SR-08-09-1988-11A
.
.
l \-A
~cs--oo~
AUG 9 1988
C/ED:CPD:DKW
COUNCIL MEETING: August 9, 1988
Santa Monica, California
I
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City staff
SUBJECT: Approval of sixth Draft of Hospital Area Specific Plan
INTRODUCTION
The Hospital Area Specific Plan (HASP) was initiated in 1986 in
response to a Land Use Element policy obj ective which required
that a specific Plan be prepared concerning the area around and
including the two major Hospital campuses in the City:
Saint
John's Hospital and Health Center and Santa Monica Hospital and
Medical Center.
The hospital area has been without Land Use Element guidelines
since 1984. The draft HASP was issued nearly two years ago. The
Planning Commission had its first hearing on the HASP in January
1987. May 25, 1988 was the fifth hearing on this matter by the
commission. Five drafts of the HASP have been considered by the
Planning Commission. The HASP document provided as an attachment
to this staff report incorporates all the changes approved by the
council and Commission to date.
Action on the HASP has been
delayed due to the press of other projects, however, closure on
- 1 -
\ \-A
AUG 9 1.988
.
.
HASP issues is important so that land use standards for the
hospital area can be established.
staff recommendations include adoption of a resolution approving
Draft 6 of the HASP, and Council direction concerning rezoning
of properties in the HASP area. Subsequent hearings by the
commission and the Council will be necessary before rezonings can
be adopted.
BACKGROUND
In October, 1984, the City of Santa Monica adopted the Land Use
and circulation Elements of the General Plan. A section of the
Element titled "Hospitals and Health Care Facilities" contains an
Objective (1.13) and Policies (1.13.1 and 1.13.2) requiring that
two separate hospital Specific Plans be prepared. Subsequently,
a single specific Plan was determined to be more appropriate to
best accomplish the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and
to integrate the neighborhood planning process.
Another requirement of the Land Use Element is that prior to the
Specific Plan being written, Master Plans prepared by the two
hospitals in the area be submitted to the City. The Land Use
Element states that the Master Plans should describe "future
physical and organizational growth and change over the 10-15
years following adoption of the Land Use and Circulation
Elements" and that the Master Plans should be prepared with
community participation.
- 2 -
.
.
Hospital Master Plans
consistent with the Land Use Element's directive, both hospitals
prepared Master Plans addressing site and facility needs for the
future, which included extensive outreach to neighboring
residents, property owners and business persons and special
involvement with representatives of the Mid-City Neighbors
community organization. The Mid-city Neighbors organization
endorsed each hospital's Master Plan. city Planning staff
monitored the planning process. The Planning Commiss ion held
workshops on both hospitals' Master Plans.
Development of the HASP
Prior to developing the HASP, Planning staff reviewed the two
master plans and met with representatives of both hospitals, the
Mid-City Neighbors organization and the santa Monicans For
Reasonable Growth organization to understand the concerns of
those groups. In addition, staff conducted two community
meetings in August 1986, and October 1986, on potential
environmental impacts of the HASP.
The intent of the HASP as developed is to address issues of
neighborhood concern, to develop basic zoning and development
standards, to identify parcels for rezoning and to identify other
programs which should be implemented in the area. The Plan does
not propose standards for surrounding residential neighborhoods
or Santa Monica and Wilshire Boulevards because these districts
have already been addressed in the Land Use Element.
- 3 -
.
.
The HASP zoning standards and related policies are geared toward
integrating development needs in the hospital area with the needs
of the surrounding neighborhood. Another purpose of the HASP is
to identify appropriate rezonings of Commercial-Administrative
(CA) properties in the hospital area, since the CA zone will no
longer exist when the City's proposed Zoning Ordinance is
adopted.
The Draft Hospital Area Specific Plan consists of a discussion of
the legal requirements for a specific plan, background informa-
tion concerning the study area and hospital Master Plans, an
analysis of proj ected development of the area, General Plan
consistency, and an implementation program designed to carry out
policies proposed by the Specific Plan.
Planning Commission Action
On March 2, 1987, the Planning Commission approved the draft HASP
and forwarded it to the City Council for final action. The
Co1t\I\1ission endorsed staff recommendations in most policy areas
and made some changes to the document, but left several key
issues to be resolved by the Council, since successive motions
regarding these issues failed to obtain a majority vote of
Commissioners present. The Commission also recommended that the
Environmental Impact Report on the HASP be certified by the
Council.
Several zoning and Land Use Element policy changes related to
certain parcels owned by st. John'S Hospital, which were
originally proposed by the HASP, are no longer necessary, since
- 4 -
.
.
applications to effect these changes were subsequently approved
by both the Planning commission and city Council. St. John's
Hospital had filed for these changes because of a concern about
the length of time involved with adoption of the HASP.
Similarly, because of delays in HASP adoption, a number of Land
Use Element issues associated with the block bounded by 21st
street, Broadway, 20th street and Santa Monica Bl vd. have been
separated from the HASP and have been acted upon ahead of the
HASP.
city council Action
On July 14, 1987, the City Council reviewed the HASP and returned
it to the Planning Commission for further recommendations. The
Council endorsed, with some amendments, the Planning Commission's
changes to the HASP.
