SR-09-26-2006-7C~I+
~ity ~auncil Report
~ City of
.SaRllta'1 1~TOIl1CiR~
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2006
Agenda Item: ~~
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Andy Agle, Interim Director, Planning and Community Development
Subject: Ordinance for Introduction and First Reading to Modify Santa Monica
Municipal Code Sections 9.04.20.10.030, 9.04.10.02.450, 9.36.270,
9.32.170, and 9.56.030 to Allow for Modification of Development
Standards and Implementation of lncentives for Projects that Include the
Retention and Preservation of a Designated Landmark Building or
Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District.
Recommended Action
It is recommended that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance
modifying Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Sections 9.04.20.10.030 (Variances),
9.04.10.02.450 (Project Design & Deve{opment Standards), 9.36.270 (Landmarks and
Historic Districts), 9.32.170 (Architectural Review}, and 9.56.030 (Affordable Housing
Production Program) to allow for modification of development standards and
implementation of incentives for projects that inclucie the retention and preservation of a
designated Landmark building or Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District.
Executive Summary
The applicant, Fifth Street Condo Proj~ct LLC, 'r~as proposed a series of ordinance
amendments to create a procedure for review of the requested modifications and to
1
provide specific incentives for the preservation of a designated historic resource on site
(Attachment B). Specifically, the applicant has proposed a new discretionary review
process through which the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission may approve
requested modifications to development standards for projects that include the retention
and preservation of a designated Landmark structure or Contributing Structure to an
adopted Historic District.
The applicant has also proposed amendments to the Municipal Code to allow for the
retention of an existing curb cut and front yard parking; a waiver from the Construction
Rate Program; and to clarify that the Landmarks Commission has sole design review
authority over changes to properties containing a Landmark structure.
The proposed Ordinance (Attachment A) incorporating the amendments also reflects
three staff recommended modifications that are discussed in greater detail in this report.
The following key issues should be considered by the City Council in its review of the
proposed Ordinance:
1) Consider whether the proposed Ordinance is consistent with the City's goals,
as expressed in the City's Historic Preservation Element, to promote preservation
of historic and cultural resources through incentives and technical assistance.
2) Evaluate whether the proposed Ordinance is consistent with the City's long-
standing commitment articulated in both the Land Use Element and Housing
2
Element to facilitate the development of new housing, including affordable
housing, in all residential neighborhoods, while still protecting the character and
scale of neighborhoods.
Discussion
Backqround
The applicant submitted a Zoning Ordinance Amendment application in conjunction with
a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map and Use Permit Application to develop a project that
includes on-site relocation of the Turn-of-the-Century Cottage (circa 1908) that was
designated as a City Landmark in 2002 and the construction of three new condominium
units behind it on the rear of the parcel at 954 5th Street.
The proposed 954 5th Street project requires a variety of modifications to development
standards including those which specify the maximum height, number of stories, and
building volume and parcel coverage above 23'-0" and the 2nd story; minimum rear
yard setback; projections into required front yard area; private open space accessibility;
and the amount of unexcavated yards provided on site.
Discussion & Analysis
Proposed Ordinance Amendments
The proposed Ordinance contains five amendments to the Santa Monica Municipal
Code that would be applicable to projects that involve the retention and preservation of
a designated Landmark building or Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District.
3
SMMC Section 9.04.20.10 (Variances)
As part of the applicant's Zoning Ordinance Amendment application, a Use Permit
process was initially proposed as a new mechanism for evaluating requested
modifications to development standards for projects that include the retention and
preservation of a designated Landmark structure or Contributing Structure to an
adopted Historic District. However, in lieu of a Use Permit process staff has proposed a
Variance process to evaluate requested modifications. The applicant has not objected
to the staff-recommended Variance procedure.
The staff-proposed Variance process would allow an applicant to request modifications
to development standards provided that nine provisions are met. These provisions are
designed to ensure that the proposed project, with requested modifications, is
consistent with key factors that help to retain neighborhood compatibility such as:
maximum unit density, maximum height and number of stories permitted by the Land
Use Element, provision of private open space, and provision of unexcavated yard area.
In addition to these nine standards that must be met in order to request modifications to
development standards, the proposed Variance process would allow the Zoning
Administrator, or Planning Commission on appeal, to evaluate each project and
approve, deny, or modify each requested modification as deemed necessary in order to
make the required findings of fact.
4
Further, the Variance process requires that projects are proposed in a manner
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties in order to ensure that the important historic character of the existing
designated resource is retained.
