SR-400-005-21APR z ~ 2004
CP:AS:JL:BR:f:\plan\share\council\strpt\2004\04TA-003.doc Santa Monica, California
City Council Mtg: April 13, 2004
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance to Modify the Multi-Family
Development Standards and Establish Design Standards for Properties
Located in Multifamily Residential Zoning Districts of R2 (Low Density
Multiple Residential), R3 (Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential), and
R4 (High Density Multiple-Family Residential). The Ordinance Also Includes
Amendments to the Application Processing Requirements forAdministrative
Approvals Applications, Architectural Review Board Applications, and
Design Compatibility Permit Applications, in the R2, R3, R4, BSCD, C3, and
C3-C Zoning Districts. Changes to the Definitions, Demolition, and Project
Design and Development Standards Section of the Zoning Ordinance, are
Also Proposed. Other Related Changes Include the Condominium Section,
and the North of Wilshire Overlay, Which will be Eliminated.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance that
modifies the Municipal Code as it pertains to development and design standards for all
~?rort~r*.~~~. in th~ F~~, R?~, ~an~ F~~ ~~nin~ di~tri~~~, Th~ or~in~nc~~ will ~I~~ m~~Jify
application-processing requirements for Administrative Approvals, Architectural Review,
and Design Compatibility Permits in the R2, R3, R4, BSCD, C3, and C3C districts.
Changes to the definitions, demolition, and project design and development standards
section of the Zoning Ordinance, which will be effective citywide, are also proposed. Oth~r
related changes are proposed to the condominium section, and the North of Wilshire
Overlay, which will be eliminated. The proposed ordinance is contained in Attachment A.
~ APR Y ~ 2004
BACKGROUND
In 1999, the City Council adopted a moratorium, and then subsequently interim standards,
for properties located in the City's multiple-family residential zones. These actions arose
from a concern that the rate of development in the multifamily zones was too high, and that
standards should be developed to preserve neighborhood character, diversity, and quality
of life. The interim standards reflected solutions to address the scale and context of new
development, pedestrian-orientation, and neighborhood preservation that both the
Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board were routinely applying to projects.
The interim standards lowered building profiles and increased the amount of vertical and
horizontal articulation. In addition, the standards included requirements for the location
and accessi-bility of private outdoor living spaces and enhanced site landscaping. In fact,
many of the standards in the interim ordinance followed the precedent established for
properties subject to the North of Wilshire Overlay Zone.
The proposed standards improve the clarity and administration of the regulations. The
standards still reflect direction consistently given to applicants by the Planning Commission
and Architectural Review Board over the past several years. In addition, staff drafted the
proposed ordinance to achieve the following objectives:
1. Provide easily understood and applied development standards that reflect the
Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board's design priorities developed
over the last several years;
2. Incorporate design standards that provide direction on a building's contextual
theme and relationshi~~, and that refl~~t c~mmunity int~r~~t~ ~~ Qxpr~~~~~4 ka~ the
Architectural Review Board, Planning Commission, and City Council;
2
3. Establish a review process whereby development standards and design
guidelines, and not the review process, are the means to control and regulate
development;
4. To provide the opportunity for the Planning Commission, Architectural Review
Board and staff to focus on policy issues such as development standards and
design guidelines instead of individual project reviews;
5. Provide a clear and predictable process for applicants; and,
6. Improve the timeliness and efficiency of the development review process
The current interim ordinance will expire on June 13, 2004. This interim ordinance may be
extended one more time, but only for an additional 30 days. If permanent development
standards are not adopted before its expiration date, development standards for projects in
the R2, R3, and R4 zoning districts will revert to those supplanted by the interim ordinance.
ANALYSIS
Proposed Ordinance
The interim ordinance has had many positive effects but after several years of
implementation, there are improvements to be made. For example, provisions related to
stepbacks have proven very difficult to administer. The code requires breaks in the
building fa~ade at specified heights. These heights do not necessarily coincide with a
building's natural floor level break points. The unintended consequence of this standard
results in many hours analyzing plans and meeting with applicants to explain the
development standards. These steps are repeated each time that revised plans are
~~~'~m6~~~~7 tc~ tF~~ ~ity ~n~ ha~a~ r~~t.~lt~~ in ~~r~'~~a~~~n a~nd ~~~n~~.~~~~ry fr~~~'~s~'k~~~ fcar
applicants and staff.
3
The proposed ordinance takes the interim ordinance's positive aspects and prevailing
design concerns of the Architectural Review Board, Planning Commission, and City
Council and incorporates everything into clear standards with predictable results. The
result is an ordinance that can be effectively and efficiently administered while improving
the quality of the built environment.
Proposed Development Standards
Interim Ordinance 2042 makes marked improvements to the multiple-family standards in
the City's Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, staff relied on those standards to form the basis
for the mass and bulk provisions of the proposed ordinance. The primary components
affecting a structure's mass and bulk are discussed below.
Height: The proposed ordinance will alter the method for measuring building height and
results in a fundamental change to the perceived building height of all multi-family
structures. Currently, the height measurement is taken from Average Natural Grade (ANG).
ANG averages the spot elevations at the intersections of the front and rear setbacks with
the side yard setback. On a flat lot this is a benign matter as the ANG and actual grade
level are relatively the same. However, on sloping lots, this practice can result in dramatic
differences and have less than desirable effects for neighborhood compatibility and
pedestrian orientation. The undesirable outcomes of using ANG can be addressed by
using theoretical grade as the building height baseline.
This is ~c~nsist~nt with the m~th~a~ic~la~y appli~si in the Q~~~n P~fk Distr~~t. Tl~~c~r~t~~~!
grade is a plane connecting the elevations at the midpoint of the front lot line with the
4
midpoint of the rear lot line and will cause a building to step down with the slope of the
parcel. Theoretical grade provides a better relationship to adjacent improvements in the
general vicinity than ANG, and staff believes its use will produce buildings that are
perceived as having a pedestrian scale.
The ordinance makes no change to the building heights of each zone, which are proposed
to be measured from theoretical grade, but it does establish different standards for the
form of roofs.
Roof Form: Under Interim Ordinance 2042, a proposed roof in the R2 zoning district can
be constructed up to a maximum height of 30 feet only if it maintains a slope of one foot of
rise for every three feet of run. While various roof forms are allowed within this envelope,
concessions at lower floor levels may have to be made to accommodate a nonconventional
roof form. Consequently, since projects typically maximize a parcel's building envelope, it
is rare to see building forms that stray too far from the prescribed standard. This may be
one factor that leads to criticisms about monotonous building design and routine fa~ade
treatments.
The proposed ordinance takes the concept embodied by Interim Ordinance 2042 and
creates an equivalent standard. Rather than prescribe a 1 to 3 roof pitch, the new
~tandard 5~ t~~~~~ on the volum~ os~c~upi~c~ by th~ r~?~f ~~ructure. Thir~ ~mpc~~~s~rs an
architect or designer to creatively express roof structures in a manner comparable to the
interim ordinance. Roof forms are closely associated with architectural styles. Creating
greater opportunity for architects to design the roof form will result in more varied
architectural forms without adversely impacting adjacent structures.
5
Sic~Q Yard Setbacks and Stepbacks: The width of a required side yard setback under the
current ordinance is a function of the building height expressed in stories. In addition to
this basic requirement, the ordinance also requires that the side building walls provide at
least a two-foot offset in plane for half of the building depth. Moreover, between thirteen
feet and thirty feet, there is a requirement for the structure to stepback an additional
average distance of four feet. Above thirty feet in height, the ordinance requires an eight
foot additional average stepback.
The proposed ordinance provides a less prescriptive standard for the R2, R3, and R4
zoning districts. In multiple-family dwelling projects, the side yards are either used for
access ta units or a private outdoor living space. Originally, staff supported a uniform nine-
foot side yard setbackproposal. The Planning Commission suggested relating the required
side yard setback to the width of the lot in a manner that provides more flexibility to site the
building on the parcel and encourages greater side articulation. Staff concurs with these
concepts and is recommending that the side yard setback be a minimum of eight feet with
a requirement that an additional two foot average setback be provided. However, for
nc~r~s;~~n#~rmin~ s~ts th~t ~re IQ~~ than ~~-f~~t ~~~~„ ~t~ff r~~~mm~r~~~ tF~~t th~ ~tidQ ~r~xd
setback be 16-percent of the lot width (32-percent overall), but not less than 4-feet. This
would maintain the same side yard setback proportions as on conforming lots.
With the proposed ordinance, structures would occupy a similar area as they do under the
interim zoning. However, the proposed ordinance does not prescribe variation in building
planes at specified intervals such as between 3 and 13 feet. These provisions of the
interim ordinance tend to establish a form with little discretion in the allocation of building
mass. Alternatively, the proposed ordinance establishes a parcel coverage requirement at
6
each story. This will significantly reduce calculation errors by architects,.designers and
staff while accomplishing the interim ordinance's intent of building articulation.
Parcel Coveraqe: Interim Ordinance 2042 and the existing zoning ordinance specify
allowable lot coverage of fifty percent at the ground floor level. While the proposed
ordinance does not seek to alter this standard, it does add upper story parcel coverage
requirements to achieve equivalent building stepback. This provides more freedom for the
architect or designer to allocate building mass in response to contextual cues. The
proposed parcel coverage provisions now encourage architects and designers to consider
the building's form rather than follow a prescribed building recipe. Specifically, the interim
ordinance requires adherence to a series of plane offsets, building stepbacks and building
articulation at set intervals. These requirements take many hours to verify and can have
the unintended consequence of dictating a design that becomes monotonous in its
repetition along a streetscape. By contrast, the proposed standards establish parcel
coverage requirements for each floor level and will have the effect of creating greater
vertical and horizontal articulation. Given that the proposed standards would be applied to
th~ ~~.~rim~~e~- ~f tht~ k~~.bil~~ng ~at th~ ~r~y~t~~~~ fl~~r I~~a~l, ~nd t~~t fl~~r I~v~4~ ~a~ry l~~tan~~~n
structures, the proposed standard is expected to result in more varied streetscape
articulation.
Design Standards
Past experience demonstrates that it is difficult to regulate good design. Attempts to do so
may be viewed as inhibiting innovative design, while less-skilled designers will be
~-~r~~pr;~~~~r~~~~~:~ 1~~~ ~a~~~a~~;~ a rQaa#~n~ pr~a~l~s~~, Tt~~~ ~~r~~~~~~ ~~~v~l~~~-~~s~r~i ~~~~~i~~°~.~~ ~~~~~~ ~~
building envelope but the architectural identity of the structure and its contextual
7
relationships must be addressed. Consequently, the proposed ordinance contains a
section on project design standards. While there is no practical way to articulate the array
of conditions that a particular project may address, the design standards can better
harmonize proposed buildings with their existing surroundings.
The proposed design standards address issues that the Architectural Review Board and
Planning Commission have consistently addressed such as mezzanine, finished floor
elevation, side building articulation, building mass distribution, unit identity, roof mass, roof
deck screening, courtyards, pedestrian orientation, landscaping, fence/wall heights, deck,
balcony, terrace requirements, and limitations on repetitive building designs. Since these
concerns are routinely expressed by the Planning Commission and Architectural Review
Board and have universal applicability to multifamily projects, staff proposes to incorporate
the polices into mandatory standards. This will provide clear direction to applicants, create
consistency and predictability in the process and result in better buildings.
Application Review ~r~~~~~ fvr~ ~~~ ~~, ~3, d~~, l~~str~~~~
The introduction of design standards coupled with development standards that address the
prevailing comments expressed by the community, Architectural Review Board, Planning
Commission, and the recent addition of a staff-level Urban Designer, creates a unique
opportunity for the City to alter the development review process. The proposed
development standards establish an envelope within which a proposed structure can be
set. Articulation of the building is then achieved by applying the proposed design
st~ndar~l~. If thQ c~QV~lca~mQnt ~t~r~~~rc~~ ~nd r~~s~~n ~ti,~i~~lir~~~ a~'e in pl~~ t~ r~~~~~~~~
development, the review process no longer needs to serve as the means to control
8
development.
The City's Urban Designer has the expertise to ensure that projects comply with the design
guidelines. If a project complies with the standards and guidelines, it will result in a quality
structure with positive relationships with adjacent sites and the public right-of-way. In
developing the process recommendation, staff evaluated different options. Those options
are provided in Attachment C. As indicated earlier in this report, staff is proposing a
process that accomplishes the following objectives:
1. Establish a review process whereby development standards and design
guidelines, and not the review process, are the means to control and regulate
development;
2. To provide the opportunity for the Planning Commission, Architectural Review
Board and staff to focus on policy issues such as development standards and
design guidelines instead of individual project reviews;
3. Provide a clear and predictable process for applicants; and,
4. Improve the timeliness and efficiency of the development review process
Development applications filed with the City are either reviewed and approved
administratively, by staff, and require ARB review, or are subject to a discretionary review
process and require ARB review. Discretionary applications are those that require a public
hearing before the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board. Each
discretionary action can be appealed adding significant processing delays. This is of
particular concern for projects subject to both Planning Commission and Architectural
~~yr~fi~~~~~ ~~a~r~ci s,r~~r~ic~~r~ti~~~ s~~~~ ~~:~ ~~~r~~c~rr~ir~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~-~~~~~;~~~~~r~~~, ~sr~~~ ~~°~ ~~y~~-~~~ ~~~~
occur after both Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board action. Experience
9
has shown that the reviews conducted by the Planning Commission and the Architectural
Review Board are very similar. Both are evaluating the design of the project and the
relationship of the project to the neighborhood. At times, an applicant will redesign a
project to meet concerns of the Architectural Review Board, and on appeal to the Planning
Commission, have to redesign the project again. By contrast, under the current
regulations, all apartments in the R2, R3, and R4 zones are subject to an appeal only after
the design review stage.
The proposed process requires an applicant to conduct an appropriate level of due
diligence prior to submitting an application. Additionally, the City would continue offering
presubmittal review meetings for any potential applicant. The purpose of this review is to
identify issues that could fundamentally affect the viability of a project. The first required
step in staff's proposal is a meeting with the City's Urban Designer. At this meeting, design
comments will be offered and compliance with the design standards will be evaluated.
Compliant projects will then proceed to plan check where a thorough code compliance
review would occur. Projects that do not comply with the design standards would be
scheduled for Architectural Review Board consideration.
While every project is evaluated on its own merits, the nature of a discretionary application
comes with certain inherent risks, including continuances, substantial modifications, or
project denial. Often projects require at least two hearings before approval. In the case of
Planning Commission applications, these can be multiple hearings resulting in building
c~~~~~n m~~ifsc~#~~~~, ~n~~ ~~~r~a~~~~, th~ ~~ag~l~c~~~s~n ~r~~~es~s~~th~~.r~~~~~~~~r~l R~~i~~~
Board. It is not uncommon for the Board to request design changes that conflict with the
10
Planning Commission's approval and require further design changes. Additionally, the
Board decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission where the proposed project
may undergo another series of design iterations before its final approval.
To highlight the situation described above, staff reviewed the project review history of
several projects in the multi-family districts. Over the last four years the process has been
very similar. An example is a condominium project located in the Sunset Park
neighborhood. From application submittal in May 2001, to Architectural Review Board
approval in December 2003, eighty-seven weeks elapsed. The applicant presented the
project three times before the Planning Commission and twice to the Architectural Review
Board.
As illustrated above, the current process is unpredictable, shifts the Planning Commission
and ARB focus to ad-hoc project review instead of visioning and preparation of design
guidelines, requires the dedication of significant staff resources to review project plans and
prepare reports on an evolving project over the course of many months, and places little
reliance in the City's adopted development standards. By contrast, projects conforming to
the proposed development and design standards could navigate the proposed process in
approximately finro months and allow the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board
and staff to focus on larger policy and design issues within the community.
There is concern that the recommended process eliminate~; public participation. How~v~r,
th~ pr~~a~~~~ ~~t~nc~~r~~ va~r~ ~c~~q~l~~~~ frt~m ~ti.~~1ic inp~~t ~r~d ~~~r~ ~f ~Jir~~'~a~n pr~vi~~~
to applicants. The proposed process is not new in Santa Monica. Administrative review
11
and approval occur in the City's single-family residential zoning districts. In the multi-family
districts, staff administratively approves the mass and bulk of apartment buildings. While
design review still occurs with apartment projects, the form of those structures is
established administratively with existing development standards.