The City Council endorsed R2 zoning for the property currently
zoned CP (which is the zoning category for medical uses) on the
east side of 20th street between Wilshire and Arizona, and
retained the proposed CP-3 designation on the properties
currently zoned CP on the west side of 20th between Wilshire and
Santa Monica Blvd.
In addition to taking these actions, the Council directed staff
to investigate provisions which would encourage development of
congregate senior housing in the HASP area. The Council asked
the staff and the Commission to evaluate whether this housing
should be allowed with density bonuses under site review, by
conditional use, or by some type of zoning overlay. Staff was
- 5 -
.
.
also asked to explore the issue of whether some affordable senior
housing should be mandated.
staff and the Planning Commission were requested to explore the
concept of relating hospital expansion to the maintenance of
access to medical care. The City Attorney was directed to
prepare an opinion on the legal feasibil i ty of such a program.
This opinion is not yet available. The Planning Commission
accepted a staff recommendation that given the complexity of the
affordable health care issue, should the Attorney indicate that
it is legally feasible, and should the Commission and Council
wish to explore the concept, it be dealt with separate from the
HASP.
staff and the Commission were asked to study rezoning of the
"CA" area south of Santa Monica Blvd., potentially rezoning CA
land west of 21st Street to CP, and rezoning CA land east of 21st
Street to Cloverfield Blvd. to R3. Staff's recommendation had
been that the entire CA area be zoned CP given the historical
zoning of the area, its location relative to other commercial
areas, and the mix of commercial and residential uses. A number
of Planning commissioners and Councilmembers suggested that a
combination of R3 and CP zoning might be appropriate. At the
most recent Planning commission meeting, the Commission
recommended such a mix of zoning, basically reflecting the
pattern of existing land uses.
- 6 -
.
.
DISCUSSION
Rezoning Issues
To remain viable, both hospitals need areas in which to expand
and develop new facilities. Santa Monica Hospital will grow in a
southerly direction, as will saint John's. A key area for Saint
John's in this regard is the area currently zoned "CA" south of
Santa Monica Boulevard. Mid-City Neighbors, as part of the Saint
John's Master Plan process, expressed a preference that parcel
rezonings focus saint John's Hospital development south of Santa
Monica Boulevard. This concept was made part of Saint John I s
Master Plan.
This area south of Santa Monica Blvd. is presently a mix of CP,
CA and C4 zoning. This area has fairly diverse land uses,
including a number of residential units. The area includes the
former General Telephone property, located east of 21st Street
between Santa Monica Blvd. and Broadway, a block which is
entirely in non-residential use.
The following tables provide more specific land use information
for Cloverfield Boulevard to 20th Street and Santa Monica
Boulevard to Broadway:
- 7 -
.
.
Residential Units (with Underlying Zone in Parenthesis)
14 Single Family Dwellings
(6 in CA, 7 in C4,
1 in CP)
(CA)
(CA)
(CA)
(CA)
(CA wlone parcel in C4)
Two 5 unit Complexes
One 10 unit Complex
One 42 unit Complex
One 69 unit Complex
One 100 unit senior
Housing- Complex
Total of 245 units
Acreage by Land Use
Acreage ',by zone
Commercial 3.2 acres
Hospital 0.5 acres
Medical Office 2.2 acres
Residential 3.4 acres
parking 5.2 acres
Total 14.5 acres
CA
C4
CP
8.3 acres
3.5 acres
2.7 acres
Total
14.5 acres
In recognition of the existing historical CA commercial zoning
and the diverse pattern of land uses in the area, as well as the
the fact that under the proposed CP zoning ordinance, residential
uses would be generally permitted, staff had recommended that
the entire CA area be zoned CPo
At the various Planning Commission and City Council hearings,
several Commissioners and councilmembers expressed support for
- 8 -
.
.
the concept of zoning CA properties east of 21st street R3, and
CA properties west of 21st street CP, while others supported a CP
designation. The R3 designation was advanced because of the
existing residential units in the area, and an expressed desire
to preserve and protect housing in the City.
As approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, and
consistent with staff's recommendations, all of the CA area west
of 21st street would be zoned CPo The rezoning recommended by
the commission would involve zoning CA parcels east of 21st
street which are currently in non-residential use, and zoning CA
parcels currently in residential use R3. This would provide a
measure of protection to existing residential uses.
staff believes that while the Commission's rezoning
recommendations have merit, the entire CA area east of 21st
Street should be zoned CP because of the historical commercial
zoning, the large extent of commercial land uses, and the
proximity of high-traffic volume commercial streets (Santa Monica
Blvd., Cloverfield and Broadway). Existing and new residential
uses would be allowed with CP zoning.
Senior Housing Issues
As indicated above, the Ci ty council asked that the Planning
Commission explore the concept of providing special development
standards for senior congregate housing.
- 9 -
.
.
A. Definitions
The Draft Zoning Ordinance contains a number of definitions and
standards pertinent to this issue. Attachment C provides the
definitions for community Care Facility (including
sub-defini tions for I'residential facility" and ttadul t day care
facilitytt), Boarding House, Nursing Home, Residential Care
Facility, Rest Home, and Senior Group Housing. Attachment C also
provides the Zoning Ordinance's Performance Standards for Senior
Group Housing.
staff believes that these definitions provide a comprehensive set
of standards for a range of development types that serve seniors,
and that the HASP need not create new definitions. The Planning
Commission accepted these definitions.