By allowing applicants to request certain modifications to development standards for
projects that retain designated resources, some of the key impediments to creating
innovative designs that balance new development with preservation goals can be
eliminated. The proposed Variance procedure creates a mechanism to evaluate such
requests for modifications on a case by case basis in order to ensure that proposed
projects are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and appropriate for the site.
The proposed amendment is also consistent with the Landmarks Commission's
articulated support for creating tangible incentives for pro}ects that involve preservation
of a designated historic resource, and demonstrates that designated City Landmarks
and Contributing Structures to Historic Districts are significant resources that contribute
to local neighborhood character and more broadly to the City's unique community
identity.
SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.450 (Project Design & Development Standards)
The applicant proposes an amendment to allow projects that involve the preservation of
a designated City Landmark or Contributing Structure to a Historic District to be exempt
from the provisions of the Construction Rate Program. The Program specifies that for
5
Appropriateness, and the Architectural Review Board are not required for new
construction on a parcel containing a designated Landmark building or on a parcel
located within an adopted Historic District.
As a matter of policy, and consistent with the City's permit processing procedures,
duplicative design review is not recommended or practiced. These two proposed
amendments recognize that the Landmarks Commission has specific expertise and
familiarity with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards to evaluate proposed alterations
to Landmark buildings and to evaluate new construction to ensure that no negative
impacts to the existing designated resource are created. Further, this clarification to the
Municipal Code serves to ensure a fair and predictable design review process for
applicants, and is consistent with the City's current practice.
SMMC 9.56.030 (Affordable Housing Production Program)
In addition to the applicant's proposed modifications to the Zoning Ordinance, staff also
proposes an amendment to the Affordable Housing Production Program to specify that
an existing designated Landmark on site shall be exempt from the obligations
established by SMMC Chapter 9.56. This exemption would only apply to new multi-
family projects that include the on-site retention and preservation of a designated
Landmark building or Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District. The
following is an example of how this proposed amendment would be applied: for a multi-
family ownership project that involves the on-site retention and preservation of a
designated Landmark residence and the construction of three new units on the parcel
7
resulting in a total of four multi-family ownership units, the existing designated
Landmark residence would be exempt for the purposes of calculating the total number
of multi-family ownership units subject to the obiigations of the Affordable Housing
Production Program. In this example, there would a total of three multi-family
ownership units subject to the obligations of the Affordable Housing Production Program
instead of a total of four units.
The currently proposed amendment to SMMC Chapter 9.56 is appropriate because the
designated Landmark residence or Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District
would be an existing housing unit and would not represent new construction on site, and
is consistent with the primary purpose of the proposed Ordinance which is to provide
incentives to support innovative project designs that balance new development with the
City's preservation goals. Further, this proposed amendment to the Affordable Housing
Production Program is also consistent with the Landmarks Commission's ongoing
recommendation to establish tangible incentives and policies that support the City's
Historic Preservation Element.
Planninq Commission Action
At the June 21, 2006 hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City
Council approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments as modified by staff.
During the public hearing, a member of the Landmarks Commission addressed the
Planning Commission to express support for the proposed project and the concept of
the ordinance amendment. The Planning Commission also received correspondence
8
from an adjacent property owner who expressed concerns about the height of the
proposed new construction an site. A second letter was received from a Landmark
property owner who expressed support for the proposed amendment.
The Planning Commission fou~~d that the staff-proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives, policies specified in the adopted
Land Use Element and Historic Preservation Element of the City of Santa Monica's
General Plan. Specifically, the Commission found that the staff-proposed Variance
procedure to be an appropriate incentive to support the preservation of designated
resources that also balances the need to evaluate requests for modifications to
development standards on a case-by-case basis in order to ensure that proposed
projects are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and appropriate for the site.
The Commission also found that the scafe, massing, and design of the new construction
at 954 5th Street to be compatible with the scale and character of the existing Landmark
Cottage on site and the surrounding neighborhood. Finally, the Commission approved
the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map and Variance for the proposed project, subject to
Council approval of the pending Zoning Ordinance amendment.
Finally, the Planning Commission concurred with staff's recommendation to not support
an ordinance amendment to allow the Landmarks Commission to approve retention of
existing curb cuts and to allow front yard parking when alley access is available in a
multi-family zoning district for projects that retain a designated historic resource.
9
Accordingly, language proposing retention of existing curb cuts and front yard parking is
not included in the Ordinance contained in Attachment A. The applicant has not filed an
appeal of the Planning Commission's formal recommendation on this matter.
The Planning Commission staff report can be found on-line at the following address:
http://santa-monicaorg/planninq/d~vJcc~~r~mission/aqendas/pc2006/pa20060621.htm.
