SR-402-001 (16)
, ~8~:LL:11261/hpc
city council Meeting 11-24-87
~tJ2 --00/
/ ti.., A--
NOv 2 4 1987
Santa Monica, California
STAFF REPORT
TO: Mayor and city council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Application for Hardship Exemption from Ordinance
Number 1416 (CCS) by Paul and Beverly Bezaire for
Property Located at 2912 Third Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Applicants seek permission to submit a project application
for a four unit apartment building under the R-3 property
development standards which existed prior to adoption of
Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS) (hereinafter "Ocean Park Interim
Ordinance") .
Applicants t proposed proj ect consists of three
two-bedroom apartment units and one one-bedroom apartment unit,
wi th a total of eight parking spaces.
The proj ect involves
demolition of an existing single family home. The existing home
is exempt from the Rent Control Law.
As proposed, the project has three stories and is 33 feet in
height at the highest point. The roof peak does not exceed 28
feet above street level. According to the applicants, the lot
slopes down from the street with a total drop of 10 feet from the
front to rear property lines. Applicants claim that the slope of
the lot causes the need to go up to 33 feet in the rear of the
building.
- 1 -
/41....,+
HOV 2 4 1987
'"" If applicants developed the subject property in accordance
with the requirements of Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS), they would
still be allowed to build four units. However, the project would
be limited to two stories and 27 feet in height, although the
roof could extend to a maximum of 35 feet if the roof pitch was
30% on at least two sides. In effect, compliance with the height
requirements would necessitate that the applicants either reduce
the size of some or all of the four units or reduce the project
to three units instead of four units.
Expenditures and Liabilities
Appl icants purchased the subj ect property for $ 304 , 000 on
June 18, 1987. Applicants' down paYment and Closing costs total
$91,200. Applicants further claim to have made expenditures in
the amount of $5,302 prior to July 28, 1987. Those expenditures
represent escrow costs, taxes, insurance and finance charges.
Applicants incurred liabilities in connection with the
proposed development in the amount of $4,956.13 prior to July 28,
1987. Claimed liabilities represent $3,176.13 for a site
architectural survey and preliminary design work and $1,780.00
for preliminary studies and consultation.
Hardship
Applicants purchased the subject property just prior to
adoption of the Ocean Park Interim Ordinance. Applicants opened
escrow on the property in May, 1987 and closed on June 18, 1987.
Prior to close of escrow, applicants claim to have received
information from the Planning Division confirming that they would
he subject to R3 property development standards. In addition,
- 2 -
t _....
appl1cants received a Residential Building Report from the City,
dated June 19, 1987, which made no mention of a pending Ocean
Park Interim Ordinance.
Applicants proceeded to contract with architects and
engineers to begin designing their proposed proj ect in June,
1987. Although applicants had contracted with architects and
engineers prior to the July 28, 1987 cut-off date, the architects
with whom they contracted were unable to meet the July 28, 1987
deadline, thus applicants were unable to file a completed
application by that date. Applicants brought their circumstances
to the attention of the city Council at the July 28, 1987 and
August 11, ~987 meetings.
Applicants' intention when they purchased the subject
property was to build their retirement home on the top floor of
the proposed four unit apartment building.
The other three
uni ts, according to the appl icants, are necessary to make the
applicants' home financially feasible.
Furthermore, applicants
state that due to childhood polio, Mrs. Bezaire requires an
elevator in the residence.
Applicants claim that the proposed
additional rental units are necessary to defray the cost of the
elevator as well as the cost of the land. Applicants state that
they would not have purchased the subject property had they known
they would not be able to construct their proposed project.
RECOMMENDATION
A reasonable argument can be made in favor of granting
applicants' hardship exemption application and a reasonable
argument can be made to the contrary.
On the one hand,
applicants claim that they would not have purchased the subject
- 3 -
property if they had known that they could not build a three
story apartment project. They claim that the only way they can
afford this property is to build a three story, four unit project
where a single family home currently exists.
Applicants,
however, did not have architectural or engineering work done in
connection with the project until after purchasing the property.
By that time, the Ocean Park Interim Ordinance was pending before
the City Council, and applicants were aware that their architect
could not provide plans for filing until after July 28, 1987.
Application of the Ocean Park Interim Ordinance would not
preclude applicants from building an apartment building. It
would, however, require that applicants re-design the project so
that it complies with the new height limit.
This would
necessitate either reducing the size of some or all of the four
proposed units or reducing the size of the building to three
units.
It is recommended that the City Council take one of two
courses of action:
1. Grant applicants' application for hardship exemption and
adopt the attached findings in support thereof; or
2. Deny applicants' application for hardship exemption and
adopt the attached findings in support thereof.