B. Bonus provisions for Senior Group Housing
The draft City-wide Zoning Ordinance allows senior group housing
in the R2, R3, R4, BCD, CP and C2 districts--a wide range of
zoning classifications which encompass much of the City's land
area. Under the Performance Standards of the proposed Ordinance,
unlike most other types of residential development, senior group
housing developments may exceed the dwelling unit density
limitations (if any) of the underlying zoning, but must meet
other development standards of the zone such as setbacks and
height. Thus, senior group housing is already provided with a
significant "bonus" provision in the draft Zoning Ordinance.
- 10 -
.
.
The City Council expressed some interest in bonus provisions for
senior housing developments which included affordable units.
The implementing ordinance for the city's inclusionary housing
program (Program 12 of the Housing Element) requires senior
housing developments that include individual dwelling units (with
bathrooms and kitchens) to deed-restrict for affordable occupancy
at least 15% of the units in projects of five or more units, or
to pay an in-lieu fee to the City for development of affordable
housing.
Given the bonus already provided by exempting senior housing from
typical density limits, and the existing inclusionary housing
requirement of Program 12, additional provisions regarding senior
housing do not appear necessary at this time.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
No budget/financial impacts are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Approve the resolution (Attachment B) approving oraft 6 of
the Hospital Area Specific Plan.
- 11 -
.
.
2) Adopt the resolution of intention (Attachment D) to rezone CA
properties to CP and direct the Planning Commission to conduct a
public hearing on the rezonings.
Prepared by:
Attachments: A)
B)
C)
D)
E)
F)
DKW:se
hasp17
08/02/88
D. Kenyon Webster, Senior Planner
Draft 6 of HASP
Resolution Adopting HASP
Proposed Zoning Ordinance senior housing
definitions and Performance Standards
Resolution of Intention regarding rezonings
Maps showing rezoning areas
Planning Commission minutes
- 12 -
.
Attachment B
.
RESOLUTION NO.
(City council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ADOPTING THE DRAFT HOSPITAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
AND AMENDING THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65450 et seq.
permits each city to adopt a specific plan for the systematic
implementation of the general plan for individual areas covered
by the general plan; and
WHEREAS, the Hospital Area Specific Plan (RASP) was
released September 1986, for public review, and the review period
for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the HASP ran from
November 14, 1986, to December 29, 1986, and public workshops on
the EIR were held on August 6, 1986, and October 8, 1986, and
public hearings before the city Planning commission were held on
January 26, 1987, March 2, 1987, September 14, 1987, October 12,
1987, June 8, 1988, and public hearings were held before the
city Council on July 14, 1987 and August 9, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the planning process has provided for substantial
public involvement including public hearings and workshops, thus
exceeding the requirements stated in of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the HASP will guide and coordinate harmonious
development of the area in accordance with existing and future
needs and will best promote public health, safety, convenience,
- 1 -
.
.
prosperity, and the general welfare, as well as efficiency and
economy in the process of development as stated in the Municipal
Code: and
WHEREAS, the HASP specifies the standards and criteria by
which development in the Hospital Area will be permitted to
proceed as required in Section 65461 of the Government Code: and
WHEREAS, the HASP specifies a program of implementation
measures including regulations and policies necessary to carry
out the specific Plan as required in Section 65451 of the
Government Code and including amendments to the Land Use Element
policies and the Land Use and Circulation Elements policy Map:
and
WHEREAS, the HASP, including its recommended General Plan
amendments, is consistent with other Elements of the General Plan
as required in Section 65454 of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the HASP specifies the distribution, location,
and extent of land uses, including open space within the Hospital
and Medical Facility area, as required in Section 65451 of the
Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report on the
project was prepared in accordance with the City's Guidelines for
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
state CEQA Guidelines and was previously certified by the city
Council.
- 2 -
.
.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, 'l'HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The document entitled Hospital Area Specific
Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A, including the recommended
General Plan amendments specified therein and incorporated herein
by this reference, is hereby approved and adopted as the Specific
Plan for the Hospital Area of the City of Santa Monica.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption
~f this Resol'ltion, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall
be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~.~
ROBERT M. MYERS () -
City Attorney
haspr2
07/20/88
"
, ~
- 3 -
4It Attachment c: 4It
ZonIng OrdInance DefInItIons
exceeding one ton capacity or rental of other heavy equipment
shall constitute distinct uses separate from an automob~le rental
agency.
Average Natural Grad3. The average elevation of the ground
level of the parcel surface in its natural state as measured from
the corners of the parcel.
Awning. A temporary shelter supported entirely from the
exterior wall of a building.
Awnings shall be collapSIble,
retractable, or capable of being folded against the face of the
supporting building.
Balcony.
A platform. that projects from the wall of a
building and is s~rrounded by a railing.
Basement.
The portion of a structure below the finished
first floor.
A basement shall be considered a story if the
finished first floor ~t~~~~~ extends more than 3 feet above the
average natural grade.
Bed and Breakfast Facility.
A building or portion of a
building used as a temporary lodging place for individuals which
does not have more than four guest rooms and one kitchen.