The Planning Commission's Statement of Official Action can be found online at the
following address:
http://santa-monica.orq/planninq/dev/cc>rnmission/aqendas/pc2006/ps2006071907-C.htm
Landmarks Commission Action
The subject property at 954 5th Street w~s initially reviewed by the City's Landmarks
Commission in September 2002 as a result of a pending demolition permit for all
structures on the parcel. In December 2002, the Commission designated the primary
residence on site (Turn-of-the-Century Cotfiage), excluded the rear structures from the
Landmark designation, and concurrently approved the concept that the structure could
be relocated within the front half of the property in conjunction with future development
on site subject to approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Following Planning Commission's positive recommendation on staff-modified, proposed
ordinance amendment language and approval of the Tentative Map and Variance
associated with the proposed four-unit condominium project, the Landmarks
Commission held a public hearing to consider the Certificate of Appropriateness
10
application for the project. In its action on July 1~, 2006, the Commission found that the
plan for rehabilitation of the Cottage is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and that the design for the new
construction on site is compatible with the existing historic resource and the surrounding
neighborhood. Moreover, the Landmarks Commission noted that the proposed project
would be a model project to promote both preservation of a Landmark structure while
still allowing for new development on site. The Commission also expressed support for
the retention of the existing curb cut surface parking adjacent to the Landmark Cottage.
The Landmarks Commission also reiterated its support for the amendments that would
allow for modifications to the Zoning Ordinance as an incentive for preserving
historically significant properties in the City. This position is consistent with the
Landmarks Commission's ongoing efforts ir~ this area. One area of special interest to
the Commission has been support for the creation of more incentives to facilitate
implementation of the Historic Preservation Program and the inclusion of procedures
that would provide more flexibility with respect to the application of development
standards in the current and forthcoming Zoning and Landmarks Ordinances. In
support of this effort, an ad-hoc Committee of Landmarks Commissioners has been
actively engaged in the Shape the Future 2025 Project since 2004 in order to develop
recommendations for incorporation into the forthcoming Land Use Element and Zoning
Ordinance.
The Landmarks Commission staff report c~ri be found on-line at the following address:
'1 1
http://santa-monica.orq/planning/I~ndrnark/aqendas/2006/OIca07102006.htm. The Landmarks
Commission's Statement of Official Action for the proposed project is also included as
Attachment D.
General Plan Consistency
The proposed amendments are consist~nt in principle with the goals, objectives,
policies, land uses, and programs specified in the adopted Land Use Element, Historic
Preservation Element, and Housing Element of the City of Santa Monica's General
Plan.
Land Use Efement Policy 1.10.1 encourages the development of new housing in all
residential neighborhoods, while still protecting the character and scale of
neighborhoods. The proposed Ordinance is consistent with this policy in that it would
allow new residential units to be constructed while still providing incentives to support
the on-site retention of an existing historic resource that contributes to the character of
the surrounding neighborhood.
Land Use Element Policy 3.1.3 encourages the retention of historic and architecturally
significant resources and states that the design of new buildings should respect the
character of nearby historic resources. The proposed Variance procedure specified in
the draft Ordinance is consistent with Policy 3.1.3 because it incorporates a requirement
that projects to be designed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
~I 2
for the Treatment of Historic Properties, which specifies that any new construction on
site shall be compatible with the historic resource while not duplicating its design.
Goal 3 of the Historic Preservation Element calls for an increase in public awareness of
the history of Santa Monica and historic preservation in the City. The proposed
Ordinance supports this goal by providing incentives to retain on site historically
significant structures, thereby allowing them to continue to exemplify important elements
of Santa Monica's history.
Goal 5 of the Historic Preservatian Element encourages the promotion of preservation
of historic and cultural resources tf~rough incentives and technical assistance. The
proposed Ordinance provides several key incentives for projects that retain and
preserve designated historic resources. These incentives include the creation of a
discretionary review process to evaluate requested modifications to development
standards in order to facilitate retention of character-defining features of the structure
while still allowing for new construction on site. The Ordinance also proposes incentives
such as an exemption from the construction rate program and an exemption of the
existing residence for the purposes of calculating the project's affordable housing
production program obligation in order to h~lp promote and facilitate the retention and
preservation of designated historic resources in tne community.