PREPARED BY: Robert M. Myers, City Attorney
Laurie Lieberman, Deputy city Attorney
- 4 -
~
CA:RMM:LL:11263/hpc
City Council Meeting ll-24-87
Santa Monica, California
PROPOSED FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF DENIAL OF
HARDSHIP EXEMPTION APPLICATION BY PAUL AND
BEVERLY BEZAIRE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 2912 THIRD STREET
1. Applicants seek a determination from the City Council
of a hardship exemption which would enable them to submit an
application for a proposed four-unit apartment project at 2912
Third street in Santa Monica under the R-3 property development
standards which existed prior to adoption of Ordinance Number
1416 (CCS).
2. The project site is zoned R-3.
3. A single family home is currently located on the site
and would be demolished in order to make way for the proposed
apartment building~
4. The single family home is exempt from the Rent Control
Law.
5. Applicants purchased the subject property for $304,000
on June 18, 1987.
6. Applicants' down payment and closing costs total
$91,200 and further expenditures in the amount of $5,302,
representing escrow costs, taxes, insurance and finance charges,
were made prior to July 28, 1987.
7. Applicants' only expenditures prior to July 28, 1987
were in connection with the purchase of the property.
- 1 -
A.
8. Applicants incurred liabilities in connection with the
proposed development in the amount of $4,956.13 prior to July 28,
1987. Those liabilities represent $3,176.13 for a site
architectural survey and preliminary design work and $1,780.00
for preliminary engineering studies and consultation.
9. Although applicants claim to have had no knowledge of
the pendency of Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS) when they purchased
the property, applicants did have knowledge of the ordinance
prior to incurring liabilities for architectural and engineering
services.
10. Applicants incurred liabilities for architectural and
engineering services with the awareness that such work would not
be completed for filing with the Planning Division by July 28,
1987, the cut-off date for filing under the pre-existing property
development standards. Thus, these liabilities were not incurred
in reliance on property development standards which existed prior
to the adoption of Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS), but rather were
incurred with knowledge that the standards contained in Ordinance
Number 1416 (CCS) would be in effect at the time the applicant
was filed.
11. Pursuant to Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS), applicants
could still build an apartment building on the subject property,
however, applicants would be limited to four units in a two-story
project which did not exceed 27 feet in height, except that the
roof may extend to a maximum of 35 feet if the roof pitch is 30%
or more on at least two sides.
12. Applicants' claim that construction of a three story,
four-unit apartment building that complies with the City
- 2 -
r~uirements in effect prior to the date of adoption of Ordinance
Number 1416 (CCS) rather than a two story, three- or four-unit
apartment building that complies with the requirements set forth
in Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS) is insufficient to constitute a
hardship requiring exemption from Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS).
13. The staff report submitted by the City Attorney to the
city Council for its hearing of November 24, 1987 is hereby
incorporated and adopted as though fully set forth herein.
- 3 -
....
CA:RMM:LL:ll264/hpc
City Council Meeting 11-24-87
Santa Monica, California
PROPOSED FINDINGS
HARDSHIP EXEMPTION
BEVERLY BEZAIRE
AT 2912
IN SUPPORT OF GRANT OF
APPLICATION BY PAUL AND
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
THIRD STREET
1. Applicants seek a determination from the City Council
of a hardship exemption which would enable them to submit an
application for a proposed four-unit apartment project at 2912
Third Street in Santa Monica under the R-3 property development
standards which existed prior to adoption of ordinance Number
1416 (CCS).
2. The project site is zoned R-3.
3. A single family home is currently located on the site
and would be demolished in order to make way for the proposed
apartment building.
4. The single family home is exempt from the Rent Control
Law.
5. Applicants purchased the subject property for $304,000
on June l8, 1987.
6. Applicants' down payment and closing costs total
$91,200 and further expenditures in the amount of $5,302,
representing escrow costs, taxes, insurance and finance charges,
were made prior to July 28, 1987.
7. Applicants' only expenditures prior to July 28, 1987
were in connection with the purchase of the property.
- 1 -
..
8. Applicants incurred liabilities in connection with the
proposed development in the amount of $4,956.13 prior to July 28,
1987. Those liabilities represent $3,176.13 for a site
architectural survey and preliminary design work and $1,780.00
for preliminary engineering studies and consultation.
9. Applicants claim that they would not have purchased the
subj ect property had they known of the pendency of Ordinance
Number 1416 (CCS).
10. Applicants claim that in conversations with Planning
Division staff prior to purchasing the subj ect property, they
were not informed of the pending ordinance which would change
City requirements for development of the property.
11. The Residential Building Report produced by the City
on June 18, 1987 made no mention of the pending ordinance.
12. Applicants claim that the proposed three story,
four-uni t apartment building is necessary in order to make the
property economically feasible and that they paid the price that
they did on the assumption that three stories could be built.
13. Applicants' claim is sufficient to constitute a
hardship requiring exemption from Ordinance Number 1416 (CCS).
14. The staff report submitted by the city Attorney to the
City Council for its hearing of November 24, 1987 is hereby
incorporated and adopted as though fully set forth herein.
- 2 -