As detailed in the proposed ordinance, staff would only review projects that conform to the
specific design standards. In cases where an applicant is unable to comply orwould like to
propose an alternative design that does not conform to the design standards, the project
would be subject to review by the Architectural Review Board. Furthermore, the
recommended process does not supplant the Development Review thresholds for projects
in the R2, R3, and R4, districts.
The proposed process shifts design review to the first step in application review to ensure
applicants are aware and can comply with the design guidelines. The proposed standards
integrally relate to one another and incorporate the range of comments offered by the
community, Architectural Review Board, and Planning Commission. These comments
have shaped the proposed standards.
This proposed process addresses concerns expressed by the City Council as to
consistency, predictability, flexibility, innovation, and efficiency. It addresses community
concerns regarding the form, design, and scale of development and establishes a reliable
development review process. It also creates time for members of the Planning
~'~~rr~+~~~~n ~n~1 ~r~~i~~~t~s~4 F~~~~~~ ~~~r~ t~ f~~,~~~ ~n I~r~~~ ~r~~~~t~ t4~~t ~~v~ 4~~r~~
term impacts and benefits to the City. For example, the Planning Commission could spend
12
significantly greater time on the anticipated update to the City's General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance. And, pursuant to SMMC 9.32.040, the Architectural Review Board could work
to develop unique development guidelines for each of the City's neighborhoods.
~,~~~~~I~~~~~ ~~~~~"~~~~~T~
The proposed ordinance includes some changes beyond the development and design
standards or processing requirements for properties in the R2, R3, R4, and Downtown
commercial zoning districts. These additional amendments include clarifying definitions
relative to floor levels, building and fence heights, and theoretical grade. The proposed
ordinance also extends the design review exemption for single-family residences in the R1
zoning district to all zoning districts. The proposed ordinance removes the North of
Wilshire Overlay district, since all of its applicable regulations have been incorporated into
the proposed standards for the R2, R3, and R4 zones, and modifies the Demolition chapter
by lowering the threshold for Landmarks Commission review from 50 years to 40 years,
which is consistent with Interim Ordinance 2042. A conflicting use requirement for
residential care facilities in the R3 zoning district is remedied by removing residential care
facilities as a permitted use. The use would continue to be allowed through the conditional
use permit process just as in the R2 and R4 zoning districts. Finally, the format of the
proposed text amendment is a dramatic departure from the existing Zoning Ordinance
format. This format significantly improves the readability of the regulations, eliminates
redundant text, consolidates permitted and conditionally permitted uses and development
~t~~~~~~~, ~+~~ ~~~~as~a~r~t~~ cr~~s-r~f~r~s~~~~~.
13
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The proposed ordinance was presented to the Planning Commission at its March 17, 2004
meeting. No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition to the proposal. The
Planning Commission generally supported the ordinance approach, while offering several
comments for the City Council's consideration. First, the Commission suggested that the
proposed text clarify that parapet walls be considered as part of the roof form and,
therefore, count towards the allowed roof form calculation. Second, the Commission noted
that the 4-foot minimum side yard setback for a substandard lot was too small and thought
that a larger setback would be appropriate provided it did not result in a ground floor lot
coverage that is less than 50% of the lot area. Third, the Commission recommended
changing the ground floor side yard setback from 9-feet to an 8-foot minimum with an
additional requirement that no more than 50-percent of the area between 8 and 10-feet
shall be occupied by the building's footprint. Finally, the Planning Commission
unanimously supported eliminating the Design Compatibility Permit requirement for
condominiums but a majority also favored maintaining the Architectural Review Board's
role in the development review process. The Commission believed that opportunity for
public involvement in the design process was helpful and yielded better buildings.
Staff supports and has incorporated each of the Planning Commission's recommended
changes excepting the proposed application review process. Staff supports the Planning
Commission's comments about the side yard setback but is proposing an alternative
m~tk~~~+ that ~~a~.~4c~ r~~~ir~ ~ minim~~m ~~t~ht f~nt ~~t~~s~4~ ~sith th~ ~r~~i~4~n ~f ~~ ~~1~4+~4~~~,4
average setback of two feet. The revised side yard setback recommendation has the
14
benefit of widening the building envelope by two feet, which allows a designer more
flexibility to site the structure on the lot. Additionally, requiring a two foot additional average
setback will increase the amount of side building faCade articulation. Staff believes that the
development and design standards work together harmoniously to address previous
concerns expressed by the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board. The
proposed process establishes a more reliable system for applicants, addresses community
and decision maker concerns regarding the form, design, and scale of a development, and
frees staff and decision maker time to focus on other projects of importance to the City.
On March 24, 2004, the Planning Commission deliberated on anticipated modifications to
the downtown development and design standards. In its review, the Commission offered
an alternative to staff's proposed application review process modifications. This alternative
plan is in Attachment C and would apply to all projects in the R2, R3, and R4 multifamily
zones as well as in downtown Santa Monica. This alternative adds two steps to the
existing development review process: 1) Pre-application developer-hosted neighborhood
meeting, and 2) Post-application review period.
The first step requires the developer to hold a public meeting with interested neighbors and
to solicit their feedback on the project. This meeting must occur after a three week
developer-provided notice to all tenants and property owners within 500-feet of the subject
property and prior to application submittal. Two weeks before the meeting, the developer
~~ t~a ~~~~ th~ ~--~~~:r~y with ~ I~r~~ ~ign th~~ in~l~~4~~ ~~c~lor r~~~~rin~ ~f th~ pr~a~~~'k„
identifies some basic project information, and provides detailed information handouts for
15
interested members of the public. This meeting provides an opportunity for public review
and comment on the project plans including the site plan, floor plans, building sections,
building elevations, landscape plans, and a massing model showing adjacent buildings. As
explained in the Commission's recommendation, the purpose of the meeting is to establ~~h
positive and mutually respectful communication between the developer and community; to
publicly review and discuss the proposed project; to invite public comment and expression
on ~~ecific ~~mmunity c~n~~rns; and to r~~~h a~c~rd on r~~gaon~~~ m~a~e by th~ ~~vel~y~er
to community concerns. The window of opportunity to comment on the project would last
for 30 days after the date of project's community meeting.
The second step commences after the close of the public comment period, which allows
the application to be filed with the City. Within three days of filing the application, the
developer must mail out notices to all tenants and owners within a 500-foot radius of the
project site and post a sign (as described above) on the property. Contact information shall
be provided on the public information flyers and this notice begins a 30-day window of
opportunity for members of the public to view the project plans. If there are concerns about
the project, a request for Planning Commission consideration of the application must be
made within this time. The developer will have an opportunity to submit modified plans that
address the public's concern. However, if this is not done the project will be scheduled for
Planning Commission consideration within 60 calendar days. Although silent on this
matter, the Planning Commission alternative infers that staff, in accordance with applicable
development and design standards, could approve projects not receiving a public hearing
r~~~~~~ ~ith~~ tF~~ 3~-~~iy ~+~n~l~~+..
16
Staff has several concerns about this alternative, including impermissible delegation of
authority. This alternative can be viewed as delegating the City's authority to review and
approve a project to community members. In addition, this process does not specify what
the Architectural Review Board's role would be, if any. Furthermore, the process is unclear
if it is administrative or discretionary. This has consequences for the way in which other
State laws like the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Permit
Streamlining Act are applied. The process does not identify who will be responsible for
overseeing that all of the requirements of this process are satisfied and whether or not staff
has a central or peripheral role. Moreover, the proposed pre-application noticing and
meeting requirements add additional steps as compared to the existing process. And it
does more to lengthen review times and make the outcome less predictable than it is now
because of the subjective nature of the community review process. As a result of these
concerns, staff does not support the Planning Commission's recommended alternative
application review process.
CONCLUSION
The proposed ordinance creates an appealing and contextually sensitive multiple-family
prototype building. Buildings that conform move more expediently through the process
because they do not warrant review and approval by the Planning Commission and
Architectural Review Board. However, if a design were proposed that is inconsistent with
the design standards it would have to obtain Architectural Review Board approval.
~~vi~~i~n~ fr~m th~ p~r~~~rib~~ c~~v~lc~~m~nt r~~~l~ti~n~ ar~ pr~hi~i'k~~ ~~~~~~ t~ th~ ~~t~r~t
that the Santa Monica Municipal Code already allows a variance application to be
17
considered by the City.
This process holds positive aspects for the City. First, it addresses priorities identified by
the community and City Council in terms of consistency, predictability, flexibility, innovation,
and efficiency. Second, it provides more time for the Planning Commission and
Architectural Review Board to focus on larger development projects, land use policy
projects that will have fundamental consequences for the City's future, and the
establishment of neighborhood specific guidelines. Finally, staffing resources can be
reallocated to policy work instead of individual project review.
CEQA STATUS
The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation Guidelines in that the
project does not establish different development density/intensity standards than those
existing in the R2, R3, and R4 zoning districts. The proposed development standards are
equivalent to the density, height, parcel coverage, and setback standards currently
~~v~rnin~ mtaltif~mily ~lev~l~~m~nt in th~ ~i'~y ~f ~~nt~ IVlc~n~~~. Furth~rm~r~, th~ ~r~.~}~~~~~
standards enhance the environment by requiring additional setbacks, stepbacks, creating
more open space, improving aesthetics, and create buildings with improved massing and
less impact on adjacent existing structures. As individual projects that require discretionary
approval under the proposed process are submitted for approval, they will be individually
reviewed pursuant to the CEQA. If it is determined that a project has the potential to c~use
a direct physical change to the environment, additional analysis will be completed in
accordance with the provisions and requirements of the CEQA.
18
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65804, notice of the public hearing for the Text
Amendment was published in the "California" Section of the Los Angeles Times newspaper
at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the h~~ring. Notice of the public h~~ring
was also sent to all neighborhood organizations, local architects, and posted on the City's
Web site. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment D. A public notice similar to the
one published in the Los Angeles Times has been placed at the public planning counter to
provide additional public notice.
~~i~~~~~~1~~i~.A~~~~1~ ~~7~~~~~
The recommendation presented in this report has no budget or fiscal impacts.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council introduce for first reading the proposed ordinance
incl~a~~el in A~~~hrr~~nt A.
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director
Amanda Schachter, Acting Planning Manager
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Senior Planner
Bill Rodrigues, AICP, Associate Planner
City Planning Division
Planning and Community Development Department
19
ATTACHMENTS: A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Proposed Ordinance Text
Alternative Review Process Models
Planning Commission Alternative Application Review Process
Notice of Public Hearing
March 17, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report
without attachments
ROMA Report
20
ATTAC H~ll E N T A
Proposed Ordinance Text
21
~:~~~~`1~~ll~lll~~!~+'~l~~~~~~~~~~r~~~~~~r~~~rr~~.~~~
City Council Meeting 4-13-04 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
THAT MODIFIES DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ESTABLISHES DESIGN
STANDARDS FOR PROPERTIES IN THE R2 LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, R3 MEDUIM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL AND R4 HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS, AMENDS THE APPLICATION REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE R2 LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, R3 MEDIUM
DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND R4 HIGH DENSITY
MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, BSCD BAYSIDE
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, C3 DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL AND C3C
DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICTS, ESTABLISHES
EXEMPTIONS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS IN ALL DISTRICTS FROM
DESIGN REVIEW, MODIFIES THE DEMOLITION PERMIT REQUIREMENTS,
DELETES THE NW NORTH OF WILSHIRE OVERLAY DISTRICT, MODIFIES
PROJECT DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PERTAINING TO
FENCES, AND MODIFIES THE DEFINITIONS OF BASEMENT, BUILDING
HEIGHT, FENCE HEIGHT, FINISHED FIRST FLOOR, SEMI-SUBTERRANEAN
GARAGE AND THEORETICAL GRADE
WHEREAS, on May 25, 1999, the City Council adopted a moratorium on
multi-family development in the City's multi-family districts in response to
dramatic changes in state law, a substantial increase in the rate of development,
and an unprecedented loss of affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, the specific factors compelling the moratorium adoption were
det~;4~d in Ordin~n~~ Number 1~44 (~~~) and Qrdinanc~ Numk~r 1947 (CCS)
and included the following: the unprecedented increase in economic activity in
which land values have skyrocketed and the rate of multi-family construction
1
tripled, the detrimental consequences of this construction rate which impacted
the City as a whole and the daily lives of residents who had to cop~ with th~
noise and interference caused by construction, the significant shift in the City's
demographics occurring due to the vast majority of new, privately-built units only
being affordable to upper income individuals, the adoption of the Costa-Hawkins
Rental Housing Act of 1995 which has severely weakened local rent control and
resulted in a dramatic reduction in the City's affordable housing stock, and the
threat posed by these dramatic changes to the existing character of the City's
neighborhoods and its unique natural environment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted this moratorium to provide the City
sufficient time to evaluate the effects of this high rate of development and to
develop appropriate requirements and programs to preserve the City's character,
diversity, and quality of life in this period of drastic change; and
WHEREAS, the moratorium was extended twice and expired on May 17,
2000; and
WHEREAS, in adopting the moratorium, the City Council directed staff, in
part, to evaluate the rate and nature of construction in multi-family neighborhoods
and assess appropriate responses; and
WHEREAS, as detailed herein, and in Ordinance Number 1971 (CCS),
Ordinance Number 1977 (CCS), and Ordinance Number 2042 (CCS), these
interim ordinances were prepared in response to this evaluation; and
WHEREAS, due to the strong local and regional economy, the demand
for housirig in the City incr~~~~d dr~m~ti~~lly in the I~+k+~ 1~90's; and
2
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the more recent economic downturn, housing
production in the City continues to be substantial; and
WHEREAS, in addition to housing production, real estate values in the
City have continued to skyrocket. While home prices fell significantly ov~r the
early to mid 1990's, by 2000, they had regained much of their value, with the
median price condominium approaching $500,000.00 in certain areas of the City;
and
WHEREAS, the ascent of housing prices continues unabated to date,
reaching unprecedented levels; and
WHEREAS, a significant amount of the City's residential housing stock
was built prior to the 1960's and parcels developed with older structures tend to
be developed at heights and massing that are less than what is currently allowed
by zoning; and
WHEREAS, given current economic conditions, there are significant
incentives for this older housing to be redeveloped with housing built to the
maximum authorized development standards; and
WHEREAS, the redevelopment of these currently underdeveloped
properties at greater height and mass would result in the loss of views, light, and
open space and could pose a threat to the existing character of neighborhoods
~nd th~ City's uniqu~ n~tural ~nvironment; and
WHEREAS, maintaining the unique character of Santa Monica's
neighborhoods is important for many reasons: City residents value their
n~i~t~~~rh~a~a~~; th~ ~r~~~r~a~~izan ~f r~~i~h~~rh~a~a~i~ ~r~m~t~~ a ~~n~e ~f
3
belonging and loyalty from r~~idents and provides residents with quiet enjoym~~t
in their homes and a community which exists on a pedestrian friendly scale; and
design and development standards which are sensitive to existing neighborhood
conditions can also further environmental and social goals; and
WHEREAS, the demand for housing has also threatened the character of
existing neighborhoods through the proposed demolition of structures, including
bungalow style and courtyard style housing developments, which have potential
historic or architectural significance; and
WHEREAS, the potential for larger scale development in the R2 Low
Density Multiple Family Residential, R3 Medium Density Multiple Family and R4
High Density Multiple Family districts under the current development and height
projection standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance posed and continues to
pose a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare of
the nearby residents and the approval of permits for such development has the
potential to be incompatible with the scale and character of existing
neighborhoods and would result in a threat to the public health, safety and
welfare; and
WHEREAS, the requirements for demolition permits contained in the
Zoning Ordinance posed and continue to pose a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety and welfare of the nearby residents in that the character
of existing neighborhoods can be permanently impacted as potentially historic
and/or architecturally significant buildings which are less than 50 years old are
demolished, yet curren~Sy, the proposed demolition of homes gre~t~r than 40
4
years old, but less than 50 years old, are not subject to Landmark Commission
review; and
WHEREAS, in light of the above-mentioned concerns, the City Council
adopted Ordinance Number 1971(CCS) on May 2, 2000 modifying the
development standards in the Zoning Ordinance and the City Council extended
Ordinance Number 1971 (CCS) on June 13, 2000 through the adoption of
Ordinance Number 1977 (CCS) and on April 9, 2002 through the adoption of
Ordinance Number 2042 (CCS) which will expire on June 13, 2004; and
WHEREAS, these interim ordinances changed the current development
and projection standards within the~ R2 Low Density Multiple residential, R3
Medium Density Multiple Family Residential and R4 High Density Multiple Family
Residential Districts in the following manner: reduce allowable building height
with an incentive for pitched roofs; reduce building mass by requiring additional
setbacks from the minimum required setback lines, require outdoor private open
space for all units, require additional landscaping, and provide greater building
articulation by requiring more separation in plane along the side building,
adversely affecting the character of existing neighborhoods in the City; and
WHEREAS, on November 5, 2003, the Planning Commission and the
Architectural Review Board held a joint meeting to review proposed revised
development standards for the City's R2, R3, and R4 zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing to adopt a Resolution of Intention which stated the Commission's
5
intention to recommend modifications of the City's Zoning Ordinance to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing on the proposed text amendment and recommended that the City
Council approve the proposed text amendment with certain specified
modifications; and
WHEREAS, if the development and design standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance are not revised, additional housing and additions to existing
buildings will be developed that would severely impact existing residences and
that would be incompatible with the scale and character of existing
neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are consistent in principle with the
goals, objectives, policies, land uses and programs specified in the adopted
General Plan, more specifically Land Use Element Policy 1.10.1 which states to
"encourage the development of new housing while still protecting the character
and scale of the existing neighborhood, Housing Element Policy 1.3 which states
establish and maintain development standards that support development while
protecting quality of life goals and Housing Element Policy 1.7 which states that
the City should maintain development standards that ensure that the
development of new housing in residential neighborhoods is designed to fit within
the existing neighborhood contexts; and
WHEREAS, the proposed standards will result in new development that is
much more in scale and ch~facter wit~ ~~~~tan~ h~t~~in~ in th~ m~lti-f~rrr~~ly
6
neighborhoods, will ensure the new development integrates and is compatible
with surrounding residential uses and will maintain the unique character of Santa
Monica's multifamily neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the public health, safety, and general welfare require the
adoption of the proposed amendment in that the potential for larger scale
development in the City's multifamily residential districts under the development
and height projections standards of the Zoning Ordinance poses a threat to the
health, safety, and general welfare because such development has the potential
to be incompatible with the scale and character of existing neighborhoods and
the proposed text amendment would ensure that the future development is
compatible with development in the surrounding neighborhood by changing the
placement of buildings on parcels, reducing building height and bulk, providing
for additional open space and landscaping and increasing the amount of light
befinreen buildings.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDIAN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.02.030-115 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.02.030-115 Basement.