Housing Element Policy 1.3 calls for the establishment and maintenance of
development standards that support housing development while protecting quality of life
13
goals. Housing Element Policy 1.7 encourages the maintenance of development
standards that ensure that the development of new housing in residential
neighborhoods is designed to fit within the existing neighborhood context. Housing
Element Goal 4.0 encourages the rehabilitation and continued maintenance of existing
housing and Policy 4.3 calls for the rehabilitation of existing housing to address the
health and safety needs of residents while respecting the character of the structure. The
proposed Ordinance supports these Housing Element goals and policies by providing a
mechanism to promote the production of new housing in residential districts while also
establishing a process to evaluate requested modifications to development standards
that would help to facilitate the preservation, rehabilitation and retention of existing
historic resources that contribute to neighbor character.
The general welfare of the City is enhanced when the development of new housing in
residential neighborhoods is encouraged, while still protecting the character and scale
of neighborhoods. The proposed Ordinance serves as an important catalyst to allow for
both the construction of new housing and the on-site preservation and retention of
designated City Landmarks and Contributing Structures to Historic Districts that
enhance the surrounding neighborhood and contribute more broadly to the City's unique
community identity.
Environmental Analysis
The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Class 5 Section 15331 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Class 5
14
consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in area with an average slope of less
than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density. The applicant
proposes a Text Amendment to permit modifications to development standards subject
to a discretionary review process when the praject includes preservation of a Landmark
building or Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District.
Alternatives
In addition to the recommended action, the Council may:
1) Adopt the proposed Ordinance with modified text language and findings;
2) Direct staff to return with a revised Ordinance with modified text language based
on Council's direction; or
3) Disapprove the proposed Ordinance.
BudgetlFinancial Impact
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or financial
impact.
Prepared by;
Roxanne Tanemori, Associate Planner
Approved:
~Agle ~~
Interim Director, Planning and
Community Development
Forwa~ed to Council:
i
P. a ont Ewell
C anager
15
Attachments:
A. Proposed Ordinance
6. Staff-Proposed Text Amendments
C. Applicant-Proposed Text Amendments
D. Landmarks Commission Statement of Official Action, July 10, 2006
E. Correspondence Received Regarding the Proposed Text Amendment
F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 21, 2Q06, Item 9-C
16
ATTACHMENT A
Proposed Ordinance
17
f:\atty\muni\laws\barryllandmarkstandards.doc
City Council Meeting 9-26-06 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS
9.04.20.10.030, 9.04.10.02.450, 9.36.270, 9.32.170, AND 9.56.030 TO ALLOW FOR
MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF
INCENTIVES FOR PROJECTS THAT INCLUDE THE RETENTION AND
PRESERVATION OF A DESIGNATED LANDMARK BUILDING OR CONTRIBUTING
STRUCTURE TO AN ADOPTED HISTORIC DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2005, the owner of the property at 954 5th Street
submitted a proposed text amendment application in conjunction with a vesting tentative
parcel map and use permit application to develop a project that includes the on-site
relocation of a residence that was designated a City Landmark in 2002 and the
construction of three new condominium units behind the residence on the rear of the
parcel; and
WHEREAS, the proposed text amendment would be applicable to projects that
involve the retention and preservation of a designated landmark or contributing structure
to an adopted historic district and would, in part, allow an applicant to request
modifications to development standards through a variance procedure which would be
subject to specified standards and parameters; and
1
WHEREAS, review of this application would ensure that the proposed project,
with the requested modifications, is consistent with key development standards that
ensure retention of neighborhood compatibility such as maximum unit density,
maximum height, number of stories, provision of private open space, and provision of
unexcavated yard area; and
WHEREAS, the proposed text amendment would also ensure that projects are
undertaken consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties so that the important historic character of the resource is retained;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed text amendment would eliminate some of the key
impediments to innovative designs that balance new development with preservation
goals; and
WHEREAS, the proposed variance process would also allow the Zoning
Administrator, or Planning Commission on appeal, to evaluate each project and
approve, deny, or modify the request as necessary to make the required findings of fact;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed text amendment would also exempt such projects from
the Construction Rate Program, clarify that the Landmarks Commission has sole
regulatory authority over design review of these projects and clarify that the retained
historic structure shall not be considered for purposes of assessing any of the
obligations that an applicant might have under the Affordable Housing Production
Program; and
2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed zoning text
amendment at a public hearing on June 21, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve the request as modified by staff; and
WHEREAS, the proposed text amendment has also been reviewed and
supported by the Landmarks Commission in that it is consistent with the Commission's