Bedroom. A private room planned and intended for sleeping,
separated from other rooms by a door and accessible to a bathroom
without crossing another bedroom.
Boarding House. A residential building with common cooking
and eating facilities where a room or any portion of a room is
rented to a person or persons unrelated to the ;l;(1i~;l$6t~ person
renting the room. A sinqle family dwelling will not be considered
a boardinq house if only one room is rented to a person or
persons unrelated to the principal occupant of the dwelling.
- 5 -
~
~
"
~
iI
~
-
.
II
t
r
,
"
.
.
the previous use. A change of ownership for continuation of an
existing use does not constitute a change of use.
Child Day Care Center. Any child day care facility, other
than a family day care home I that provides carel protection I and
sUperv~sion for more than six children for periods less than 24
hours per day and where the owner or operator does not reside at
the child day care establishment. Child day care centers shall
include infant centers, preschools, nursery schools, and extended
day care facilities.
Church. See Place of Worship definition.
'/.;I.1!'tf4/tt;tt J ,.11 t;)6.;t~,i~1! ,!~;I.'J. t;t ~ tt;~Jrt t;t J!5)f,iJsd.i1ig ;t)1~;t
tt~~% ~J!5t;11! ~1i t~jpt1ij1i~ 'tPpt ~t;~;t~.in.i1i~ ~ttt~t;'!% )f%~~ Ip't Jj~~;t
pt 11!1i1-,iJ~'t,it;1iJ
cinema. A motion picture theater where the primary use is
to show motion or video pictures and to which admission is free
or a fee is charged, received or collected, either by the sale of
tickets or by any other means or device by which money or
something of value is received or paid therefor.
Club. A group of people organized for a common purpose to
pursue common goals, interests or act~vities and usually
characterized by certain membership qualifications, payment of
fees and dues, regular meetings I and a constitution or by-laws.
community Care Facility. Any facility, place, or building
which is maintained and operated to provide non-medical
residential care, adult day carel or home f~nding agency services
for childrenl adults I or children and adults including but not
limited to the physically handicapped, mentally impaired I or
incompetent persons I and includes the following:
- 7 -
.
.
(I) "Residential Care Facility" means any family home,
group care facility for 24-hour non-medical care to persons 18
years of age or older in need of personal services, supervision,
or assistances essential for sustaining the activities of daily
living or for the protection of the individual.
(2) "Adult Day Care Facility" means any facility which
provides non-medical care to persons 18 years of age or older in
need of assistance essential for sustaining the activities of
daily living or for 'the protection of the individual on less than
a 24-hour basis.
Conditional Use Permit. A discretionary permit obtained in
accordance with Subchapter lOF, permittinq the establishment of
particular uses in a zoning district.
Cultural Facilities. Museums, qalleries, theaters ana the
like, which promote educational and aesthetic interest within a
community.
Drive-Through or Drive-In Restaurant. A restaurant where
customers may be served food in their vehicles for consumption
either on or off the site.
D1:lplex. One structure on a single parcel containing two
dwelling units, each of Which is functionally separated from the
other.
Dwelling. A structure or portion thereof which ~s used
principally for residential occupancy.
Dwelling, MUlti-Family. A dwelling containing two or more
dwelling units.
Dwelling, Single-Family. A building containing one dwelling
unit Which contains only one kitchen and which is located on a
- 8 -
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
J
.
.
I~
which fails to conform to the present requirements of the zoning
district.
~~rsing Home. A facility licensed to !=lrovide full-time
convalescent or chronic care to individuals who, by reason of
advanced age, chronic illness, or inf irrni ty are unable to care
for themselves.
outdoor storage. The keeping, in an unroofed area, of any
goods, junk, material, merchandise, or vehicles in the same place
for more than 72 hours.
overlay District. A zoning designation specifically
delineated on the Districting Map establishing land use
requirements that qovern in addition to the standards set forth
in the underlying residential, commercial or industrial district.
Parabolic Antenna. An accessory structure of any shape,
including the main dish and covering, feedhorn, low noise
amplifier, structural supports and all other components thereof,
which transmits and receives electromagnetic waves by l~ne of
sight.
L Groundmounted Dish Antenna. A parabolic antenna, the
entire weight of which is supported by an approved platform,
framework, pole, or other structural system, which system ~s
affixed directly on or in the ground by a foundation and wh~ch
system is freestanding, excluding lateral bracing to a building
2. He~ght. The vertical distance between the highest point
of an antenna when actuated to its most vertical position and
grade below, for a grounctmounted dish antenna, and to the roof
below for a roofmounted dish antenna.
3. Microwave Relay Antenna. A transmitting and receiving
~
t
I
- 18 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
f
I
J
.
.
Residential Care Facility. A group housing arrangement
chosen voluntarily by residents over 60, but also including
persons under 60 with compatible needs, who are provided varying
levels and intensities of care and supervision or personal care,
based upon their varying needs, as determined in order to be
admitted and remain in the facility.
Residential Use. One or more rooms designed, occupied, or
intended for occupancy as primary living quarters in a building
or portion thereof.
