TO COMM~NT The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. You may comment at the City Council public hearing, or by writing a letter. Written infarmation will be given to #he City Council at the meeting. Address your letters to: City Clerk Re: Downtown Design Standards 1685 Main Street, Roam 102 Santa Monica, CR 90401 MC>RE INFCIRMATION 1f you want more information about this project or wish to review the project file, please contaet Faul Foley, Principal Planner, at (310} 458-8341, or by e-mail at paul-foley a~santa-monica.org. The Zaning Ordinance is available at the Planning ~ounter during business hours and on the City's web site at www.santa-monica.ar . The rTieetir~g facility is wt~eelct~air accessible. For disability-related accommadatians, please contact {31Q) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in advance. All written materials are available in alternate #ormat upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, $, 9, and 10 serve City Hall. Pursuant to Galifornia Government Cade Sectian 65009(b}, if this matter is subsequently challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues raised af the public hearing described in this notice, ar in written correspandence cielivered to the City of Santa Monica at, or prior to, the public hearing. ESPAIVQL Esto es una noticia de una audiencia publica para revisar applicaci6nes proppnienda desarrallo en ~anta Monica. ~i deseas mas informacicin, favQr de llamar a Carmen Gutierrez ~n la Division de Planificaci6n a1 numero (310} 458-8341. APPROVED AS TO FORM: 1..~1~'~.~,~.d,.^~.~~'_~~-f'~=~%'~~ ~ RMANDA SCHACHTER Planning Manager F:\CityPlan ninglShare\COt1NCl LiN~TICES\20Q5\TA04-002DOwntownDesign Nov.05.dac