articulated support for providing incentives for projects that involve the preservation of
historic resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on this proposed text
amendment on September 26, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is consistent in principle with the goals,
objectives, policies, land uses and programs specified in the adopted General Plan,
specifically Land Use Element Policy 1.10.1 which encourages the development of new
housing in all residential neighborhoods, while still protecting the character and scale of
neighborhoods in that new residential units are proposed along with the retention of an
existing historic resource that contributes to the character of the surrounding
neighborhood; Land Use Element Policy 3.1.3 which encourages the retention of
historic and architecturally significant resources and provides that the design of new
buildings should respect the character of nearby historic resources in that the retention
and preservation of the historic resource is proposed and the new construction is
designed to be compatible with the historic resource on site while not duplicating its
design; Goals 3 and 5 of the Historic Preservation Element which calls for an increase
public awareness of the history of Santa Monica and historic preservation in the City
3
and which encourages the promotion of preservation of historic and cultural resources
through incentives and technical assistance; Housing Element Policy 1.3 which
encourages the establishment and maintenance of development standards that support
housing development while protecting quality of life goals; Housing Element Policy 1.7
which encourages the maintenance of development standards that ensure that the
development of new housing in residential neighborhoods is designed to fit within the
existing neighborhood context; Housing Element Goal 4.0 which encourages the
rehabilitation and continued maintenance of existing housing; and Housing Element
Policy 4.3 which encourages the rehabilitation of existing housing to address the health
and safety needs of residents while respecting the character of the retained structure;
and
WHEREAS, the public health, safety, and general welfare require the adoption of
the proposed amendment in that the proposed text amendment serves as an important
catalyst to allow for both the construction of new housing and the on-site preservation
and retention of designated City landmarks and contributing structures to historic
districts that will enhance the surrounding neighborhoods and contribute to the City's
unique community identity and in that by allowing applicants to request certain
modifications to development standards for projects that retain designated historic
resources, some of the key impediments to creating innovative designs that balance
new development with preservation goals can be eliminated,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
4
SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.10.30 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 9.04.20.'l0.030. Applicability.
The Zoning Administrator may grant a variance from
the requirements of this Chapter to:
(a) Allow the modification of the minimum lot sizes
or minimum parcel dimensions;
(b) Allow the modification of the number and
dimensions of automobile parking spaces, loading spaces
and driveway requirements including those set by
performance standards, use permit special standards,
special conditions for conditional uses, regulations of the
various zoning districts, the off-street parking requirements
and the off-street loading requirements;
(c) Allow the modification of fence heights;
(d) Allow the modification of yard setbacks or parcel
coverage on:
(1) Parcels having a depth of ninety feet or less or a
width of thirty-nine feet or less,
5
(2) Nonrectitinear parcels or rectangular parcels on
which parallel property lines differ in length a minimum of
five feet,
(3) Parcels with a twelve-and-one-half-foot grade
differential or more, as measured from either any point on
the front parcel line to any point on the rear parcel line, or
from any point on a side parcel line to any point on the
opposing side parcel line,
(4) Additions to the same floor of an existing
building which is nonconforming as to yard setbacks, where
such addition follows the line of the existing building but in
no case is closer than four feet to a property line,
(5) Parcels in the CM District on which relocated
structures that are identified on the Historical Resources
Survey as having a value of 1 through 5D or which are
determined to be historically significant by the Landmarks
Commission are located. A variance may apply only to the
relocated structure;
(e) For projects conforming to State density bonus
guidelines, allow encroachment into no more than fifteen
percent of one side yard setback, and into fifteen percent of
either the front or rear yard setback, and, except in those
6
zones where an increase in parcel coverage for State
density bonus projects is already permitted, aNow an
increase in parcel coverage by no more than ten percent of
parcel area. In no case shall a rear yard setback of less than
five feet be allowed;
(fl Allow buildings to exceed district height limits by
no more than five feet in one of the following situations:
(1) If a parcel has a grade differential of twelve and
one-half feet or more, as measured from either any point on
the front parcel line to any point on the rear parcel line, or
from any point on a side parcel line to any point on the
opposing side parcel line,
(2) To allow an addition to an existing structure that
is legally nonconforming as to height provided the addition
does not exceed the height line of the existing building;
(g) Allow an addition to an existing building that is
legally nonconforming as to height provided all of the
following criteria are met:
(1) The addition does not exceed the height line of
the existing buifding,
7
(2) The addition does not exceed two percent of the
total floor area of the building,
(3) The addition does not increase lot coverage or
the overall footprint of the building,
(4) The addition does not increase the density or