Restaurant. Any building, room, space, or portion thereof
where food is sold for consumption on site. A restaurant does
not inolude inoidental food service. l'~t,tf!P;: ~% j~~tr,if!~t~ll J
y;itJ;f ]1Jp7'fi f.fi~;1 7JJfJ ;tqJijiJl'fi ffi~j jiJ7;lPFjil"tfisi fpI ;tfiJij!;t;1)J/ ;tPft7JiP;tpfg
t~t~tjpt ;i;!r,i f!ftj!~t;tPT ~t~~~J
Rest Home. An extended or intermediate care facil~ty
licensed or approved to provide health care under medical
supervision for 24 or more consecutive hours to two or more
patients who are not related to the governlng authority or its
members by marr~age, blood, or adopt~on.
Roof. That portion of a building or structure above walls
or columns that shelters the floor area or the structure below.
Sanitarium. An institution for the treatment of persons
with chronic and usually long term illnesses.
Self-Service storage Warehouse (Min~-Warehouse). A p~~~t~
warehouse operation where customers rent or lease, and have
direct access to, individual storage areas, compartments, or
rooms within a larger structure or structures provided for
storage use.
- 24 -
I
I
I
t
I
I
!
.
i
I
I
E
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
. .
senior Citizen. An individual 62 years of age or more.
Senior Group Housinq.
~~1~~p~~~~% ~t A building or
buildings, including a single family dwelling, t~;ttt).~pJt~ that
provides res~dence for a group of senior citizens y#jJt~ pYpyj~~~
with a central kitchen and dining facilities and a separate
bedroom or private living quarters.
Service Station. Any establishment whose primary function
is the retail sale of petroleum products and vehicle accessories
.
normally associated with this use, and shall include those
service stations providing full-service or self-service stations.
Setback.
The distance between the parcel line and a
building not including permitted projections.
Shelter for the Homeless. A residential facility operated
by a "provider", other than a "community care facil! tyll as
defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 1502, which
provides temporary accommodations to homeless persons and/or
families and which meets the standards for shelters contained in
Title 25, California Administrative code, Part 1, Chapter F,
SUbchapter 12, section 7972. The term "temporary accommOdations"
means that a homeless person or family will be allowed to reside
at the shelter for a time period not to exceed six (6) months.
For the purpose of this definition, a nprovider" shall mean a
government agency or private non-prOfit organization which
provides, or contracts with recognized community organizations to
provide, emergency or temporary shelter for the homeless, and
which meets the standards set forth in section 9050.14.
Shrub.
A pI ant with a compact growth habit and branches
coming from the base of the plant. Mature heights of shrubs may
- 25 -
.
Attachment D
.
RESOLUTION NO.
(City council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CHANGE
THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code, the
city Council does hereby give notice of its intention to change
the classification (re-zoning) of property as set forth in
Exhibit A.
SECTION 2. The city Clerk shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall
be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~~~
ROBERT M. MYERS 0 ~
city Attorney
wjcpreso2
.
.
EXHIBIT A
Proposed Property Rezonings
CP to CP3
LOT BLOCK TRACT
D-L 105 Town of Santa Monica
16-29 none Tract No. 4618
A-I 130 Town of Santa Monica
M-U 108 Town of Santa Monica
C-L 110 Town of Santa Monica
A-I 135 Town of Santa Monica
A-I 134 Town of Santa Monica
P-x 134 Town of Santa Monica
P-X 133 Town of Santa Monica
CP to CPS
LOT BLOCK TRACT
1-5 1 Schader's Addition
3 4 Orchard
1-3 2 Golden State
1-3 1 Golden state
1 4 Orchard
v-x 154 Town of Santa Monica
4-15 none Tract No. 4618
1-3 none Tract No. 7764
13 3 Orchard
14 3 Orchard
1-3 129 Tract No. 5379
P-x 129 Town of Santa Monica
c-v 109 Town of Santa Monica
cp to R2
LOT
10-12 N/A 199
P-U 104 Town of Santa Monica
10 3 Orchard
- 1 -
.
.
CP TO R4
LOT
M-O 104 Town of Santa Monica
LOT
CA to CP3
8-10 2 Schader's Addition
1-5 3 Schader's Addition
1-3 4 Schader's Addition
4-10 2 Golden state
LOT
CA to CP3
6-10 1 Schader's Addition
1-3 2 Schader's Addition
3 4 Orchard
4-10 1 Golden state
1 4 Orchard
Q-U 154 Orchard
w/hasp1ad2
- 2 -
.
ATTACHMENT E
REZONING MAPS
.
g
SPJ
~
~
c
~
s
-I
N/;J
Moo1
o
~
.
)"YMOYO~9
g
<>
c:<
=1
-
..
..
..
..
.. ...
CI
-.J
LU
LL
~
l-LJ
>
o
-.J
U
-: 10
lOH
.. a'
~
on
roO
V31NOH VJ
:0
....
.,...
:'~~~
6~ ~1;; -
OJ
I-
uJ
..u
oc:
.-
(o?
Q
::s
....'..I ..~.. ... ::~I ......~ '"
~. '~:: t-
...... . '-00 ~o..-.,...J
~ G _ 8~ ~ ...,
9 ~- ~.t"0I e>:
"..!..l .. pz ~ ..-z Vi
~ l:l'fld \'~INOH .,1 It YS "
or<
.. '" ~ $<0 ~
C"-
..... ;e
:1 :I
..., r-
~ "'" 'f
-
U +J
~ OJ
0.:: (!)