The portion of a structure below the finished first floor. A
basement shall be considered a story if the finished ~floor level
7
above extends more than three feet above the average natural or +~
, theoretical grade, as appticable.
SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.02.030-155 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.02.030-155 Building height.
The vertical distance measured from the average natural or
theoretical grad~, ~s aqplicable, to the highest point of the roof.
~-?~ ~'~~~,---;~~~~'~---~~~~'~~~+~I+~~~~~}+~~' ~., +r,e n,.e.,.,
~~~~~~~---~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~ . .
SECTION 3. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.02.030-305 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.02.030-305 Fence height.
Fnea~~~e~f~em ~h~~i~t~^ ^,~~~T~i~~~~~~ '~^ -.~~~~~-
. The maximum vertical
distance between the hi~~~~t ~~~~r~ ~~ +~I~~~t~~ c~~ ~~+~r~~e ~r~d t~~
lowest point of elevation of the existing or finished surface of the
qround. ~~vi~~ ~r ~r`~~w~t~ irr~~i~~li~t~iy ~~1j~~~r~~ t~ eit~rer side of
the fence as measured in a continuum at each qoint alonq the
fence.
8
SECTION 4. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.02.030-310 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.02.030-310 Finished first floor.
The top of the first floor of a structure which does not extend
more than three feet above the average natural ~or i~-~e
, theoretical grade, as ~~a~,lic~ble.
SECTION 5. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.02.030-335 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.02.030-335 Garage, semi-subterranean.
A structure located partly underground used for parking and
storage of vehicles, where the finished floor of the first level of the
structure is not more than three feet above the average natural
~or ' , theoretical grade, as
applicable~#~e--pa~sel, except for openings for ingress and
egress.
SECTION 6. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.02.030-355 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.02.030-355 Grade, theoretical.
An imaginary line from the midpoint of the parcel on the front
property line to the midpoint of the parcel on the rear property line,
9
from which height calculations in the R2. R3, R4 and Ocean Park
District are measured.
SECTION 7. Part 9.04.08.06 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Part 9.04.08.06 Multiple Familv
Residential Districts
Section 9.04.08.06.010 Purposes.
(a) ~~w ~~n~itv ~l~ip~~ ~~r~ril~ R~~i~~~~~~1 ~i~~ri~t
(R21. The R2 District is intended to provide a low density
multiple family residential neighborhood (zero to finrenty-nine
dwelling units per net residential acre) free of disturbing
noises, excessive traffic, and hazards created by moving
automobiles. The R2 District is designed to prevent burdens
on the public facilities, including sewer, water, electricity and
schools by an influx and increase of people to the degree
larger than the City's geographic limits, tax base or financial
capabilities can reasonably and responsibly accommodate.
The R2 District affords protection from deleterious
environmental effects and serves to maintain and protect the
exi~ting character and state of th~ r~sidential neighborhood.
(b) ~+~~1~crnw ~~~si~~r iN~r~t~~~~ ~a~~~v 14~~~~~t~+~~a~
~s~~r~~~ ~~ ~ ~`~~ #~~ ~~~t~"~~ ;~ ~nten~~~ t~ _ r~v~d~ ~ ~f~~+~
10
r~~ ~~~ ~c~~~i~ ~itl~~r~ r~~di~r~ d~~~~~ ~n~~~:~ I~ fi~rni~
r~~i~~~~~~1 r~~i~~b~r~~~d~ _~~~rc~ t~ t~~r~~~i~~ d~v~~lir~ ~~~~~
~~~ r~~t r~~i~~~~i~l ~~r~~ fr~~ ~f ~i~~~rbi~~ ~~~~~~, ~~c~~~~~~.
~r~~~, ~r~d kr~~~r~~ ~r°~~~~d ~ rn~~~r~~ ~c~t~~~~i~~~. T~e ~~
District is ~~~i~~~~_ ~~ ~~°~~~~~ ~a~rd~r~~_ on the public
f~~~l~~i~~. i~~l~a~~r~~ ~~~r~~a v~~t~r~ ~I~~~ri~i~ ~~~ ~~t~~~l~ ~~
an influx and increase of people to the degree larger than
the City's aeoqraphic limits, tax base or financial capabilities
can reasonably and responsibly accommodate. The R3
T~~~~l`l~t ~~~f~~ 3~1"C~~~~~J@f7 ~F~~P'] ~~~~~~~'lC~U i ~!7'J~~"~~7177~~7~~~
~f~~~~~ ~r~~ ~~r~~~ ~~ r~~i~#~%~ ~r~d' ~~~~~~t the existina
~~ar~~~~r ~~~ ~°~~~~ ~~ th~ r~~ic~~~~i~l neiQhborhood.
(c) ~'~~1~ ~~r~~it~ ~~ul~~~~~ ~'~r~i~tr ~~~~d~r~ti~J
C~i~~r~et (~A~~. ~'1~~ F~4 ~i~~r~~~ i~ ~rr~~~r~~i t~ ~rr~~id~ ~ br~~~
r~,~~~ ~f ~~u~ir~g ~ithira hir~~ ~'~~~it~r ~r.~J~i~l~ f~~~~~
~°~~r~~r~~~~J ~~i~~~i~r~~~ ~z~r~ ~~ ~~~t~-~~g~~ ~~v+~~J~~g ~r~~t~
per net residential acre) free of ~~~turt~~~~ ~i~~~, ~~~~~sr~~
traffic, and hazards created b~ ~rr~~r~r~g ~~tr~r~~~il~~. Th~ R~
~~~t~i~t ~~ ~'~~~~~~d t~ ~r~;~~~t ~~~~~~ ~~ the public facilities.
~~~~~~rr~~ ~€;w~;~. ~r~t~r. ~~~~~~i~itr~ ~r~~ ~~~~a~i~ ~v° ~n i~f~~x
and ~~~~~~r~~ ~~ cr~c~~~~ ~~ t°~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~g~~ ti~~~i ti~~ ~i~~.~~
qeoqraphic limits, tax ~~~~ ~~~ ~in~nci~~ ~~7fi~i~i~~~5 ~~r~
r~~i~c~t~at~i ~~~' ~re~ v~~it~t ~~cvm~rr~vd~t~. ~`h~ !~4 di~t~~~~
11
~f~r~r~~ ~~~~~cti~~a ~r~~`1 d~~~~~~r~~~ ~~~~~~a~~~~t~~ ~f~~~~~ ~n~
~~~r~~ ~~ rr~~int~in ~n~ r~t~~fi k~~ ~~~~ti~ ~I~~r~~t~r and
~t~~~ ~~ ~~~ r~~i~~r~ti~l ~~i ~i~~r~~~d,
Section 9.04.08.06.020 ~Allowed land uses.
~~~I~ ~.~~-~ ~,~~~d ~~~~ ~a~l~w~~ ~ra ~l~lti~4€~ ~~milv
'~~~i~~~~~~1 ~i~~r°i~~.~~ ~d~r~~~~i~~ ~I~~~~d l~r~~ ~~~~ ir~ ~~~ ~~~ ~, ~~d
9`4`$` L_~?~A~~EI 1'utl,,,. ~~~~# ~~~~.+~~~. ~.+~A4~ 9~ SA~~.~4n+~ ~~e~~1.i~~Y~l~b+ 7P~0.~~ ~~~ S~~~C74 FF~,!'d Sd8 z'r
~~rr~~t~#~~ i~ ~~~~ ~~~tr~~~ ~~k~~~~~ ~~ ~t~~~~r°d~ ~~~~r~r~~~~i ~~~~r t~~
~~di~i~r~~l ~~~~l~~i~~~ ~~~u~r~. ~.~r~~ ~~~~ ~~~i~~~t~d ~i~l~ ~1~~
@~~1~~~ °`~~~" r~~~~i~~ ~ ~~~f~sr~,~r~c~~ ~t~~~~rt~~ ~~rr~it ~r~d ~r~
subiect further ~t~ndard~ ~~t fc~r~J~ ~nd~r t~~ A~i~~ti~r~~l ~~ul~ti€~r~~
~~~t~r°~n_ L~~~ ~~~~ d~~i~r~~~~d ~i~t~ th~ 1~#~~r~ ~,~C~~"' r~r~~i~~ ~
~~n~at~e~r~~~ ~~~ ~~r~it ~~c~ ~r~ ~u~~~~~ ~~ fu~t~~~ ~~~r~~~rd~ ~~~
~~~~ ~r~~~r tt°r~ ~~~i~~~~~~J ~~~p~~~~it~r~~ ~~ur~r~. ~~r~~ u~~:~ t~~t ~~~~
no letter ~~~i~r~~~i~r~ ~r~ ~t~~ ~~~~~tt~~ i~ t~~t ~~~~~~d~r ~ii~tri~+~~.
~~~~tr~~ ~~r~~rr~~ ~s r~~t ~~~~~~~~ in any multiple family residential
~Ji~~r~~f. ~~~~ a~~r~ ~~~ r~~~ ~p+~+~i~~~~i~~ ~~tt~c~~iz~d i~ ~~~~i~i~~~.
12
I Child dav care centers. I CUP I CUP I CUP I 9.04.14.030 I
Qnd~n~~
I Larae family day care hom~~. I ~ I ~ I P P I o•~•~~•OQO I
Neiahborhood qrocerv stores. ~ ~ p ~ 9.04.14.080
4.2 .12
~f~°r~~~ ~~~~1 ~°rr~~~ar~~a ~~~~~ ~~r .9 04•20•12
~~~~~'ol~k~l~ v~~at~t ~t~~ ~~~~~r~ ~P l~P ~e.~P
~~ ~~i~~~r~~~,
~~~a ~t ~ ~~_ • ~ ~r~i~+~a~ ~ ~v~~ 14 9.04.08.06.020 (cl
6~~~ ir~ '~r~it~k~~ ~ar ~~a ~i~r'~ ~~~~~~c~rw
St~
S~~ ~04.10.02.110
St~
t~r~i9~~~r~s {~p f~ a rr~~~~rrr+urr~ ~r~rr~~t ~~ 24 9.04.14.110
f t. . .12
One-story accessory buildinas and P P P ~•~•08.06.020 (cl
tructure t 14 f t in h i ht. - - - .1 ..1
One-story accessorv livina auarters.
P~P
- -
P P 9.04.08.06.020 (c)
p~ 9.04.08.06.020 (dl
9.04.12.080
P~~ ~ s~f ~a~ar~fii~a. ~~4P ~ 5' ~1~~' •5~~. ~. 2
Private tennis courts. P P P P p~ 9•~•12•060
e n~ ~n nQ
Underground ~arkina structures. I ~ I ~ I ~ I o•04.08.06.020 (fl I
13
~~~i~i~~i~~ ~.~r~~ ~~~ ~~ ~I~ti~~~ ~~~ ~h~ ~~ F~~ ~nd F~~
Districts:
e permitted in the R2 District:
(a) ~~~~I~ ~~ ~~i~t~n~~ ~,~ ~~ ~~~u~~P ~ , 1 ~~~, ~~ ~~~~r
replacement with a new hotel at an existinq hotel site in
~~~~~~r~~~~:~ ~w^it~r ~h~~ ~f~~~i~~~ ~'~v~~~~rr~~r~t ~~~~~~~d~ i~ ~~f~~~ ,~~
tk~~ ~ir~~ ~af ~~a~h r~~l~~~r~~~~ ~rr~ I~~~~~d i~ ~ ~~ c~r ~3 ~~r~+~ i~ ~n
~r~~ ~~~r~d~~ ~~ ~f~~ ~~r~t~rl~r~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~~r~~~ t~ th~ u~~~~. th~
~~~~~~~i~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~r~ t~ #~~ ~~~t. ~~~ ~~rrt~rlir~~ ~f t~'~~~~iir~
~~~i~~~~~r~ ~~ ~h~ ~~~#~ ~r~~ t~~ ~~~t~rlir~~ ~~ ~c~r~~~r~~ ~v~~~~ ~~ t~~
~r~~~, L~~J~ i~cl~~~'ir~~ th~~~ ~~ ~r~~~ ~~ p~r~~l~ ~~ ~~~ r~~~~ ~id~ ~f
Montana ~~~~~~ ~°~thi~ t~~ ~~~t ~~d ~,r~~~ Y~~~nd~r%e~. ~~~vided:
(1) 7~~r~ i~ ~c~ ir~~r~~~~ ~r~ ~~~ ~1~~r ~r~~ ~~ t~~ hc~t~~ ~~~r
January 1, 1995.
(2) ~r~~ ir~~r~~~+~ i~r th~ ~u~rrb~r +~~ r~~r~~ i~ ~c~r~r~J~~~i
~~r~~~~~ ~t~b~~~~s~~r~ ~~ ~~c~r~~ ~a~r"~t~~g ~r~ .~~~~~~ ~' . ~ 9~~ ~r~d does
~rr~~ ~x~~:~' ~~~~ ~~~~~r~~ ~~ t~i~ number of rooms existing on January
~ ~ ~ 5~~~. r~~ ~~~~ ~~~r~r~. ~~t~~~v~r ~~ ~~~~. ~~~
(3) All oth~r Zoninq Orc~i~~n~~ requ~~r~~~nt~ ~r~ m~t
including parking r°~;~u~~°~~n~~r~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~dit~~r~ c~f t~~~ys ~fter
January 1. 1995.
14
(b) ~~~i~~~t~~l ~~r~~~~ir~~~~~ ~r~ also subiect to the
~~~~air~~~nt~ ~~t f~~th i~ ~ub~~~~t~r ~.~~.16 (Condominiums and
~~~~t~~ ~a~~ ~~u~dy~i~i~~~~. .
(c) ~~~~~~~ ~uil~i~ ~ ~~~I~ ~~ ~r~~it~c~ur~il
~~r~r~~~~i~~~ ~ri~~ t~i~ ~ri~~~i~~i ~~~~e~~ar~~~l. ~lesHi . . .
(d) ~~~-~t~r~ ~~~~~~~~ li~i~~ c~~~~t~r~ ~r~ lirr~it~c~ ~~ ~~R
~~~~ i~ ~~i~h~~, ~ r~i~~r~~r~ ~~r~~l ~r~~ ~~ 1~r~~~ ~~~~r~ ~~~t i~
required. .