number of inhabitants or increase the intensity of use of the
building,
(5) The addition otherwise conforms to the
regulations of the district in which it is located,
(6) There is no feasible alternative method of
attaining the desired use,
(7) There is no substantial adverse impact to
adjacent buildings, existing streetscape, privacy, nor
significant increases to the mass and bulk of the building;
(h) Allow the replacement of an existing residential
building in an OP District that is legally nonconforming as to
height where the parcel has a grade differential of twelve
and one-half feet or more, as measured from either any point
on the front parcel line to any point on the rear parcel tine, or
from any point on a side parcel line to any point on the
8
opposing side parcel line provided the following criteria are
met:
(1) The replacement structure does not exceed the
height line of the existing building,
(2) The replacement structures does not increase
~the density or square footage beyond the existing structure
or increase the intensity of use of the building,
(3) The replacement structure otherwise conforms
to the regulation of the district in which it is located,
(4) There is no substantial adverse impact to
adjacent buildings, existing streetscape, privacy, nor
significant increases to the mass and bulk of the building;
(i) Allow the modification of the required front yard
setback to allow, in the case of existing development, a
detached garage provided all of the following criteria are
met:
(1) The lot is less than one hundred feet in depth,
(2) The on-site use is a single family dwelling,
(3) No alley access is available to the site;
9
(j) Allow the modification of the side yard setback
for primary windows in the OP-2, OP-3 and OP-4 Districts
when the imposition of the required setback would severely
constrain development on the project, an alternative setback
would still satisfy private open space requirements and
maintain privacy for the occupants of the project;
(k) Allow an additional story which would otherwise
not be permitted for an existing residential structure provided
all of the following criteria are met:
(1) The existing structure has a finished first floor
level that is more than three feet above average natural
grade or theoretical grade,
(2) The street frontage and overall massing are
compatible with the existing scale and neighborhood context,
(3) The addition does not enlarge the first floor of
the existing residence such that a nonconforming condition
is expanded,
(4) The overall height of the structure with the
additional story does not exceed the height limit in feet of the
zoning district in which it is located unless authorized by a
variance granted pursuant to subsections (fl(1) or (fl(2) of
10
this Section for a structure located in the R1, R2R, OP1 or
OP2 zoning districts, which variance may be granted
concurrently with a variance authorized pursuant to this
subsection (k),
(5) The addition otherwise conforms to the
regulations of the district in which it is located;
(I) Allow the modification, renovation, or
replacement of nonconforming building access features such
as stairs, ramps, doors, balconies, and windows, or features
that provide shelter and which are located at the exterior of
the buildings, such as awnings, canopies, or covered
walkways, provided:
(1) The modification, renovation or replacement is
no more intrusive than, and does not intensify or expand
such existing nonconforming features, and
(2) The modification, renovation or replacement
either improves access to the building or improves the
building's aesthetic appearance.
(m) Allow the modification of maximum building
height; maximum number of stories; required setbacks;
maximum parcel coverage and buildinq envelope
11
requirements; permitted buildinq height prolections;
permitted projections in required vard areas; access to
private open space; and provision of unexcavated yard
areas contained in this Chapter for projects that include the
retention and preservation of a desi~nated Landmark
building or Contributinq Structure to an adopted Historic
District, provided that all of the following conditions are met
and all of the findinqs of fact contained in Section
9.04:20.10.050 are made:
(1) The proposed proiect conforms to the
Secretarv of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties.
(2) The proposed project conforms to the
allowable land uses permitted in the applicable Zoninq
District.
~3i) The proposed project does not exceed the
maximum unit densitv permitted in the applicable Zoning
District.
~4) The proposed proLect does not exceed the
heiqht permitted in the Land Use Element of the General
Plan for the applicable Land Use Classification.
12
(5) The proposed proiect does not exceed the
maximum height permitted in the applicable Zoning District
by more than ten (10) feet.
(6) The proposed proiect does not exceed the
maximum number of stories permitted in the Land Use
Element of the General Plan for the a~plicable Land Use
Glassification and does not exceed the maximum number of
stories permitted in the applicable Zoning District bv more
than one (1) storLr.
(7~ Covered front porches and stairs of a
desianated Landmark buildina or Contributina Structure to
an adopted Historic District may project a maximum of 12'-0"
into the required front yard setback area provided that the
buildinq fa~ade com~lies with the front yard setback
reauirement in the applicable Zoning District.
(8} The oniy requirement related to the provision of
private open space that can be modified is the requirement
that private open space be adiacent to and accessible from,
and at the same approximate elevation, as the primary
~ace of the dwellinq unit.
'I 3
(9) Requirements for the provision of unexcavated
area in vard areas may only be modified when the strict
application of such requirements would not allow for the
preservation of the Landmark buildinclor Contributinq
Structure to an adopted Historic District.
SECTION 2.Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.450 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 9.04.10.02.450. Construction rate
program.