(C\., !e I-l
- .. +J
.., .. Ul
Y ~'" c -'"
_u Q ~ -v
"0 00
~;;;t -' -'
~ ~ ..
-
-4: ..
:I:: :I
V
c::.::
0
+J
m
Q)
I-l
.v
Ul
~ 'U
~
t-< f"'l
~ ~ N
0 ~ 11Dll;1
"0 $
v "0'1. ::3
'i ~
fl.
leil
s .U.l
-
~
.aAV EUOZL.:IV 0 ~ ~ YNC
Ul co
~ N -.
.. '.. .... .. .
Z -J
H ~ ...
Z ...
0 I
..... n "
N - -
r.:l II .., 0 ....
.c:: ....
...
Q :l r- ~A "I
...
r.:l Po. N 0:2' Of' "~.c...! .
CI U ~ Q:)
p:; II : l~~' -'!i"
z
~ 0 0 0 ,..
~ 8 E-o E-t i I .. ~ ~f
.....~ .'P-.'
0 .:e p., llt ,- ~
U U U U ~ ..... .....1...
_.....___ ...__01
rzJ ~ ~"~ .:-.~ --1
0:; . ~ :l ..
I ::It
Ii.. , .. II S 0- ;.: :I ~
Ii.. 11lLI. D
..:e: 1.tIoli1i11...... ~ ~~ 0: ::a:
~~J{l~ ....
8 ~~ ~
Ul ~
3'
P-
O - lOil
............ .In .... .. .. ... ...
.. c-I
.. ot~ ..
... ... co
".pATa a.:r1t{sT1'M >tit ~ 'I~I~
{~ ;;
;:; 0 :?
..,
..~
111
<>
5 .
!:r"~"i ~ ~ .. ;I"fr:~" ~I'"~
.. '" 2 ~ . - - - -.
~ ~ .
. ~~~~ .~
. .'
· r r ---
~- ;,.. '!!-
...... ::I"~ _...~. .
. 0 ......; 0 " ~ .4i.,~ --, - ,; ..~i"" _I . .
~ ... 0: - rJ - t!: - - --l! · I-
u... ~ r- - ~ I' : = .11... .-, ~
~ . r: · · 1= .. t .,.,-1,;,....". ~
.~d '~f~-~ ~~~, ". ~ .1- j,-~~ ~_." ~ ~
~ lOti" 10 -j - @I - S - :l IU
:Mi 0' Ot" Oi- i D" "cp; I DII i Oli i ,..... 'II,.,
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
...
""
(J)
t.!)
Z
I-l
Z
>t 0
~
C>:I
.... c:t::
.....
:II: Z
/l 0
I-l
U)
U)
I-l
~
0
0
t.!)
Z
H
Z
Z
t<t:
. ,.::j
~[ llo
I fl.
c;
:l
..
~"Itfa
c;
....
....
~.{~~ ..
I-
u.J
....
o~ -! 0:
I-
_u ICU' "II.U </'J
~ Hl~OH E
"""
+J
Q)
Q)
.,~ l-l
+J
~~ t/)
H.g;j 't:l
~ G: ~ l-l
,.. t-"I M
~ ~ N
_ .5IV(1
e
Ci'
Zf
1 \.0(1 ~f'CliI
o f""
. 61: --'iIIll[J 'Wil
i: -
a
-t: .aa'l. eUOZT;I'q' Ci
0.
eo
... .;<
..' .. .. ,'" .... .It
~ ... .. ... ...
.... ... ... ...
, h ti:i ~
..
f J ~
II "" 0:
.... 40, l;;
..' ~ .. ..'
~ r- ~ "
N
. ' I ... oE-< 0
:51 .. lIi II ~
.... ...
AYMQ'i'OM9
. ..: r-
~ N
<<..' <.J)
~ ....
!/( ""Y on
r-
!/ ~
~'" ~
!/ ...
~..' ~
~...
N
.' " 2
"10,)11"'
~
1'Ji!.
m
0..."'''''''.14-0. I
is'
iI
.
.
..-
el-ues
51
\f:lINO~ 'J
8
...
..
K ..
.
s
l-
f..) +J
<! Q)
ClI: Q)
... l-l
10- ~ +J
~ U)
Co 5l
c.:: ...
'"
-<
:z: :::r
U
or:
0
(Q\..,
~y
...
!:!",
- .,
00
~-'
...
~
:iI Ci VN(
~
... .... I
ISo ~ -1
. .......-v ~
'" .1
~ z
. --. "- .
.
. ~ A
. - .. 04
- ~
:~ .. --1
~Y~T :1
~~ ""' ~~i
.. ".-Q I
... on~-1
;:-.:- -",,)
...
....~". .".--.....1
it :J ~
;00.' -.:.,.~--~.
>- , \
.a'i' ~ __ M ""
~
.... ..... ~ ;:- .c
-. t
... ~ .. - .. - .. - .. 14111 JOU - ..
eo4
a
...
CO!
~Ull
CoI
".paTa: a;Ilt1sT'tM
~ 2
~Of
...tt
...,
l~
CI
2
.
Attachment F
.