(e) Sinqle ~~~~I~ ~~r°~~~~ ir~~i~~~r~c~ r~r~r~~f~~t~r~ri ~i~~.~~r~~a
r~~~~~t ~~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~rr~~n~~t ~~ur~~~ti~r~. ~ :
m . ~ ~ ~ _ • • .
(f) lJn~~r~~~~~s~d ~~r~ir~~ ~~~~~t~r~~ rn~~ l~~ ~~~~~ti~r~~~l~
~~~~~~~~~~ ~~aJy ~~ ~1~~ ~~~~~~t ~~~~1 ~~ ~~~~~J~ ~v~~°~ v~~~r~i~~ ~y ~
~~r~~~~ ~rk~r~c~ l~f ~t th~ ~ir~~ r~€ ,~~'~~ti~n t~~ t~ii~ ~~i~~t~r. ~,~~
parcel(s~ is s~~t a~~~~~rat ~~ ~ r~~r~~J ~r~ t~~ C2 District, the ground
9~~~J ~~~~ ~~e ~r~d~r~r~u~~ ~~r~~~~ ~tr~~t~r~ i~ ~~~~ ~~r
f+~si~~~rtra~ ~r ~~~ir~ ~~r~~ ~~~ ~p~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~, ~~~ ~tr~r~~~r+~ r~
associated with an adiacent commercially zoned parcel, and the
v~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ t~~ ~r~~~r~r~rt~r~~i ~~rktr~r~ ~~ ~r~~r~ th~ ~+~~r~~~r~r~~i~
~~~~c~ ~~~~~~ ~r~~ ~~ ~~r ~r~r~ t~~ r~~s~e~~r~t~~~~y zr~r~~d ~~~~e~ a~ ~~
reasonablv possible. .
15
~9) °~~~d ~~I~~ ~~~ li~~t~~ t~_~r~ _ ~r ~~I~r~d~r ~~~ f~~
~~~~ d~~~li~ ~~~t ~~r ~ r~n~~~rr~~~ ~~ ~~ d~ ~ each. SeAie~
~
~~~ ~.~ ~ a ~~~ ~~
~~ ~~~~a~.~~mP~~~~~~.~.,~,p~ -
~ : ~ ° +~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ a
f~} •
~
f ~}_ "~~ ~- , .~~ : y ~.:~ ~ ~- ~~ . ~,-#eFeask-
~~~~~~; ~~~-~ ~~~~~~~~;~:
Section 9.04.08.06.030
~~~: j~~~~r~~d f~~ ~~t~r~ U~~~
~~~-~ ` ` ` ,
~ - .
~ ,.
.
,
4~ •
16
Section 9.04.08.06.040 .
fReserved for Future Usel
~~~ ~~ x~ir~r~_ ~ d~~ _ a~s~ ~~-~ - "~~r~i in _ fh,~~ ~ a ~ .
~ ~ ' ~~ ~~ ~3 - ~~~4~ ~ ~~I~
~'&} •
{~ ~f~}RQ-~9kFS@~
~6-} •
~ •
{~ ~F~F~FI@~
~ ~ ~ ~f IT ~~-F~ .
~ , ,
~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~
~ ~,~ •' r , , ~~ ~ ° ,
{+} ~68~5-A~WA~f~
{}} •
{~} ~BS~IAFF}@~
{~ ~6~
~}- , , . .
, ~ ~
~ ~6ife-~~i~~'~F~~--~~~EF~-~t~~~i~~'~k~~~~~
17
Section 9.04.08.06,050 .,~Reserved for
Future Usel
~ ~ ~~
~~~ ~~ '~~ .
Section 9.04.08.06.060 Property development standards.
All property in the R2. R3, and R4 Districts shall be
developed in accordance with the ~1 °~~~~~~d~rd~ ~~t f~rth i~
Table 9.04-2:
~s
C~~~~~a~~~~~~. t
~
~r~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~t~ ~ ~3~1~J ~~ ~,~Q~i ~~ ~~47~~_~F ~,~~.~~,~~a.t~~~k ~Y
; ~+"~~S~Ca ~ ~`~~1~ ; ~4~ ~~ ~rD ,
~ ~.~~~~tfi~ t~~~t
~ ~. ~_~_.. ~ ..w ~ v.. I
~wm ~ ~C~
.. ~ ~~ ~ t~~
~
~___.~..~.~ ~ ,_ ~ .~„
~
C4~c3~lY~tl~Cls ~t]~{~~f4 F°~~G ~l~ ~ ~~~?~R~:S ;~ ~k~7~°E~.~
~ ~ a~'~kf'~~*~
~
~~
~~
~~
~~~ ~C)~
~ '~
I ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~C ~~ ~~~~ .
.
.
,
~ ~~~.il~t~~~ I~~r~~1
~~~~~~ ~~~ry
'~°N~~~~°~i ~~~~
~~
~~~~~ c~f ~ ~~
~~~"/~ ~f ~ ~~
~t~r° ~~~
~47 °~'~ ~f ~ ~
~s~~,~r°#~ ~~~~~v
~e~si~r-b~~ ~"rc~nk "~~r~
~~t~~~~ ~~~t
~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~~
~~v~~~~~
~~„ ~r ~~ ~~d~ +~r ~~ ~~~ ~r_~~
~~~~~~I~~~t~ 1~i ~~~~~~1~~1~C~ I~f ~~~'~~twl~~1~~ 1~
~~~ ~~~i~~ ~~`S~ ~~~~i~r ~~~ ~~t~l~~
C~i~tr~~li~~ ~~s~ri~'t~~r~ ~i`r~tri~ki~~
~~t~. ~+1~ ~ ~~~.
v~~Q~~~~~r i~ ~~7~~F~~w~r b~ ~,~~ri~h~~~r i~
P~~~`wi~r'~~r~1 ~~ar ~`~~
. ~~~~~~ ~f~~~l ~~~ ~ 5 'i ~ ~.~~. ~ ~.~~,~~~
- ___. ~ __ _~ ~_ ~~ .,~,..._.,.~
~3i~ue~ro~~ ~~~~ 1"W~r~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~~,~~.~~i.t~~~ t~~
;,...,~~ll~~~~. tf~~t~ __.~.~..~. ~~, _~ ~.~. ~
' t~~~ ~~r'~~~ 9Jr~c~ ~s~r~~it~ € - ~m..~_.._..~.~ ~.~ - ~.~~,~~.~~.i~~~ ~~~ ~
~ ~~~~~~~a~~~ Y~~a~ ~ ~~~~t ~ °~ i ~,~~~ ~~ ~ ! 1~~~~ ~~ 1 1 ~~~_~~ n n~ r~~ ~~ ~~~ rx~
CJ~v~@~~~rr~a~~ ~~v~~~
F~~rrt°w~~ `~~'~~~~F~~9~ ~b~~~~l ~~.~~~ ~~ ~ ~~,~a~~ ~~ ~~~J~ ~F ~ ~4_~~ ~~.~d~a~ ~~t~
A,~idit~4na~ t~~~~~r~~r~~~rt ~~~c~~~t~~r~~ ~~r C~~ R~. ~3 ~~~I ~~
Districts:
(a) ~ar~~~s ~r~ ~xi~t~r~~~ ~i~ir~r #~ Septem~er 8. ~ ~~8 shall
not be ~~~~~~~ ~~ t~~~ r~~~r~r~r~r~;r~~. : . . , .
, ,
19
~ ~AA~
+
(b) The maximum b~~l~~r~ ~~~ ~t r~~ ~~ ~x~~~d~d in
each ~~~tri~~ ~r~~~d~~ ~~~ r~~~i~~r~ r~~f ~~K~~t ~~~~ ~~t exceed 30
f~~t ir~ t~~ ~~ ~i~fri~~, ~~ fi~~~ irr th~ Ft3 district. or 45 feet in the R4
district and subiect to the following criteria:
. _ ~~ - .. ~~~ ~..~ ~'
e ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~~-sir~gl~#a~il~
~~ -~~~~~~~~~~, -
(1) In the R2 district, the ~~i~dir~~ ~~I~rr~~ ~~~~~ ~u~~~otv-
three feet shall not exceed fiftY r~~r~~n~ ~f ~~e ~~r~~~ ~~v~r~~~ ~~
the ~t~~ Trs~r~~~i~~~l~ ~~l~~a ~f~~ t~~r~~y-tt~r~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~tt ~I~v~ti~~.
~~~1#~~l~~d ~ay ~e~~~. ~~r ,~ur~~~~~ ~f ~~~~~J~~~r~~ ~ ~~~~yr'~ ~~r~~l
coverage. area rr~+~~~ur~r~r~r~t~ ~~~IJ ~~t~~~ i~ t~~ ~u~~i~~ ~ur~~~~
of exterior walls. No ~+~~~r~ ~~ ~~~ bua~~~r~~ ~~~~~e ~k~v~ ~~r~~~v-
~~rr~~ ~~t ~~~~~ ~r~~ro~~~ ir~t~ a pl~ne starting at twenty-three feet
above the front setback line and ~~~pi~r~ ut~v~~r~i ~t ~~5-~~r~~~~
angle ~~+~~~ t~~ r~~r ~~ ~~~ ~~t. ~~r~p~~s ~;~~~~+~~~g ~b~v~ t~r~ty-
~~~'~'~~ ~~2t ~~'f~~~ ~7f: ifl~ail~f:~ ii~ ~~i~ ~i.lt~~7lffiC~ '~t7~~iii~: ~c"~~'ClJ~~7tf~7'f`i. To
~~t~~r"r~~ ~~~ ~~~rr~r~ ~~~~r~r~~i ~y ~ parapet structure, finro sets of
para~~et' iines tv fvrm a rectangte s~~~i ~e us~~ tr~ ~~~i~~~ ~~~~ ~~a,
nnu~t,~~~~~~ t~~ ~~4~t c~f #~~ ~~r~ ~t.
20
(2) ~r~ ~f~~ ~~ ~~~~r~~ ~~~ k~~~l~y~ ~ v~l~~~ ~~~~~ ~~i~t -fi~~
~~~~ ~~~II r~~t ~~~~~~ ~i~ ~r~~r~t ~~ t~~ ~~~~I' ~~~e~r~ ~ ~~ ~~~
~~:~r~ i~~~~i~f~l~ ~~~~~r t~~ ~~ai~~-~~~ f~~# ~~i~~t ~I~v~~i~~,
r~~lt~ : li~d b f~~~. ~~~ ~~ ~~~~ c~~ ~~~~~~~~i~ ~ ~t~ '~ ~r~~l
~~a~a~r~~~# ~r~~ m~~~~ar~rr~~nt~ ~#~~1I ~~~~~~ t~ ~h~ ~u~~~~~ ~~r~~~~
of ~~~~ri~r ~~II~. i~~ ~~:i~r~ ~~ t~~ b~ildi~ volume above thi -five
~~~~ ~~~II ~~~~~~~~ ~~t~ ~ ~I~~~ ~t~r~i~~ ~~ t~iir~~-~i°~~ fi~~t ~~~v~ ~h~
front setback line and sloping upward at a 45-de req e anQle toward
the rear of the lot. Parapets ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~v~ t~Nrt~-fi~~ ~~~~ ~~~~I
b~ i~~l~a~~~ %r~ t~~ b~~ii~i~~ ~~1~~~ ~~~~~1~'~l~ar~, ~"~ ~~~~~~ir~~ t~r~
~~1~ar~~ ~r~~:~~~i~~ ~a~r ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~r~~~~r~. ~~ ~~t~ ~~ ~~r~~1~1 ~ir~c~~ t~
~~rr~ ~ ~°~~fi~r~~l~ ~~~J~ h~ ~~~d ~r~ ~~~1~~~ ~~~ ~a°~~, rs~~~~ipJs"~~ t~y ~5~~
height of the parapet.
(3) Jr~ t9~~ ~4 ~i~tri~f. Yh~ ~~iJ~~r~~ vr~J~rr~~ ~b~v~ f~rtv feet
~~~J~ r~r~t ~x~ ~~~ty ~er~~~rt c~~ t~~ ~~r~~~ ~~~r~~~ ~~ t~r~ ~t~~
ir~r~~r~t~J~ ~~~~ t~~ ~~~t~ ~~vt ~~~~~t ~J~~at~~~. rr~t~~ti~r~~r~ t~~ ~rv~
For purposes of ~a~~~J~~i~r~ ~ ~t~r~"~ p~~~+~J ~+~~~r~~g~. ~r~~
measurements ~h~l] ~~~~r~~ tc~ ~~~: c~+ut~~d~: s+~~~~~ r~~ ~re~~;~ic~r waJ~s.
~~ ~c~~~r~ ~~ t~~; br~~J~~r7~ v~~ur~~ ~~~v~ ~~~y ~~t s~~~~ encroach
into a plane starting at forty feet above the front setback line and
~~~~t~r~ ~r~~rr~+~ ~~ ~ ~~-~eqr~~ ~~x~~~ ~~v~r~~d ~~re r+~ar ~f ~~~ ~ra~.
Paraaets extending above fortv feet shall be included in the building
volum~ ~a~~~tl~.t~c~~, ~~ a~~#+~r~~~~ tt~~ vca(~~~ ~~cu¢i~c~__t~y ~
21
~~r~p~t ~t~~~ur~4 ~r~ ~~~~ ~f ~~~~~i~l lir~~~ to form a rectanqle shall
~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ th~ ~r~~ rrrult~: I~~~ ~ the hei ht of the ara et.
~r~dfih ~~~J9i ~~ ~~~#e~~ ~~~~~~~ of t~~ ~~~~~J ~ri~t~. ~a~ ~c~ur ~~~~
~ ~~r~~ ~~ ~~~s t~~r~ ~~~~ t~a~~~~~ ~~t~r~r~ ~~~t 'r~ ~ ~ir~g~~ ~~r~~lv
~~~t~rr~g ~~r`~~~~ ~~ t~~ ~~+~~~ r~~ ~~~t~~~~r ~. ~ ~~~. ~~1F,afd
,
22
~~ ~~; ",~. ;~~~-~,--R+~_.;;~-~~~ ~ ; ~ :- ~{ ~ ~~
(f) T"h~ ~~n~itv ~~~ ~~~rd~~~~ ~~~~i~~ ~~~1~~~~ i~ ~~~~h
one hundred percent of ~h~ ~~~t~ ~r~ ~~~~ r~~tri~~~~ ~~r w~r~ ~~~Y
i~~r ~r m~~~r~~~ i~~~rr~~ ~n~ I~~~~~~ ir~ ~n ~~ ~~ F~~ ~~~~ri~~ i~ t~r~
~r~~ ~~u~~~~ ~~ t~~ ~~~t~~~irr~ ~~ ~~~~r~ ~~~~~~ t~ t~~ ~~~~, t~~
~~~r~~r~li~~ ~f ~~~h ~~~~t t~ ~~~ ~~~~, th~ ~~~t~rli~~ ~f "~d'~~'~~ir~
~~~~~~,~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~u~h ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~i~~ ~f ~~~~~r~~ ~v~r~~~ ~~ tk~~
~r~~h. ~~t t~i~l~~ir~~ t~i~~~ ~~ ~r~d l~~ ~~r~~~ p~r~~~~ s~n #h~ r~~r~f~
~i~~ ~~ c~~t~~~ ~~~n~~~ ~i~l~it~ ~1~~ ~~~# ~~~ v~~~~ b~u~~~ri~~. r~~~r
be ~~~ ~~~ll~r~~ ~~ni~ ~~~ ~~~r~ ~~~Jv~ l~~ar~~r~~ ~~tv ~~~~r~ f~~f
~~.~~~ ~F~ ir~ #~~ ~:~ di~~r~~~. ~a~~ ~n~ d~~~li~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~v~r~r r~in~
~~r~dr~~~ ~ta~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ir~ t~~ ~~ df~tri~t. .