(a) For projects involving the new construction or
substantial remodel of two or more dwelling units in all multi-
family residential districts in the City for which a development
application was deemed complete on or after March 7, 2000,
only one such construction project shall be allowed within a
five hundred foot radius of another construction project
subject to this Section. Except as provided in subsection (c)
of this Section, this restriction shall apply for fifteen months
after issuance of a building permit, after which time another
project may begin construction in the defined area. The
multi-family residential districts in the City are: R2R, R2, R3,
R4, RVC, RMH, OP-Duplex, OP2, OP3, OP4, NW-Overlay,
BR Boulevard Residential R3 Overlay, R2B, and R3R.
14
(b) Building permits shall be provided on a first
come first served basis in accordance with the terms of this
Section. No application for a building permit shall be
accepted for filing or otherwise processed by the Building
and Safety Division unless the applicant provides
documentation on forms provided by the City that the project
has received all other City or State approvals or permits
necessary to commence the project, with the exception of
building and sewer allocation permits.
(c) During the plan-check process, the Building and
Safety Division shall determine the status of other building
permits for projects in the area. A building permit shall not be
issued when the Building Officer determines that a building
permit has been issued in the previous fifteen months for
any other project within a five hundred foot radius of the
subject property unless the owner of the previously permitted
project has formally relinquished the building permit for that
project or obtained a certificate of occupancy for the project.
(d) If the Building Officer determines that another
building permit has been issued less than fifteen months
prior to the date on which the building permit has received all
plan-check approvals and the exceptions specified in
subsections (c) and (e) do not apply, the Building Officer
15
shall place the project on a waiting list in order of the date
and time of day that the permit application received all plan-
check approvals. The life of other City approvals or permits
necessary to commence the project shall be automatically
extended by the amount of time that a project remains on the
waiting list. The Building Officer shall approve the project in
accordance with the Uniform Technical Code in effect at the
time of the plan-check.
(e) The following projects shall be exempt from this
Section:
(~) Affordable housing projects in which one
hundred percent of the units will be deed-restricted for very
low, low, middle, and/or moderate income housing.
(2) Structures identified by the Building and Safety
Division as unreinforced masonry construction and subject to
City-mandated seismic upgrading.
(3) Projects to be developed on a site that is vacant.
(4) Projects to be developed on a site in which
either: (a) the structures on the site are uninhabitable, not as
a result of the owner' s failure to maintain the structure, or
the property of which the structure is a part, in good repair,
16
and the structures cannot be rendered habitabie in an
economically feasible manner or (b) the current use of the
property is not otherwise economically viable. The City shall
prepare an exemption application form which delineates all
submission requirements. An owner shall not be required to
file a project application with the exemption application. City
staff shall make a final determination whether a project
meets the requirements of this subdivision within ninety days
after the owner's exemption application for the project is
deemed complete.
~~~_ -P_r~j~cts ti~~t ic~c:,l~~dc tr~~ retentiran and
~r~~urvation of ~ desi~n~ted L~ndmark b~iilciinc~r
Cor~trik~uti~Strixcture to ~n adapted Hisforic District.
p~ ov~ci~d th~t a variance has been obtained pursuant to
S~nt~ Manic~ Nlur~ic;i~aal C~de Section 9.04.2U.10.Q3Q(n~).
(~ The Planning and Community Development ~
Department may develop administrative guidelines
implementing this Section.
SECTION 3.Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.36.270 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Section 9.36.270. Preservation incentives.
17
(a) Architectural Review Exemption. AIi--~~+e-~~res
~es+~~~!- ~s-~~+~a~~-~d-a+~y-ca~~~~+~ag-~3t~~+l~~+ra~-ar
s~t~e-~~+~e ~+t~a-i~-~--k#+s~~r-i~-Qis~~+c-~-t~~#-~eq~+r~~-a-c-er~+#+~~e-e#
~{~pr~~p~~a~Eness-sk~-~!!-~e ~x~apt~ro~~-fevi~-~~-~k~e
~~e~+t~r:t~+F~l-~~~+~w- Q~ ~ r~ :~k~ -L--~~+d~~ r#~ s-~ar~~+~saa+~
~a~ ~~~~r ~{~-~~a~fi~-~~-~~+~:-,~~c~E#e~t~~~~-~e~+e~v-~o~r~-€o~
~~r~}~e~+~-Pravided th~t_a Certificate of A~propri~teness is
obt~inec~ fr~E~r~_thF. l_andm~rks Car7~mission~fhe foilowinq
~~.ojects sh~ll k~e ~xct~r~pt from__review by the Architectur~l
Review Bo~r~J:
~1 ~All work to a des~~i~d Landm~rk b~ailc~ir~ or
GaritribuYir~c _Str~ic~ure to_~~t~_ac~o~~tec~_ Nistoric Qistrict: and
(2~ _ F~I~ _Acic~itions tc~,_ madificatiar~s c>f~alterations_of, or
r~~w_con~truction_on__~ L.and«~ark P~rc;ef or ~arcel containing
a Con~tributinc,~Structure t~ an adoptec~ Nistoric District.