M I NUT E S
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 8, 1988
7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
ROOM 213, CITY HALL
1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at
approximately 7:15 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: Eileen Hecht
Leslie Lambert
Ralph Mechur
Penny Perlman
Absent: Mehrdad Farivar*
Thomas pyne*
Also Present: Paul Berlant, Director of Planning
Ron Fuchiwaki, Traffic Engineer
Laurie Lieberman, Deputy City Attorney ~
Christine Reed, City Council Liaison
Kenyon Webster, Senior Planner
*NOTE: C01U1l\issioners Farivar and pyne were absent due to
uconflict of interesttt and they would have had to
abstain from all voting."
3 . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. HOSPITAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
Kenyon Webster, Senior Planner, gave the staff report on
HASP. Mr. Webster explained the rationale for the
zoning changes proposed in the plan. A correction to
the Resolution of Intention was brought to the
Commissionts attention, at the bottom of page where it
reads Lots 3-10, it should read Lots 4-10. Mr. Webster
explained this was a preliminary hearing and a public
hearing would be held on the rezoning issue at a later
date. The need for senior housing was discussed
briefly. Mr. Webster stated that the City Council has
requested advice on whether a policy regarding new
development and indigent medical care would be part of
the HASP. The City Attorney has yet to issue an opinion
on this matter.
Mr. Webster asked that the Planning Commission forward
HASP to the City Council and that there be adoption of
- 1 -
.
.
the Resolution of Intention regarding rezoning. The CP
zoning designation has been included in HASP. The new
CP standards are expected to be adopted by Council in
July. The rezoning issue has been separated from HASP
so that HASP can proceed independently for adoption.
Commissioner Lambert asked about affordable senior
housing and Program 12. Mr. Webster indicated that
group housing is not affected by program 12.
Chair Hecht asked about the parking lot zoning
designations. Mr. Webster stated that parking lots were
associated with commercial use and were therefore
designated as CP zoning.
The following members of the pul:ll ic spoke about the
plan:
K.B. Huff, 918 16th street, Santa Monica
for: Ed simonian, 1333 26th street, Santa Monica
Fred Fitzgerald, 1119 22nd Street, Santa Monica
Marjorie Krober, 1018 Euclid st., Santa Monica
Tom Larmore, 725 South Figueroa, Los Angeles
for: Bruce Jebbe, 2180 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Mara Bresnick, 1250 6th Street #300, Santa Monica
Paul Rosenstein, 1518 Yale Street #6, Santa Monica
Bill Weingarden, 1234 17th Street, Santa Monica
James Jacobson, 1417 21st Street, santa Monica
Sherman Stacey, 1299 Ocean Avenue, Santa Monica
for: Sherwin Memel, 11355 W. Olympic Boulevard,
Los Angeles
fatricia Keast, 1225 15th street, santa Monica
commissioner Nelson requested the Traffic Engineer come
to the Council Chambers to answer questions.
Commissioner Nelson then expressed his concerns and
observations on the situation, especially as pertains to
st. John · s Hospi tal pushing toward Santa Monica
Boulevard for future development.
Commissioner Nelson made a motion asking the Commission
to consider Mr. stacey.s zoninq pattern for HASP.
Commissioner Perlman seconded the motion. Commissioner
Nelson stated the proposed changes would not result in a
friendly neighborhood.
commissioner Perlman asked staff about maintaining
residential housing on Schader street. Commissioner
Nelson stated that Schader housing would remain
residential and that the only area involving residential
is on 21st Street, in the Golden state Tract, Lots 4-10.
Commissioner Lambert stated opposition to the motion,
asserting it was critical to protect what affordable
housing was present in the Mid-City area. Program 10 is
not tight enough to make the replacement program
- 2 -
"'
.
.
required. Commissioner Lambert stated that it was
important to protect residences and neighborhoods.
Commissioner Mechur asked about changing a zone to CP
and removal of units under the Ellis Act. Mr. Webster
stated the issue was still undecided. Program 10
implementation will come before City Council soon. A CP
zone, according to Mr. Webster, allows residential
development. Commissioner Mechur asked about the
specifics of square footage for future growth by the
st. John's Master Plan. Mr. Webster stated that the
plan is very specific but grows less specific in the
long term Commissioner Mechur asked if there were any
caps or limits set. Mr. Webster stated that the Master
Plan was st. John's own plan and did not represent City
policy and was a private document.
Commissioner Perlman asked for a clarification on the
issue of could the hospital acquire properties for
commercial use if residential housing units are
displaced and replaced somewhere else in the city. Mr.
Webster stated that if a property is zoned residential
it can not be used for medical office use.
commissioner Nelson asked if a property is zoned R-3
residential, could it be used as a community care
facility or other related use. Mr. Webster stated that
was permissible.
Commissioner Lambert stated this was consigning the
properties to the Ellis Act.,
Chair Hecht stated disappointment with staff's
recommendation and had hoped that staff would come up
with a rational grouping of areas for residential and
commercial blocks.
Commissioner Perlman noted that there were not enough
votes to pass the motion.
Commissioner Nelson commented on his concern to protect
the majority of housing units there (in the area); but
the majority of housinq was on the west side of 20th
street between santa Monica Boulevard and Wilshire
Boulevard. Low intensity uses such as a church, parish
house, parking lot for a mortuary, chapel and mortuary
and open grounds, three apartment buildings and
convalescent hospital.