~i#eer~#ee~
~9) l~~r ~~rpr~~~~ ~~ t~~ c~~~er~ ~~~~~ r~r~uir~r~~r~t, ~
residential d~v~l~ir~~ ~~rit ~~~JJ rr~e~~ ~~~ ~rr~it t~~+~~ ~~~r~r~d ~~~~r~~~
six square feet (376 SF) in area, or larper. Affordable housing
~r~i~t~ rr~~y ~~l~~t~t~te ~r~~ ~~a~~r~ ~~r~ of common open space for
23
se#basl~- ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ : ~ ~- ' ;~~ •~ ~
~
~n~
-~v
(h) A Development Review permit shall be required for
proiects that exceed the established floor area threshold. See Part
9.04.20.14 of the ~~~ir~~ ~r~i~~~~~. ~ . A
~~~~~~ ~~~. e . ~ ~~~ . ~' m
~~ ` ~--~~ µ , -~~r " . '~" . -~~
r~~~ ' ` ` . ' ' ~~~~~~~~
~ ~
{a-~ - d •_
24
~~ . , ~~~ ~~~.~~ ~~~:~G-,~~~~~ , , ~~ ~~
~~~~ ~~~ - ~`~-°~~~n : ~1 ' ~-6&66
~"~~~st~~~ ;u"`; ~~~~~~p~~~~~~°~,~~~" ~~n~ ~~,~ ~~~t. ~~~
n n
~
~71`Y~ .:.. ~. ~~~~'~$"°"`1~~#'~~'SJ'F"'°"L~'r:"'"°'Ca~~~7'~'T'~""'~3"~'S'T'A'1~"~.s^~~ i YYSrtiSISf :'~~~"+rIIC3C~.
)°
f f
~ :~~~ ~?T~ . . , ~ ~..: ~. . . ~~
~ ~ ~ '~'f---- ~~~ ~~~~ .~ '~~~11 ~~~L 3~
9~ ~1~• ~ _ "~~ ~~ . ' ' - - ~ ' ~~~t~~~, ~a~s~
,.~~.,r. ,
~i+~6_ k^u'il~`r°s ~r~a>«~#~rwrs r}~~~i-i~~~~i'
~ ..a~sa~ -r~ui~7n ,~ ~,L'~t°ra'i-i-c~ s y ~,
~~~' . ~~.. ' ~.,~ e .~~~.[3~~~~~~~]'4~ Mtisd+~s~'xPkVt L~~I1~~ ~A
~ ~~~ ~V ~4 ~~._. . .'. . . , " _
25
~~~~1~~1 ~~~~.~~.~~.~~~ ~~~~~+~t ~~1~~ ~~~~1~~1`~'~.
r~i~~ ~`1~~G? _ ~~fl~~~Ld~~9~1"1 ~~1~ ~{~~I_~#~~1~__ ~~ ~~l~~I~f~ ~~"Ill~l~~~
~~i~~i~ ~ ~i~~~~ ~~~ f~~ ~~~ ~~r~ ~~ d~~#ri~t~ ~~~~I__~~r~ l ~ri~~~ th~
~~~Ic~~rir~ ~~~i~r~ ~~~~~~r~~. ~'~~u~~~rs ~~~j~~~~ ~~~~ d~ n~t ~~rr°~~Iv
~r~~~~ ~f9 ~~~~~ra ~t~~~,~r~~ ~~~I~ f~~ ~ul~j~~t t~ ,~r~hit~~~ur~l...~~~ri~v±r
~~~r~ r~vi~vv ~~~~u~~~ t~ ~F7~~t~r ~,~~.
(a) ~"~~ ~~r~i~~~~ f~~~r ~I~~~~i~rr ~f t~~ ~ir~t ~1~~~ l~~r~~ ~~~f~
be a minimum of six inches above. but no more than three feet
above theoretical qrade.
(b) ~~ ~c~~rti~r~~1 f~~~ f~~~ ~~t~~~k ~a~y~~c~ tf~~ r~ir~imur~
~r~~t ~~r~ ~~~.~°~~~~ ~~ r~~~ir~~ f+~r ~~ l~~~f ~~~r~~~ ~iv~ ~~r~~nt ~~ tt~~
~i~d~h ~f l~~ ~rr~r~t f~aca~~. ~h~ ~~~~~k ~n~lJ i~a~r~as~ ~n ~dr~ifi~n~l
~i~~ ~~r~~~tt ~~ tf~~ ~~~~r~~ ~~~~y~ J~v~l f~r ~ tr~f~J r~~ 3~ y~erc~r~# ~~' fl~~
bt~iJdi~~ v~~~r~f~. ~f 1~~~~ 4~ ~~~~r~ f~~~ a~~ ~J~i~ ~d~itir~rr~l ~~~r~r~~
story front ~~~J~~~~ ~~r~1~ ~~ ~~~1i~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~r t~r°r~~~.
(c) ,~~~ r~~~rr~t~ ~~tb~~J~~ ~~t t~~~t~ i~ ~~r~ i~~t~t~r~~
9.04.08.06.060 and 9.04.08.06.070 shall be open to the sky except
~~r p~r°~rr~t~~ ~r~~~~~~;~~ur°~~ ~rc~~~~~~c~r~~ ~~r~~~~r~~~l ~r~ 5~~~~r~~
9.04.10.02.180.
(d) ~P~~~nr"r~~~ ~~~~i ~~ c~~~~~~~~ ~i~~,~r~ the buildinp
~r~d ~~i~~t r~~t ~t~r~e~r ~s a~ ~~Id~~i~~~~ s~ory ~~ the exterior building
facade.
2s
(e) ~t~ir ~nd ~I~~~tc~r r€~'~~#i~r~~ ~k~~~~ ~~~ m~~i~~r~
~~~r~~~~d ~~~ ht lirr~it ~~~II nc~# ~~~~~d ~h~ r~i~~mum width de th
~r~~ ~~i ~t id~r~t~~i~~ ir~ ~~~ t~r ~ ~f t~r~ ~~~m~~ ~i~r~i~~ Munici al
~~~~ t~ ~~~~rr~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~c~~~~g i~~l~~~~~ ~a~~ i~r~~~n_ . ~r1~_It~pl~
I~r~~ir~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~ r~~~~~r~~r~~~ ~r ~ir~ul~~€~r~ ~~rr~d~~~ ~~r~ll ~a~
~~ ~~rr~i~t~~ ~~~~r~ ~~r~ ~~~~r~tu~ f~~~q~t ~r~i~.
(f) An additional finro foot averaae sideyard setback from
~~~ ~i~ir~~~r~ ~~~~air~s~~r~~ ~I~~MI ~~ ~r~~w~~d ~t ~~~h ~~~~r. ~~tb~~k
~r~~~ ~a~~~t~r th~n ~i~~ f~~~ i~~ ~~~t~ fr~rr~ t~~ rr~i~ir~urr~ ~~d~~
~~t~~~k. ~r ~r~~ ~~~~i t~ ~~r~r~l~ ~rit~ ~~~ ~~diti~a~~~ ~~t~~c~
r~~~~Ji~°~r~~~~~ ir~ ~~~~i~~~ ~~l ~~~~r~, ~h~ll rt~at ~~ ~~~~4 #~ ~~ti~~~
~a~a~~~i~~~~~ ~i~~ ~~i~ r~~~~r~rr~~r~t-
~9) 7~h~ ~ll~~~~i~r~ r~f ~J~~v~~~a~~ ~~r~~l ~~v~r~~~ ~r~~ ~~~1]
~~ r~~~~ri~u~~~t~ te~ ~r~vi~~ ~l~~r d~Jir~~~~ir~r~ ~~t~~~r~ int~i~i~u~J ~a~st~
tt~rr~~~~: ~h~r~~~ ~~ ~~J~ ~~~~r, ~~~ ~~~r~ r~r~ ~~~tir~r~: ~~~ ~f ~~riitior~~~
stepbacks; +~~~ ~~ ~~~k~ ~r l~~~~t~r~~~~: ~r ~t~+~r ~r~hit~~tur~~ ~r~~
spatial manipulation. A change in plane to differentiate individual
c~t~~~s s~~~~ t~: ~ ~~r~ir~~r~ ~~ ~ ~ ~r~~~r~~. ~~~v~:~~~. r~t~r~; t~~~ ~r~e ~~t
r~~ ~~~~ t~ar~ ~~r~~~ ~~r"~s r~av ~~ c~r~~a~~~i t~~~t~~r f~r t~+~ ~~r°~~~~
of providinQ a shared ~rrtry, t~a~~~r~y ~r ~tl~~;~r +e~~~~~~r st~a~~.
(h) ~~r~~~~~~ ~~r ~trii~lrr~~ rr~~fli~nes ~~7~i~ ~~ ~~r~id'~c~.
(i) In addition to reauired private open space, every unit
`~4'~f~ ~ 54~~.~`~ ~~d1~1 '~ - ~~ f+~~~ 4n #~1~ ~~ &~1~~f1~~ t~11'~ : ~!"~~
27
~~~t i~,~ t~~, ~~ ~'~~tri~~ ~~d ~~a~ ~~~~ ir~ t~~ ~~ ~~~~r°i~t ~~~~N r~vi~~ ~
roof deck of at least 150 square f~~t ~~ ~r~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~tb~~~ ~rtri
screened from neighboring buildinqs. Guardrails surroundinq a roof
deck shall be set back a minimum of three feet from the edQe of all
~~t~~i~a~ bui~~ir~ ~~~I~, ~h~~ ~r~~ ~~t~v~~n ~ r~a~~ ~~~~ ~a~rdr~~l ~~~
the edge of the building shall be used and maintained for irrigated
~~~i~~~~}~ir~~ ~rit~~~ p~rr~r~~~~~~ ~I~~~~r~ t~ ~~r~~r~ ~i~vus between the
~~~~ ~~a~ n~i~~~~ri~°~~ b~il~i~~~.
~) ~~~°~~I~ ~~~in~ ~ ~idth ~~-~~~~r ttr~n ~~ f~~t ~~d
located i~ ~~~ ~~ ~r ~ ~i~~ri~t ~h~ll ~r~~id~ ~ ~~u~t;~~r~ ~~nt~r~~
~~~s th~ ~~~. ~~~irt~~r~~ ~~i~~l cc~r~~~~~ ~ri~~ ~~~ ~~11t~w~n~ ~~:~~~r~
criteria:
(1) Courtyards shall be no less than 10 percent of the
~~~~! ~~1 ~r~~ ~r~t~ r~r~~t f~+~ ~~~i+~~~~ t~ ~c~~~r~~~~'~~~ ~ r~~~~ra~~J~r
~r~~~ ~r~~ ~~~~ ~~~r~ ~.~f7~ ~c~~~r~ ~~~t ~~t~ ~ r~rir~~r~~r~r wrt~t~ ~~ ~8
feet measured parallel to the front parcel line. Required setback
area ~~~1J ~~~ c~~r~t ~~~~~d ~~~ r~r~~ir~~r~ ~vir~t~ ~~ ~ .C~U~ ~+q~r~r+~ ~~t
requirement.
(2) Courtyards shall be oaen to the sky, but may include
}~~~~rtt~~ ~r~~~~~tr~~~ ~~t f~r~~r r`~r ~~~+~ ~.~~. ~~.t~~. fi'8t~ ~~r ~r~t~
yard ~r°~re~t~~~~. ~~u~t~~t~d~ ~~a1~ b~ ~i~ib~~ ~n~ ~~c~~~i~~~ fr~rr~
the sidewalk and each around floor unit. If inechanical or utility
~ +i~ ~~~+~ ~~ ~ac~~ in tt~~__~~~~ ~~rd it s~~~t ~~ ~~ree~~d visu~~~
28
~r~d ~~c~u~ti~~il~~ ~~~II not encroach into the minimum courtvard
area.
(3) ~~~~~~r~ ~r~~r~ ~~t~~, rf ~r~~id~~ ~~~II ~~ 7~ ~~~~~~~
transparent to the ~~~ar~~~r~ P~~ ~~~f~~ri~~t~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~I ~~
permitted.
(k) ~~~h ~~~~ ~~i,~~~~i~ ~~ ~ ~~r~~~ ~h~~i ~r~~i~~ ~ ~~ir~r~r`~
pedestrian entrance accessed from that street. Corner lots shall
provide primary pedestrian entrances from the street sideyard.
Primary entrances must include defined entryways, stoops, or
porches. At least one primary living space per unit must be located
~~ t~~ ~ir~~ ~1~~~ ~ritJ~ v~i~rr~~!,~~ f~ci~r~ i~i~ ~#r~~~ ~l~v~~i~~r_ ~~ildin~
~r~~ r~~~ f~~°r~ ~r~~iculafi~r~ ~n~ fe~~~tr~fi~~ ~h~ll l~~ ~r~v~d~~ ~~ t~i~
~t~w~~t ~1~~r~~»r~ ~~~ r~~nf~r~~ ~ ~~~~~~r~~n~~r~~~t~d ~~~i~
(I) Lots having a width of 99-feet or less shall conform to
the followinca
(1) ~~~~-~~~~~r~ 1~t~~Jt~rr~€~ ~r~tr°a~~~~ ~~~I~ b~ ~~;r~~~i b~ ~
project entry walk havina a minimum width of 48" that shall be
rr~~~~r~~~~~ ~r~~~ t~~ ~~~r~s~~~~ ~~si~~.
(2) If one project si~~y~r~ r~ ~~~~~~rrt tr~ ~~~; er~t~r ~v~~~ ~~
an existina buildir~g. t~~; ~~c~re~~ ~~tr~r ~r~ik ~~~I~ b~ I~~~t~~ t`n t~ir~
sideyard. If both ~r~j~~t ~i~~~~r~~ ~~e ~~j~i~~~~ ~~ ~r~~ry vv~~k~ ~~
~~istir~c~ f~ui~r~ir~qs, ~f~e project entry watic may be located within
29
~i~~~~ ~~~~~~~°d. ~"~~ ~e~i~~~ ~~~~' ~~Ik ~h~ll ~~v~ ~ s~mil~c~ ~~~v~tia~
~~ ~~~~ ~ratr~r ~r~~~ ~rr t~~ ~d'~~~~t ~r~ ~r~t~.
(3) Where proiect entry walks in the sideyard face an
adiacent entrv walk of an existinq buildinq, all fences, walls and
~~~~~~ ~i#~~ir~ ~h~ ~~~~v~rd ~~t~~~~ ~~~I~ r~~~ ~~~~~~ 4~ ~r~~~~~ in
heiaht•
(m) ~ r~i~~r~ur~r ~f t~~ ~~r~~~~ ~r~~~ shall be provid~d in
~~~~ r~~~air~~ ~a~~~~~~~~~d f~~~~~ ~~r~ ~~t~~c~~ ~~~ ~h~~~~ ~~r~~~Y
t~~~~ ~h~~N ~~ ~r~r~i~~~ #~ ~h~ r~~~~r~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~i~~ ~~rc~,
(n) Stairs providing access to semi-subterranean or
subterranean garaqes in the front yard setback shall be positioned
~~~~~~~~ t~ ~~~ ~ui~di~~~~~r~lJ~l tc~ #~~ ~~~~li~ ri~~~ ~~ vsr~~ ~r~d
screened with landscaping
(o) ~~ir~r~~y ~rr~i~~ti~r~~ ~k~r~v~ ~~~ ~~rc~ht l~mr't ~~r~~J r~r~t
~~~~ ~~r~~rasr~r~~ r~~~~t~r ~t~~r~ ~hr~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~th ~r~~ ~iv~ ~~~ i~
width.
~P) ~~ ~~:r~~~. ~v~~~. c~r ~r+~~~~. ~r° ~~~~~~ ~~ f~r~c~s. ~~~~~ ~r
~~r~~~~. ~,~~~~r~~ t~~ ~~t~~~r~~i ~~°~r~t ~~ ~~rrr~r s~~~y~ard ~+~tback s~~~~'
individually or cumulativelv exceed 42 inches height.
(q) ~~~~~~, ~~r~~~~. ~i~~~m~, ~nd' decks shall not
~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~t ~F ~~ ir~c;~i~s w~h~r~ ~r~j~ctir~~ ~'r~td ~ re~uir~d f~r~t
yard setb~~k.
30
(r) ~"~~ ~~~ ~~ r~i~l~~ti~~ tir~~~d ~r m~r~~r~~ _ I~~~
~r~~r~~~~~ ~r ~r~~ir~i~~~d b~ai(~i~ rr~~t~~mi~l~ ~~~1-~n ~~urr~i~~~
~v~~d~r~~ ~r~~ ~~ h~lt a~ ~i~~r I~~~ ~~~ ~~~ti~~ r~IN r~~~~~ ~r
f~~~r I~~~ ~~fr~ ~~~ u~~~f ~~ ~~i~~r~ r~~t~~i~l i~ r~~ibit~~.
(s) 9V~.._..~r~a~r~~~~ b~i€dir~~ ~~~~~I i~~v~ ~~r~ ~~~r~
~~~J~di~~ ~r~~? i~~~~~r~i~~ ~1~~~~.
Section ~~fl~y~8,~~y : ~~~ .~rc~i~~~~~r~i review.
All new construction, new additions to existing buildings, and
any other exterior improvements that require issuance of a building
permit shall be subject to review by the Architectural Review Board.
~J~~~~~r. ~~~~~~~~ th~t ~c~r~~J~ with Section 9.04.08.06.070 shall be
~:x~r~t~t ~~~r~ ,~~~~rrt~~tt.r~~~ ~~;~r~r-rr ~~~~~i ~~~~~vv. afsl~es#~al
~~~~~w~-~~,~ ~Q~; ~ ~~ ~ _ . . . ~ ' ' .
SECTION 8. Part 9.04.08.08 of the Santa Monica Municipal is hereby
d~le~~~! a~ f9~4~~~~
31
~~~ dS~ !"f~ 9C"1V~ ~ [4A~ r'~rsv~ ~+~.°~~.
e-c~ , , . . c~~re~~a~rr~~~s°~~ ~~~~' ' ~
. [RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR FUTURE
USE.]
~~ ~ N~~~~--~~-~ ~; ~,~~~~,~~~-~~+~~~~~~
~~5~ ~~ii~hin m~ai~ ~ium--'~~~~~~ ~4°~ _ ' ~~ ~~ ' t
i
i ~
~~~t~....~~~-~~~~ ~~~~~~~~° ~„e °~ ~~-~ ~ ~~~~~-~+~c~~+~~ ~-~~
, , ,
~~" ~= ,
~~~~~r~s--~~~~~~~~-~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~--~~
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
~
4~ •
Es3 ~#e~p+~~~-#asi~i~ie~
~ A* Ai~~~{,-~+nmil~i s~l~~inllir~ ~~i.~~r~
32
~
{#~ •
{~} •
{~ ~6HIAF~A~6~R~
~ . .
~
~
{~} •
~
{~ ~ . . ~
{~ •
33
[RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
~" ~~ ` ~--t~~ _ , ~ . ~~~ . . .
~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~l~i'~i~{'C~'J~~~c% ~.'~,~~ °°vi~,'r~r.
i~7 •
T°7 ~~iA~S@s'
~
~ ~
34
~~~ ~~~-~ ~ -~~ : ~ ~ ; ~ .: : ~~~
, •
{~}
•
35
{~} ~~~~•~k T- °~' ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~f8-~e@~
~ ~ n . ' ~~~ ; ~~~~#~.~~.,+~ .~~ ~,~,~ ~,, r~,.~~ ~~
~~~i~`~~~~ °~~ ___~~ ~~w ~,~,~~,~~ ~h~+ ,~~-~~~~ ~
~
~Fa~^,ll r~wa~w# ~e~ ~~iF~i g..g~ i~+w~e^~r~t^9#
~'~~'~` ~- ~ ~l-s- -. t'°t~_ '~~~ '~'~-r-ec~~i-r~~
{~e~ ~ w~~ ~~r ~ ~~. . .
~ ~~ ~~~~~~t-~~-~~~ ~-~ ;~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~ ~+~~~~~'~~#-~~~~~~~~~~---~~ +~ ~ : ~ ~ -~
, •
{#~ ~~~° ~~~~~ :-~~x~~~- .
{g~ "~ ~~ 1~. ~~ ~ ~ ~
. . ~~
r ~~~~.~~~~~„~.+~~rt~ -~n~-t~~
~ ~~1~~~ t~ ~ ~° ~~~ ~ ~~~- . . F . Y ~
~'fT7~~~~.7ii~~ ~.~i`"~L7-~~'-`.~. i.~ii~iSl~~'~~]'A~""~L F.~'3f~ 3P°t~°`LiPf~'~£SWR:~ ~',S -V~ -~li~./
~~P~YfYf ., .. ~, 9 3£"~' P4 1~~~.~~.. ~ ~ ~~ .. , ,4~ _ .. :~ ~~-. a.
~ •
~.~ 1 /c~4n~ine v 1~4 wird4l~\
~
~~~ ~ . ~ic~~~ ~~ ~~~~a~~l -, ~~~ ~~~ ,~~~
{+} • ~~ef
,
,. • „
. ,
36
. ~ ~ ~ ~ . _~~ ~ ` --~~~ ~ ~a.~~~~-afea
~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~' ~~~
~ ~ ~°af ~nr~ss°~r ~-~-~~~~r~ fr~a° ~~'~~ ~~: ~
~ '
~ ~~ ~~~~f~ ~ -~?~'~~- : £i~~~"" CF..r~-~~a--~'rrT
. . ~.- l~~i~~:_ '~~~ ~ ~MTI F~'~'1 il'~€'... +AYS~'
~i
~~Ti~~ ~ita~r'3Y'f~ +-sJ`ir'4i'~etaM+n~" ~d"ra2Tw3T~~°Y~'tiA'i'~""" ~~~~~A'~~ ~.: r-a*°c.~'Y^s,YS~_~,~:~~.
~~3~"T3~T`-TYCA""ia ~'~ .~~~"'+ °'~~T3"' . ~. ~i' ~ ~,~, ~.~' ,.~~. ~YA't5 J~Y ~'}°i~.YS. ~.a^17°3
a'T
11 11
. ~
4 _ , . _ v~~+~r~~~°~'.~~ . e
,
~ :
T~7 •
,
37
~
. ,
~f~~'~-a---~ ~~~~ _~~ ' d~ _ ~ ~--rf~~~~
~~~+~-~~~I ~ g ~~ ~~~~~+~ ~~~~ ~~~: , ~
i~~~~ ~ ~~w "~- ~~-~~.~~~~~~ m~'
44-~ _ ~~i~~~ ~~ ~~ _ ~ ~~ ~ "~~ ~~~~o
,
,
~~ ~~-~a~~-~J~a~+~~ ~ ~:
~
,, . . ,
~~ -~t~ _
, ,
,
38
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
C'l' *:J:... ,~3"CY"ti':~in'~YA'g'k"~t ~'s~ix8 +°J~.f"'~~,~,~~te"YNS~ ~`~'"a..C~'VIC.'~'I~?l.Pi ~°3111~'L'~'iT"S ~-.~~ ~'f~
~3~Y~4P ai°ti~'~~L"tM" _f~S/~`~s~..~. P~,gF'~YM,~~ ~ .' ~[ ~` -. GT ~'PT p .
T3 '~,~'T]~T
~~~{"'~'~"Y`~,~'lt~ ~ ~~ ° ~ . ~.~v~`~4'~'~'~B ~'..'T4kxF.. .~`lhiY~Yf_3F^~~' ~P~. ~' ~~~
~~'~~': ~ - - ~~" ~ ~€~F"~c°~ ~ ~~~~;~
SECTION 9. Part 9.04.08.10 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is
hereby deleted as follows:
. [RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR FUTURE
USE.]
, ,
, , ,
, , . . , . .
.
39
~~~~- ~ ' ~ . -~~~-~ , . ~ ~
~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
8~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~it-~~~-~~~~ [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~-- - ~ ~-~~ ~~~~~
f~ •
~} Se~~e~g
~
~
b~
{~} •
~
{~} , ,
,
40
~
. . . . ~~~t~i~' ~~~~----~~a~~~~t : _.__....~~.~ q
[RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
~~~ ~~~` ~ ~~ ~!vv~ ~`~~~:~~:
~ •
{b~ ~ea~+~#~etfse~:
{~} •
{~} G~s-eFled~e~
{~} •
{~ •
4~? ~fafie~
{#~ •
4+? •
41
(jl ~lffinoc. ~nrl ~rr,~r~,~ina^~ rrdna^r°a~ fn~~pE°~¢r~i~~S~l~ ~~f~
V/
~
~ 1"It~ .
\"'/ '
!nl ~e~4 L~i,w,e~
Tn7
\`''/ `''.."....'..'
\Y/ '
\`i/
r ~
t
'
-- _ _ _ .... .~..-. -~.
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
~ ~~~
4~~ ~~~~ ' , ~4~-~~ ~
42
~~ : ~~;~~~. ~ ~
, ~ ~~-~~ ~+~~~~~ ~~~a~r~~:
[RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
{~ ` ~ ~ - ~~ °~~_- _ +~~~~ ._ ~ w. ~-~~~'~~~~~~-~e
e~ESee~~ , ~'~~~~ _~~ ~~~ m . ,~~~~°~~~~~r . ~~
, ~
i °7
~~~~-~~ - - ~~ ~"~~~~ . ~~~ ~ g
~~~~~~~_~~:-_~~~;~~~r~ n_o~ -, ~.-~~~.~~ ~~ ~,~~~ + ~~.~,~~......~~~~~~
c.~^Q~r~T~'~ - ~'~~,!~".;~'~,~~7.~,~„„°",~:.~ ~~ wi~~tsr~ ,v`~.n ~~'^sas r~sr~ir~~[s~ rar+a
i"
~ •
~ ~~~r1v~11 _ . ` ~~~~-+~~'~
~ ~~~~ ` ~ _ ' .
~
~ , .
i~7 •
43
{#~ . .
{~} •
~ +
, •
~.~ 1 /c~4~riec. v 1~4 ~iiirl~h\
~
~ ~~ ~~ ~- •1 s ° ~ ~~~ ~4"~°~ "c°~
D~rmi4 ~+1~~11 ~,r ,~ .,~ ,....~~~_.~ ° ~` ~ °'~°~~~°-~ ~P.
T\.rTTTiL Jf1LfiT- ~
t~~~~~~r~ ~~~~,~~.~~~~° '~-~ .
{+} •
~ .~ ~~ . ~~ . . .
, . : , , ~~~~~~~~~~ . .
_ ~ , ~~ . . . . ~~
. ~
~ •
~ ,. ,_~, Y a: , .. :-~. . . .' „ .~,. ~ ~~. ~~ ~
• }
44
- +~~- . ~-~ ~~_ ' ~~~~~ . ~~~~~~~ -#ee~-aad
~ ~~~ .~~-~~~N~~ ~~ ~~-~a~+~ ~~~~ ~~~ . ~+Ae-ar~
~~~ ° 4~ ., ~,~.~~~ -~ . ~~ ~„
~•'~-~:~_.. ~ ~° ~~~k~-~~~-4` -~"~rr~ t ~Fr~r~F~~r4~ rwra~#~rr #h~n ~~~
7PiCl~`t~ ~~JQ'1 ~nCl~'~n }`'~7'R~VG~CIV~T•~vim~ ~m h~ ~ilr1.~l~le ~~•~4i~t7Vr~•~7tid"ii
TG~, .~:.~. ~i~~~~ . ~~~, . ~ L.r'C~~~~~"`~ -:~ ~~~"""~~7 ~4»~~'""~'~~' , ~ ^ y- ~~..-~ ~ ~..
1
f •
~ "V~~~#~~~~ '~ .. ~~ ~ ~ ~~. .,:.~°~a~#`~~"... ,~ _. ~,~.
~a ~ . ~-~~~"-~t' ~~~~~~°"~~~'~~ ~~~~J~ .. .. ~~-~~ , -~~~
~~~; ~ ~~~~ f~~r~~ ~~^~iailr~ir~rv ~Yr~ar~+ia*,w^~ ~s~r°~ar~ ~4~sir^~ar fs~rs~_~~r - ~~
+~~'~~~~~.~.~: ~ ~W~ ~ ~~ _.e^n~~+ir~~,~r'r~rr°°r.~"`ri'~ : _ . ~' ~. . • ~VV
~ , ; .. ~_~s~~~ : ~ -~~' ~~",~.t~ ~y~ _~;;-°~~ 6 . . ;~ ~}~
~
~# . ~~-..._, _ : ' °
~ ,, . ,
45
~
,
~
~~ m i~~~_ ~ :. ~~ ~ . ..._-~~~~~~--~° . • ~~ .~.~~~ ~~_~ ~ ~ r~~~~~~,~, ~~~~
~~~ . ~~ . _ . , •~d ~~~ a~" ,~ fl~-~
, ,
. . . ~~~~~~; ~~aa.~-~ r:: ~~. ~~~~ ~-~~--~~~~
, ~~~° ~#~~'k~"'~~~'` ~ °r~r~~~ ~i~-~-~~~~~7~~
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
~-~~~~~~~~~r~~~; ~~;~r ~~' '~~~~;~~-~~~
SECTION 10. Part 9.04.08.56 of the Santa Monica Muni~i~al Code is
46
hereby deleted as follows:
[RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR FUTURE
USE.]
~~~~_~~~~ ~ ` ~~~~~ +~ __~~-~~~; . ~,~~ ~,,,~~~~~
- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~#~~~~~ . ~d~~~~~~~~ - ~-~_~ ~~
~~ ~# _ ~ '~~~ ~i~ : ~~~°~°~~~~~~~-~~~~~ ~~ ,
~:~ . . ~- ~~- :. . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
~ ~° ~ ~~~ ° t~~ ° ~i ~~ ` '~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{~ ~€~~d~~~--~~~~~.~.~~~~.o~.~~~~yw~a~; ~~9~~,..~~....~~~r
~~ ' ~~ ~ ; .
~ . ~ .
, ,
~
,
47
,~. ~-~~ ` ~ ; ~~ -a~m~ # ~
("/ Y°~-'~~~~`~~°"-~~~-~~'!~"~~"~"~'~-i~~~~:~~~~ ^~ r"'~rRe~
~{R~-~~ #~~-~' ~ ~~~ ~~-`' : ° ~.
~ •
(RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
~"-#~~~- ~ °~ ~ ~-~~~_ ~ ~~~~+~~~~~ .
~ n~i ~~~ r~.~_ ~ ~~~ ~~.~~~~_ ~~~~'~~
. . . . ~~~~~ ,~~ ~r~r°~~~~-~~~
(RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~ '~
. , , - ~ ~~-~ ~
4~? . , , . ~
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
{a} .
48
' ~ ~~-~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~r~~ ~
[RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
L"4I1 r~rr~r~csa~s~ irw ~E~r~s ~It~'41 r~st~s~;1,~ "~ 11~~11_I~w,~ ~l~rr~+~ ~~
.. ~,~ ~. . ~~ ~~~,~,~~`~ ft~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~'~~~
~~ , ~4 : , ~ ` " • ~ . . ` r-M~+~' ,
~ ~~-~~~F~~~~~F~-~#~~~~ -~-~J~----~~~~~~~-~~'3~-~~
~
,
f~~~~Syta~e^~~__a~resrs ~'~c~~ r•c~ i~srwri~-,vr~iszr~-i-caF~--~~}'~ ~.'~ ~ -~~i~.'~°s~-ai a~~
,~r n a: a~~~--r-c•~c.: a-~a~:~-~r-rr~r-r
, ...9 ~ ..,. '~-:. ~'~'~'~~~~'°", ~'~ '...-~ ~~ ---~ ~[
~-f--~~J~~~~~~~~~~v~~~'1~~~~~~
{~} • ,
,
49
~ ~~.~ .. .,~ -~~. ~ ~ " ~L'M ....a r' ;FF`7~~'~"Pti~~ ~ „ T~dSJ ~T~'~i~"(I~'li} 1-.r~'JF-3~~
~7~i~+~~---~~~~~~~~ ;~~ ° ~+~~ . . ~~~-
r-^~~~~~ ~#-sr~ #rrsra# ni.~zr~ ' ~,cs rmr~sr~~s Ir~crc~l d ir~ trg frti~ ~r}z~~r~
~'~`~c„~rr ~r-arrca-rrvrr~~ a r ~-t~ ,
. . . . . - °~ '~~,~
~~°~~~~i~_ - -._ ~~ _ ~N ,,~ ~~ ti~Yl A`ci~~~ -`~ ° _ ##:~"C~ ° _.~
~~~~~~`~^~F~^~-c~-~ F~~~~~--~~~r-~'~~ ~--~ - ~~i-~~~~
t°7 •
~~~ :. •~ . mm ~~~~ - ' ~ ~~ - ~~~~ . ~ ~~~ ~-~~€~
~.~ 1 /c~~~riec. v I~t ~~iirl~h\
~
50
T~~-w-F#~#~~~ ~~--~~~rb~,~_ ~~ ~~~~'~~~ ~'~~~~'~;-~
° ~.~ ~~'~; ' ~~- : ~ ~~~; ~~~°~ ~~ ~~
~~#--~a~d~~#~~~~-~~I~~~~~~~~1~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~---~~--~~~-~~k~;~
~} •
. . . ~- ~ _ ~--~ ° ~-~~ . ~--~~_
~e~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ " 1~-~~~~~-~~a-~-~~~~~~~ ~~~~:
, ,
. . ,
, ~ , . .