Commissioner Lambert stated that according to the staff
report, 245 housing units are in the area. Mr. Webster
stated that the nature of the area and mixed use pattern
makes creating a cohesive zone difficult. staff tried
to make a logical rezoning recommendation within the
framework of the commisioner's direction.
- 3 -
. .
Chair Hecht called for the vote:
AYES: Nelson, Perlman; NOES: Hecht, Lambert, Mechur;
ABSENT/ABSTAIN: Farivar, pyne.
The motion failed.
commissioner Perlman stated that not enough votes were
present to do anything, that 21st Street was spot zoned
and should be zoned CP, and the residential areas need
protection. If the spot zoning can not be corrected,
then the staff compromise language about maintaining
zoning should be used: residential for residential and
commercial to become CP zone. Commissioner Perlman
noted this was the fifth draft of HASP and made a motion
for maintenance of residential use as residential and
commercial as commercial use. Commissioner Nelson
seconded the motion.
commissioner Nelson stated he was prepared to vote for
the motion so that it could be sent on to City Council,
but indicated he would probably speak against it at
Council.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Lambert, Mechur, Nelson, Perlman; NOES: Hecht;
ABSENT/ABSTAIN: Farivar, Pyne.
COJlllllissioner Perlman asked for two other issued to be
considered: (1) that staff be required to upgrade the
lanquage prior to its going to City council regarding
the environmental review beginning on page 86, which
refers back to prior EIR process; and (2) that on 20th
street, east side, permit the remaining three lots to
develop to R-4 standards. Commissioner Mechur seconded
the motion and commented that two new projects on the
block are being developed to R-4 standards.
Chair Hecht asked about setting a height 1 imi t not to
exceed surrounding developments.
Commissioner Nelson asked for a amendment restricting
some R-4 permitted uses such as hotels. Mr. Berlant
asked for clarification of R-4 height limit to
neighboring developments and that hotels would not be
permitted.
Commissioner Lambert expressed support for the motion,
but felt that it would "open the door" for the Ellis
Act.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Hecht, Lambert, Kechur, Nelson, Perlman;
ABSENT/ABSTAIN: Farivar, Pyne.
councilmember Reed questioned the
asked if congregate housing
no hotel aspect and
would be allowed.
- 4 -
.
.
Commissioner Nelson stated his support for residential
or convalescent hospitals in the area, and that only R-3
or R-3 uses would be permitted.
Commissioner Mechur commented on the St. John's area and
made a motion that the hospital be allowed to build
six-story buildings on the property directly east of the
hospital, so that support floors of the hospital complex
will line up in a similar use facility.
Commissioner Lambert seconded the motion.
Chair Hecht asked which parcels were involved.
Mr. webster stated that it was the Orchard Tract, Block
3, Lots 13-14. It was also noted that 22nd street, on
the map, no longer exists. Mr. stacey added Tract 7764,
Lots 1-3 and stated that that hospitals are generally
six stories and need to have continuous flow of floors
for patient movement.
Commissioner Nelson stated he could not support the
motion.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Hecht, Lambert, Mechur, Perlman; NOES: Nelson;
ABSENT/ABSTAIN: Farivar, Pyne. .,'
Commissioner Perlman made a motion to officially adopt
the Resolution of Intent as corrected by staff and adopt
HASP. Commissioner Nelson seconded the motion.
chair Hecht asked about the west side of 20th street and
whether City Council could change the use. Mr. webster
stated Council could do so.
Commissioner Mechur noted Mr. stacey's statement that
the hospital preferred to do traffic demand instead of
providing free parking for employees. Mr. webster
stated that language could be added to Objective 22.
Chair Hecht stated it did not sound like an option. Mr.
Webster replied that this did not deal with the amount
of parking, but whether there would be a charge or it
would be free. Chair Hecht mentioned a City study. Mr.
webster stated that as it was written, mandatory free
parking was required regardless of other TSM
requirements. Councilmember Reed suggested that free
parking and TSM requirements be tied together because
mandatory tree parking will cause the TSM program to
fail. Mr. Berlant noted that TSM often requires paid
parking.
Commissioner Nelson asked if there was a motion on the
floor and commented that st. John f s has 500 employees
and has a SCAQMD deadline. Also, free parking should be
for employees and not the doctors.
- 5 -
..
.
.
Chair Hecht asked that staff be directed to prepare
alternate language to allow TSM program to replace free
parking. Mr. Berlant asked if the plan should be
returned to the Commission for review. Chair Hecht
indicated changes could be made at a later date.
commissioner Perlman expressed no confidence in the TSM
program.
Chair Hecht called for the vote on the TSM parking
issue/motion, which was approved by unanimous voice
vote.
[ABSENT/ABSTAIN: Farivar, Pyne.J
commissioner Perlman made a motion for adoption of the
fifth draft of HASP as amended and the Resolution of
Intent. Commissioner Nelson seconded the motion. The
motion was approved by unanimous voice vote.
[ABSENT/ABSTAIN: Farivar, Pyne.J
5. PUBLIC INPUT
6.
PC/pcm68
DKW:kf
06/22/88
"
ADJOURNMENT:
9 p.m.
The meeting was adj ourned at approximately
- 6 -