~
a~t~~~~~~ •~ ~~~ ~,~,.~~°~~~~. ~~~..~n.~3 w °
~Y-~,o
~ . , . . .
~ ~
f-1~~+r--ef-~~-~~~~ • . . .
,
51
T~'f"S ._~:~.sT~w`~RFds~s:~i ilril~..'~!^YY" dB.Ba~I^41 '~'6.AP1~~4J~___~'791Y7f'~,~°~ ~!~~ ~.
• ~ • „~Pt:+1 r~f'sn.r?~~~~~C-7~ ° . . ..
~` ~
~~t~° ~~~~r ° ,~~`~,~~~~~ ~ - ~~ + ~~
~$°~~ ~ ~: ~f -~~~_° ' ~~~,~., • .~m ~~. ~ ,~~~ r~r ~vr^~~~r~irs
. ._ '~ ~~~ ~r-~'`r~;~~~~.~f~,-~,s~~ ~'~~-~~ .~~~~ ~ . -~~~
~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ c~~ ' ~~-- ` ~,
~4~~~~-~~.'t~_..~ ~~~-~~~~-~~~~+~~~~~~~-~+~~k~~-~-~~~~~:;
. ~ ~ y ~--~ ~--~~~ . _~~~-~ ~~: [RESERVED
FOR FUTURE USE.]
{~-} ,
~~~~~~~~i~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ . ~~ . ~~~ r,~.~~~; ~~ ~~t~~~~~~~
~~ . ~ .. ., . . . . .
,
, .
{~} . . , . a .
52
53
(~ ~ ~ ~- ' ~--~~~~~ v~~ ~-y~~~ _ -P-~~-~~ed
~,~-~~~~r" ~ ~~` : ~-~--~ , , ` ~
~ ~r~ L,~wi,~~ ~
~ ~~i~#~~#~~~ ~~ ~~ , _ . .
~ ~~ ~-~ :~d~fh~-~ ~-~~ -- k~~~~~ .
~~~~~~° ~#~~~' -~~' ~- -~~~~~~.~.~ ~,~,~, ~ ~' ~~°°~ F~~
~ • • ~m,~'- .w~,~
r~~~: ~~ ~ '~
,
~:~~:~~. .~a~ - ~~~ ~~i~~: [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
~~~~ ~~~t~ ~ ~~~~~ ` ~~~ ~ '
~~ ~ ` . . ~
. . . ,
{~}
~ ,. . .
~
. . . . . [RESERVED FOR
FUTURE USE.]
, ,
F ~~~ ~~,~~~~ ~ t ~~ ~~ ~- -~+~r ° ~~ ~~. .
~~~w~ . #~ ~ ~~ :~~~' ~~ m
"~~~-~~~~:~~-~~~~~~~~~`~~~--~~~ .. ~~I~-•~~~.
[RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.]
,
SECTION 11. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.080 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 9.04.10.02.080 Fence, wall, hedge, flagpole.
Subject to the hazardous visual obstruction requirements of
Section 9.04.10.02.090, any fence, wall, hedge or flagpole shall
comply with the following standards:
(a) Fences, walls, or hedges shall not exceed eight feet
in height when located in a required side yard or rear yard.
(b)(1) Fences, walls or hedges shall not exceed forty-finro
i~~~~~ in h~ir~~t ~'~~~ 1~~~~~ in ~ r~~ui~~~ ~~~~,~ y~~d.
55
(2) A front yard chain link fence for a school may be up to
eight feet in height.
(c) Fences, walls and hedges within reQUired yards shall
~~ ~~t ~~~I~ fr~r~r ~~~h c~t~~~° ~ r~i~~rrr~~ di~t~n~~ ~~u~! ~~ th~
N~~i ~~t ~a~ t~~~ ~~~r~~# ~~'a~~~a~ ~~II ~~~t i~ ~I~~ Ic~~~t~c~ in ~ r~ ~ir~~
~~~-~~~-~,~~ __ _ ..: --~ ' ~ ~~--~~,....-~~~~,~, «~,~ ~,~~ ~~
~~~~~~~~: . ~~~ ~ °, ~~~--~~ y ~~-~-~ ~ ~~ - .
~~~~~~~ ,a ~~~ : ~+~~ ~ ~ m '~~ ~~ ~t~r~~;;~~~~~~ ~
(d) Freestanding flagpoles may not exceed the height
restrictions of the district in which they are located.
~e~ ~~~~~~~~~: ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~r~~~~ ~~d ~~~~~
~~~~tr~~~~~~i r~rir~r ~~s j~f~~ct~~~ ~~t~ ~~ ~ar~9in~r~~~~ may be measured
tr~ ~~~r~~~r~u~r~ ~~ ~~~h ~t~~~t ~1~ng the fence as the minimum
vertical distance between the ~~~~~~~ ~~~~,t af ~l~v~f~~r~ ~f th~ ~~nc~
and the lowest point of ~J~~~t~~~ ~~ t~e ~xi~~i'r~g ~~ ~~i~F~~ ~~r~~~~
of the grcaund. ~~v~~c~ ~r ~~~~~~~~ i~~r~~~~a~~~~ ~~f~~~+~r~~ t~ ~~~~~~
side of the fence.
SECTION 12. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.16.010 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
56
9.04.10.16.010 Demolition of buildings and structures.
(a) No demolition of buildings and structures shall be
permitted except when all of the following conditions have been
met:
(1) A removal permit has been granted by the Rent
Control Board, when required.
(2) For residential buildings and structures, the final
permit to commence construction for a replacement project has
been issued, or the building or structure is exempt from this
requirement pursuant to subsection (b) below.
(3) A property maintenance plan has been approved in
writing by the Director of Planning and the Building Officer. The
Architectural Review Board shall adopt and the Planning
Commission shall approve guidelines and standards for property
maintenance plans pursuant to Section 9.32.040.
(4) If the original permit for the building or structure was
issued more than ~+#~-fort~years before the date of filing of the
demolition permit application, the requirements of subsection (d)
are satisfied.
(b) The following buildings and structures are exempt
from the requirements of subsection (a)(2):
57
(1) Single-family dwellings which are located in the R1
District, any Cor~mercial District, or any Industrial District and which
are not controlled rental units under the Rent Control Law.
(2) Buildings or structures which the Director of Planning
and the Building Officer have determined to be a public nuisance.
(3) Buildings and structures which were damaged by the
January 17, 1994 Northridge Earthquake or its aftershocks, and
which were yellow- or red-tagged by the City.
(c) Prior to filing an application for a demolition permit, a
notice of intent to demolish must be prominently posted on the
property. Such notice shall be in a form approved by the City.
(d) In addition to any other requirements imposed by this
Section, no demolition of buildings or structures, the original permit
for which was issued more than €~-f~years before the date of
filing of the demolition permit application, shall be permitted unless
the following requirements have been met:
(1) Within seven days of receipt of all filing materials for a
demolition permit for such structures, the City shall transmit a copy
of such application to each member of the Landmarks Commission.
Filing materials shall consist of a completed application form, site
plan, eight copies of a photograph of the building and photo
verification that the property has been posted with a notice of intent
to demolish.
58
(2) If no application for the designation of a structure of
merit, a landmark or a historic district is filed in accordance with
Sections 9.36.090, 9.36.120 or 9.36.130 within sixty days from
receipt of a complete application for demolition, demolition may be
approved subject to compliance with all other legal requirements,
including this Section.
(3) If an application for structure of inerit designation is
filed in accordance with Section 9.36.090(a) within sixty days from
receipt of a complete application for demolition, no demolition
permit may be issued until after a final determination is made by the
Landmarks Commission, or the City Council on appeal, on the
structure of inerit designation application. The structure of inerit
application shall be processed in accordance with the procedures
set forth in Section 9.36.090.
(4) If an application for landmark designation is filed in
accordance with Section 9.36.120(a) within sixty days from receipt
of a complete application for demolition, no demolition permit may
be issued until after a final determination is made by the Landmarks
Commission, or the City Council on appeal, on the application for
landmark designation. The landmarks application shall be
processed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section
9.36.120.
59
If an application for historic district designation is filed in
accordance with Section 9.36.130(a) within sixty day~ from receipt
of a complete application for demolition, no demolition permit may
be issued until after a final determination is made by the Landmarks
Commission, or the City Council on appeal, on the application for
historic district designation. The historic district application shall be
processed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section
9.36.130.
SECTION 13. Part 9.04.16.01 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Part 9.04.16.01 Condominiums generally.
9.04.16.01.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this Subchapter is to establish development
standards and special conditions for the protection of the
community and purchasers or renters of both new and converted
residential and commercial condominiums, community apartment
projects, and stock cooperatives, and the lessors of cooperative
apartments, consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of
the General Plan.
9.04.16.01.020 Applicability.
All new or converted residential and commercial
condominiums, community apartment projects, stock cooperatives,
so
and cooperative apartments for which a development application
was deemed complete on or after March 7, 2000 shall require
approval of a Design Compatibility Permit, in addition to compliance
with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.16.01.030
establishing additional minimum requirements for condominiums
and any and all requirements of Chapter 9.20 of this Article for
preparation, review, and approval of a Subdivision Map. However,
i~ ~~~ ~~, F~~. ~~ ~~~~, ~~ ~~r ~~~t; ~r~~ N~~~~~d ~~t~~~r~ ~~~
~~r~t~r~li~~~ ~~ ~~~~r~~~ ~~~n~~ to the south and Wilshire
Boulevard to the north. and C3-C districts, no Design Compatibilitv
Permit shall be required.
9.04.16.01.030 Minimum requirements.
Except as otherwise provided by law, the followinq minimum
r~q~~r~~r~r~~~ ~~~11 ~~ ~~r~uir~r~ ~~r . ~ t ..
app~e~ifl~any condominium ~r~j~t , ' ` ' ,
,
(a) Residential Parking. Off-street parking shall be
provided pursuant to standards for new construction in Part
9.04.10.08. Required off-street parking spaces shall be covered
and located within the same structure as the dwelling units for
which they are required and shall be included in the ownership of
each condominium unit. No off-street parking space required by this
s~
Section shall be sold, leased, or otherwise transferred to the control
of any person or organization not an owner of one or more units
within the project except that spaces may be rented to other owners
within the project.
(b) Non-Residential Parking. Off-street parking shall be
provided in an amount not less than required for the use or uses in
the project pursuant to standards for new construction in Part
9.04.10.08.
(c) Yard and Height Requirements. All new
condominium projects shall comply with property development
standards for the district in which the condominium project is to be
located
~~ ~ . . . . .
w .
, ,
~ •
(d) Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC &
Rs). The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC & Rs) for the
new or converting condominium project shall include an agreement
by the subdivider that the following shall be guaranteed by the
subdivider:
(1) Common area items, including, but not limited to, the
r~~#. pl~m~in~, h~~tint~, ~ir-~,t~ndi~ic~ninc~, ~r~d ~I~~~r~~~~ ~y~ter~~
62
until one year elapses from the date of the sale of the last individual
unit sold.
(2) Items provided or installed within individual units by
the subdivider, including, but not limited to, appliances, fixtures, and
facilities for a period of one year from the date of close of escrow of
each individual unit.
(3) Adequate provisions for maintenance, repair, and
upkeep of common areas.
(4) Provisions that in the event of destruction or
abolishment, reconstruction shall be in accordance with codes in
effect at the time of such reconstruction.
(5) Provisions for dedication of land or establishment of
easements for street widening or other public purpose.
(e) The CC & Rs shall provide that the non-subdivider
owners have the right to select or change the management group
or the homeowner association 90 days after sale or transfer of title
of 51 % of the units. The CC & Rs shall be reviewed by the Citv
,~~~t~r~~~~° ~~r~r~ t~r~ ~r~r~~~~~~~r~ f~ st~~it~~t t~ ~~r~t~~st~~tive review.
or by the s~}est~~Planning Commission fe~ie~or City Council
fev~ie~upon appeal, when qrocessed with a Design Compatibilitv
Permit. The subdivider shall agree not to change the CC & Rs
submitted to obtain City approval of a new or converting
condominium project without the cons~nt of the ~ity Atk~ar~~~,,
63
Planning Commission, or City Council, as appropriate~-app~
fe~iew. The CC & Rs shall provide that subsequent owners agree
to make no changes in the CC & Rs imposing restrictions on the
age, race, national origin, handicap, sex, marital status or other
similar restrictions of occupants, residents, or owners.
(f) Estimated Costs of Maintenance. The subdivider
shall submit an estimate of, and guarantee for, the maintenance
costs for a period of 12 months beginning at the close of escrow on
the first unit sold. The subdivider to be responsible for all costs of
normal maintenance in excess of the estimate.
~9) P~~a ~~~ ~r ~l~ctri~ r~~t~r~ ~~S~I~ ~e }~~~at~~ ~^~~hi~ tl~~
~°~quir~~ ~r~~~ ~r ~fr~~t ~i~~ ~~r~ ~~tb~~~ ~r~~~.
(h) Prior to the demolition ~f ~~~ ~~i~~i~g strr~~rrc~ur~, t~e
applicant shall submit a report from an industrial hygienist to be
r~vi~~~~i ~r~d ~~~r~~~t~ ~~ t~ ~~~t~rr~ ~~~ ~~r~ ~y t~~
~r~~st~~~rr~r~~rt~~ ~~rr~ ~'~~~~~ ~J~rk~ ~~~~~~r~rr~rr~l~r~v~r~r~r~~;r~t~~
~r~~~r~~r~t~ ~r~°r'~r~~r. ~`~~ ~~~~~t s~~~~ ~,r~stst ~~ a hazardous
r~~~~r~~~~ sr.rr~~~,~ ~~r t~~ ~t~~~~+~~ ~~a~~~+e~ ~~~ ~~rrr~~~~t~~r~. `~t°r~
~"~~7~T~ ~~~~~ ~f~~~t1t~~ c~i ~+~~~f~~`7 ~i°t c'~5~7~~~t7~ c~f f"~ ~f~ d~+~f7~~1'~c°~~`i~~ i-Vi~f`i
the South Coast AQMD Rule 1403. the asbestos survey shall be
t~~r~~~°~~~ ~~r ~ ~~~~~ ~~r~~~r~~ ~l~b~s~~~ ~c~~~uit~nt (~t~~~
i`~t~~r~ 5~i~~~ ir~~~~c~~ a sec~ivn on ~ead. w~ic~ s~ai'i be performed bv
~ ~t~t~ ~~r~~~s~~ ~.+~~~ ir~s t r~~ ~~r. s~t~~ii~i~~~! ~~~~r ~~
64
materials to be considered by the industrial hy,qienist shatl include:
rr~~r~~ ir~ t~~~r~t~~t~~~ ~~it~#~~~~ ~~a~re~~~nt ~i ~# °
~~I ~~~~r~~~~~~ ~i ~~n !~ f~~~~ ~n~l~adi~ li ~~ ~~~I~~~ ~~~ f~a~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~n~ ~~t~~ri~~,
(i) ~id~~~~k~, ~~r~~, _~u1~~r~3 ~~~~r~~ ~~c~ ~riv~~~~
~~tc~, r~~~~ r°~~I~~ir~~ ~r r~r~~~~l ~~ ~ r~~~lt ~f tk~~ ~r~i~~t ~~
determined by the Department of Environmental and Public Works
~"l~r~~~3~c~~r~t ~h~l~ ~~ ~~~~r~~~r~~t~d tc~ t~~ ~~t~~f~~~~~r~ ~af ~~r~
~~~~r~r~~nt ~~ ~n~i~~~rr~~~t~l ~~d F"~~1» ~+"~r~~ ~l~r~~~~r~°~~r~ti,.
~~~~~~~1 f~~ t}~i~ v~~r}~ ~h~11 ~~ ~~~~in~d ~r~r~ t~~ ~~~~r~r~~nt af
Environmental and ~u~~r~ ~'~rk~ P~~r~~~~:~~~fi ~ri~r t~ i~~~~~r~~:~: ~~
the building permits.
~) ~J~hi~~~ ~~uJ~~~ ~irt ~r t~tJ~~r ~~~~tru~~c~r~ ~~br~~ #r~rr~
the ~i~~ ~h~~J ~~~~r ~r~~ ~~~r~ J~~r~ ~ith ~ t~r~~ulir~ ~r ~~h~r ~~~Ur~
covering to minimize ~~~~ ~~~~~i~r~~. lmr~~~i~~~ly ~~~r
cc~r~~~~~~~~~ ~1~ r~r~+~~ra~ ~~~rr~ ~~~~ ~~t~. the general contractor shall
provide the ~ity ~~ ~~r~t~ ~'J~r~~~~ ~~t~ ~rrit~~r~ ~~r~i~ic~ta~r~ th~t a~~
~r~~~~ ~~a~~~~ ~~re ~~~~ ~~~ ~~v~r~d irr ac~~rdar~~~ ~r~t~ ~i~is c~~~~~it~r~
of approval.
(k) Street trees shall be maintained. relocated or
~~`€~V~L~ ~'~ c'~Lt;~t"~~~~:~ iil~~~~7 ~'~i'~.' ~:i~jrk5 ~i~5'~`ft'i7i,i~if~~ ~t?~~~~'
Manaqement ~~~~ ~~~t~. ~~r° t~e ~~ec;~f~cati~~~~ c~~ ~~~ t7~en ~pace
~~r~~, ~~~s~t ~~~9~~~~ ~f tk~~ ~~t~rt~~~s~r~~ ~~c~ ~~a t~f ~.~~ s~~ ~t~~s
65
~~~~ ~~r~~ ~~d~~. ~J~ ~t~~~t ~r~~~ ~#~~I1 b~ r~m~v~d ~a~~h~~rt tf~~
~ ~~~~I ~f t~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ I~~~~ ~r~~r~t ~i~~~~~~.
(I) ~ ~~~~~r~r~t~~~ ~rr~~ r~iti~~t~s~~ c~~~r~ ~h~l~ ~~
~r~~~r~~ ~~ tk~~ ~~~li~~r~t ~~~ ~~~r~va~ b~ ~~~~ ~~~~r~r~a~nt ~~
Environmental and Public Works Management prior to issuance of
~ ~u~ls~~n~ ~~r~r~ti, ~~~ ~ r~~~~ ~i~,~~~~~~~ ~~~r~ ~~~I~ ~~ t~~~~~d ~an
the site for the duration of the project construction and shall be
qroduced upon request. As applicable, this plan shall:
(1) ~,~~~i~ t~~ r~~r~~~. ~~dr~~~~~, t~~~~~w~r~~ r~~~b~r~
~n~ ~~~ir~~~~ li~~~~~ r~~~~~~r~ ~f ~11 ~~ar~tr~~t~a~~ ~nd ~~ab~~r~~r~~~r~
~~ ~~JJ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~~l~~~r ~r~~ ~r~~~t~~~:
(2) f~~~~ri~~ ~~~v ~~~~litrc~r~ ~# ~~~ ~~i~~i~~ ~~r~~t~~~~ i~
to be accomplished;
(3) Jr~r~i~~t~ v~h~~~ ~r~~ ~r~~~~ ~~~ tc~ b~ l~~~t~~i fr~r
erection/construction:
(4) ~~~~r~b~ n~~ ~~~~ ~f t~i~ }~t~bJ~~ street, alleyway, or
sidewalk is ~r~~~e~~~ tn ~~ ~~~~ i~ ~~ju~r~~ti~r~ ~va~~ c~r~~tr~r~t~~~:
(5) Set forth the e~ent and nature of anv pile-driving
operations;
(6) Describe the length ~r~~ ~~~rrb~~ ~~ ~r~y ~~~~~c~cs
~~~~~r ~r~~t ~~t~~ ~rr~~d+~r~ ~~~ ~~~p~r~y ~~ ~~~~~ persons:
(7) Sqecify the r~~t~ar~ a~~~' ~xt~~~~ ~f ~t~y ~I~w~if~~ir~c~ ~r~~l'
ti~~ ~~~~t ~~ ~~~ ~d ~~+~~t ~+~~ic~~n~~~
ss
(s) ~~~~~i~~ ~r~t~~i ~t~d ~~~~~ru~ti~r~;~~~~t~~ ~r~~~~ r~~~~~
~a~~~~~° ~fi t~~a~~ tri ~ ~~ur~ r~f ~~~r~li~ ~nd ~r~~n 1~~~t~ar~°
(9) ~ _~~sf ~~~ r~~t~r~ ~r~d ~~t~r~~ ~~ ~~ h~l~~c~ ~~r
haulinq;
(10) ~t~t~ w~i~t~i~r ~~~ ~~n~~r~c~i~n ~~tivit~ b~~~~d
~~e~°~~(i~~~r~~~~d ~ca~r~ ~~ ~ '~~~
(11) d~~~~~it~~ ~r~~ ~r~~~~~d ~~~~tru~ti~~ ~~i~~ r~i~~~~tic~r~
measures:
(12) ~~~~r~~~ ~~r~~tr~~ti~~-~~~~~~ ~~~~r~~~v ~~~~u~r~~
including any fencing, lighting, and security personnel;
(13) Provide a drainage plan:
(14) ~r~~i~~ ~ ~~~~fir~~t~r~r~v~~ri~~ ~~r~k~t°~~ ~l~r~~ ~nr~i~3~ ~~i~lJ
r~air~~r~i~~ ~~~ ~f ~~F~J~~ ~~r~~~~ f~r ~~rl~~~r~;
(15) ~~~f ~ r~~~~~~r~~~d ~r~-~it~ ~~r~~#~t~~ti+~r~ m~~~~~r.
(m) ~'~~ d+~v~~~r~~r ~~~~J ~~~}~~r~ ~ ~c~~i~~. ~u~j~~t t~ tJ'~~
r~~~r~~~ t~~ ~h~ ~ir~~t~~ ~~ ~~~rrrri~t~ ~r~d ~~r~r~r~r~~~y t~~v~lr~~r~t~r~t.
that lists all construction mitigation requirements and permitted
hours of construction. ~~~ ~~~nt~~~~~ ~ ~r~~~~~ ~~~°~~r~ at +~ity ~J~J~ ~~
well as the developer who will resaond to complaints related to the
~~~~~~~~ ~~~s~r°e.~~ti~~. ~~~ ~~ti~~ ~~~~~ b~ ~~il~~ t~ prt~~~r~~.
owners and residents within a~t~~-f~c~~ r~~Pr~~ ~ri~r~ t~e ~ubi~~~ ~~t~
~~ ~~as~ ~iv~ `~ ~~ys privr fo tt~e sfart vf cvnstruction.
67
(n) ~ ~i~~ ~~~~I ~~ p~~~~d ~r~ th~ ~r~~~~v ir~ ~ ~n~nn~r
~~~~~~t~~t ~w~th th~ ~~~[i~ ~~~ri~~ ~~~~ ~•~~~air~~~~t~ ~~i~~ ~~~~I.
i~~r~tif~ t~i~ ~ddr~~~ ~r~~ ~~~r~~ ~~rnb~r ~~ ~hr~ ~~v~~r ~n~l~r
~ ~li~~r~~ ~~r t~~ ~~r~~~~~ ~~ r~~~?~~~[~r~:~ ~~ ~u~~ti~~~ ~r~d
~~~~~I~~r~t~ ~u~ir~~ ~f~~ ~r~r~~t~~~~i~n ~~~i~d'. T`~is ~i~r°~ ~~~~[ ~~~~
~~~i~~~~ ~f~~ h~~~r~ ~af ~~~r~i~~i~~~ ~~r~~tru~t~~~ ~~~~.
(o) ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~r~~ ~~~~~~ur~~ ~~~ ~ti~~r ~~~~li~~~~
~~~~~°~~i~~a ~r~~~~~~t~r ~rith ~i~~~~i~~r~~ ~il ~nd ~~~~~~ ~~~t~~t ~~~
~~~~ir~~ t~ ~r~tr~~~ t,1~~~~ ~v~~t~~ b~~~r~ d~~~~~r~,~, t~ the ~i~~
~~~~~ ~ar ~t~~r~~ ~~~ir~ ~~~t~~. ~r~~r~~~r~°~~~t ~ri~l ~`~qt~ir~ ~t~~~ ~
~l~rifi~r ~r ~i~~~~~~~° ~~~~~~~~~ t~~ ir~~~~~J~~ ~r~d r~~int~ir~~~ s~~ ~it~.
lr°~ ~~~~ ~~i~re ~~~t~~~t~1~ ~~1~~~ ~~~ ~r~~r~r~~ ~~r ~~~~~t~~f i~s
~~~~~~r ~r~~r~ur~f~ ~J~~r~ ~1~~~~~~~ ~iJ ~n~i c~~~~~~. a ~1~~°if~e~° ur~it ~~~1 ~~
r~~t~ar~ti. J~ ,~~~~~ u~f~~r+~ tf~~ ~~~~if~ ~a~t~ ~~~r~~t~~isti~~ ~r`~
~r~~~~~, ~~ ~i~~'~~~~~r ~~~~r~t~r ~i~~r ~~t~m~ti~ ~~J +d~r~a~~~f~ ~w~~J b~
~~~~~r~~ ~~~t~~~. ~'~~ ~~~r~r~r~r~~~t~~ ~r~~ P~~~i~ ~~rks
~~~r~c~~m~rat ~~~r~r~r~~tt ~iJ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~a~ requirements. Building
~~;~~r~t ~~~r~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ t~r+~ r~~~~~~;+~ ~rr~ta~f~t~r~~.
~P) !~ ~~~ ar~~~~~~~~~~~J r~er~~i~~ ar~ ~~~~~~~r~ ~f~rrr~~
~~~~~~~t~c~~ ~~ ~~~~tr~r~tr~rr, v~~r~k in the affected area shall be
~~~~~r~~P~~" ~~~~ ~ ~~~t~~~r~~d ~~~~r~ir~~ ~~~Pl ~~ ~~~r~~~ted t~
cvn~ucf a survey vf` f~e aft`ected area at qroject's owner's exqense.
A~t: r~~r~~~~c~~ ~hall the~i b~ad t ~~r~~~ ~ f P`I~~~i~ ~c~
ss
~~~~ i~~ t~~ ~i ni~~~r~~~ c~~ t~~ surve findin s and a ro riate
~~~ic~~~ ~~~ r~ ~~r~~r~~rts ~~ ~~i to address such findin s.
(q) A security qate shall be ~r~~~d~d ~~r~~~ ~~~ ~~~r~in~
~~ t~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~n ~~~ ~. If ~r~ ~~~t arkin s ace is located
i~ t~~ ~~bi~r~~r~~~~ ~~~~~~, th~__~~~~rit~ qate shall be equipped
with an electronic or other system which will open the gate to
~r~~ri~~ ~i~i~~r~~ ~it~ ~~~ii~~~~~r ~~~~~~ ~~ tP~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~v~r~~
~~~ir ~~f~i~i~~, ~h~ ~~~~~it~r ~~t~ ~~~I~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~r~~~~ ~~ ~~~
F~~li~~ ~n~ ~~r~ ~~~~~~tm~r~~~ ~ri~~ t~ i~~~~~~~ ~f ~ b~ail~ir~g p~~rr~i~.
SECTION 14. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.15.020 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.20.15.020 Application.
An application for a Design Compatibility Permit shall be filed
in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Santa
Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.20, Sections 9.04.20.20.010
through ~.f~.~t~.~~.~~~. ~J~~~~~~. ~r~ ~~~i~r~ ~~r~r~~ti~iJitv~ ~~~r~~t
shall be required ~c~~ ~r~~~~~rr~fu~~ I~~~te~ ~r~ t~+~ ~~. R~. R~.
BSCD, C3 for that area located b~~~~r~ ~~+~ ~+~~teri~~es ~~
~~~~r~c~~ ~~r~r,~~ to tf~~ ~~~th ~nd ~iiis~ir~ ~~cri~~~rrl t~ ~i~~ n~~~.
and C3-C Districts.
69
SECTION 15. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.28.020 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
9.04.20.28.020 Permit required.
An Administrative Approval, approved by the Zoning
Administrator, shall be required for all new construction and new
additions to existing buildings of more than one thousand square
feet of floor area located in residential and non-residential zoning
districts, not otherwise subject to discretionary review and shall be
issued prior to issuance of any Building Permit for the development_
However. ~~ ~d~~ni~t~~~iv~ ~~r~~~~ ~~~tl ~~ r~~uir~~ ~~~
~~r~~~~ir~i~rr~~ ~~~t~~ i~ ~~~ i~~', 1~~, ~~. ~~~L~. ~3 ~~r t~~~t ~r~~
located befinreen the ~~nf~rlin~~ ~f ~~Jt~r~d~ ~~r~~~~ t~ th~ ~~~f~
and Wilshire Boulevard to the north, and C3-C Districts, or for anv
e~ESe~~new single-family homes or additions thereto in any
zoning distrr~t • - ~ ~~~~-~~~~
.A
public hearing shall not be required for issuance of an
Administrative Approval. An application for an Administrative
Approval shall be in a form prescribed by the Zoning Administrator
and shall be filed with the Planning and Zoning Division pursuant to
Part 9.04.20.20.
The Zoning Administrator shall issue an Administrative
A~~proval if the ~roposed development conforms precisely to the
70
development standards for the area and does not require
discretionary review or approval as outlined in this Chapter. The
Zoning Administrator shall deny the Administrative Approval only if
the development is not in compliance with the development
standards for the area as outlined in this Chapter.
The Zoning Administrator shall within sixty days of deeming
the appli~~tion complete, prepare a written decision which shall
contain the findings of fact upon which such decision is based. A
copy of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant at the address
shown on the application within ten days after the decision is
rendered.
SECTION 16. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.32.170 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
9.32.170 Architectural review district boundaries.
Pursuant to Section 9.32.110 of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code, an architectural review district is hereby established. Said
architectural review district shall be composed of all commercial,
industrial and residential areas within the corporate boundaries of
the City, with the exception of those areas designated as R-1
districts by Article 9 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and those
structures designated as landmarks or contributing structures within
hi~~~ric dist~icts pur~~~nt to Chapter 6 of the Santa Monica
71
Municipal Code. Non-contributing structures located within historic
districts shall be subject to architectural review unless otherwise
exempted by the ordinance that establishes procedures for the
alteration of structures within the historic district. Single familv
structures ~n~~~di~~ ~~~~~~~r~ ~t~~~~ur~~~ i~ ~I~ ~i~~ri~~~ are also
~~~r~r~~ ~r~r~ ~r~~ii~~~t~~~~ ~~v~~~v Board district boundaries.
SECTION 17. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.32.190 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
a~~.~~~ ~~~~i~~ ~t~r~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~i~na~~.
~l~~~it~~~~n~~~~ ~~'ll°~~ ~.~~r ~ ~~ ~r~d ~,~~,~1 ~C~. ~ll ~uildi~~~
~r~d ~fr~~~~r~~. i~a~J~~'~r~g ~~~~~~+~r~ ~~r~~~~r~~. ir~ t~~: R2. R3. R4,
BSCD. ~~ ~~r ~h~t ~~~~ la~~t~d b~t~r~~r~ ~~r~ ~~~t~r~in~~ of
~~l~r~~~~ ~~~~a~~ t~ t~ti~ ~~~~h~ and 'V~l~~~~ir~ ~~taJ~~~~rd ta th~ r~c~r~~i,
and C3-C Districts, that comelv with ~~J d~~~r~~ ~~~ic~r~ ~~~~~~r~~,
~~r~a? r~~t ~~ ~~~~~t t~ ,~~~~~~~~~t~r°~~ ~~v~~~v ~r~~r~ r~~i~w. Proiects
that do not comelv ~~t~ ~~i ~'i~tr~a~t d~:~~~~ ~t~r~~~~+~~ ~i~~l~ t~~ ~ul~i~~t
t~ Ar~~r~t~~ct~~~J ~~~i~~r ~~~rr~ review.
SECTION 18. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Cod~ or
appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the
extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to
th~# e~~nt r~~~s~~~ ts~ affe~t the ~rovisions of this Ordinance.
72
SECTION 19. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of
this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a
decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section,
subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional
without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 20. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the
passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published
once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance
shall become effective thirty days after its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
;,
~ m {;,.
~ r ~ '° ~` ~ ~' ~ ~ ~`` ~ ~ r _~ ~" ~~~f~ .,a~ y~~, _
~" ~ ~,:~,. ~ ~i '~~ ~ ~'.~`~ •
~r~~ J~~ ~ ~' 1JT~~~ w
City Attorney ~ ,~
~_
73