The ~andrnarks Commission ma~refer anv af these
m~tterv; tr.r t1~~~ ~rc};it~ctural Revie~v Board for cammer7t.
(b) Building Permit and Planning Application Fees.
All building permit and planning fees for Administrative
Approval applications shall be waived for designated
Landmarks, or contributing structures located in a Historic
District.
18
(c) Certificates of Appropriateness/Administrative
Approval Fees. All certificate of appropriateness and
certificate of administrative approval fees for any alteration,
restoration or construction, in whole or in part, to a
designated Landmark or to a contributing structure located in
a Historic District shall be waived.
(d) Any parking incentives permitted by the Zoning
Ordinance.
(e) Streetscape Improvements in Historic Districts.
Whenever streetscape improvements are proposed by the
City in areas that are designated Historic Districts, the City
shall consider the use of materials, landscaping, light
standards and signage that are compatible with the area's
historic and architectural character.
(~ State Historical Building Code. The California
State Historical Building Code (Title 24, Part 8, California
Administrative Code) shall be applied to alterations to
designated Structures of Merit, Landmarks, and contributing
structures located in Historic Districts.
(g) Historical Property Contracts. Designated
Structures of Merit, Landmarks and contributing structures
located in Historic Districts that are privately owned shall be
19
considered qualified historical properties eligible for historical
property contracts submitted or entered into, pursuant to the
provisions of Article 12, commencing with Section 50280,
Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 1, Title 5, of the Caiifornia
Government Code upon resolution approval by the City
Council.
(h) Plan Check Processing. Structures designated
as Landmarks or Contributing Buildings or Structures to a
Historic District shall receive priority Building Division plan
check processing.
SECTION 4.Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.32.170 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Section 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 for which a c~rtificate c~f a~~rc~~riateness is
20
ot~tained from the L.a~7dr~arks Commission (ar Citv Cauncil
oi~_~~~e~~9~ d~~s~c~r~~~~~-~-~;~~~~ks~er-~~f~~r+b~#++~
~tr=t~c~Ea;~~-w+tl~i~~-k~i~~r~~~c,--D+~tr-i~~s-pursuant to Chapter 69.36
of the Santa Monica 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-family
structures, including accessory structures, in all districts in
the City are also exempt from Architectural Review Board
district boundaries.
SECTION 5.Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.56.030 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Section 9.56.030. Applicability of chapter.
(a) The obligations established by this Chapter shall
apply to each multi-family project for which a development
application was determined complete on or after May 25,
2006 involving the construction of two or more market rate
units. No building permit shall be issued for any multi-family
project unless such construction has been approved in
accordance with the standards and procedures provided for
by this Chapter.
21
(b) Multi-family projects for which a development
application was determined completed prior to May 25, 2006
shall be subject to the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal
Code Section 9.56.01 Q et seq., as they existed on the date
the application for the project was determined complete.
c) A desi~n~tecl Lanc~mark buil~ina ~r Contrik~uti
L~lri.icture to ~r7 ~c~opteci Historic. District that is retained and
~reserved on-site as part of a multi-family project shall not
be considered or included in assessing anY af the
re uirements under this t~ha~ter.
SECTION 6. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code 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 that extent necessary
to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 7. 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.
22
SECTION 8. 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 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M R A JONE OUTRIE
City Attorney
23
ATTACHMENT B
Staff-Proposed Text Amendments
18
Attachment B
Staff-Proposed Text Amendments
SMMC Section 9.04.20.10 Variances
SMMC Section 9.04.20.10.30 Applicability.
The Zoning Administrator may grant a variance from the requirements of this Chapter
to:
~m) Allow modification to maximum buildinq heiqht; maximum number of stories;
required setbacks; maximum parcel coveraqe and buildinq envelope requirements;
permitted buildinq height proiections; permitted projections in required vard areas;
access to private open space; and provision of unexcavated vard areas for proiects that
include the retention and preservation of a desiqnated Landmark buildinq or
Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District, provided that all of the followinq
are met and subiect to the findinqs of fact contained in SMMC 9.04.20.10.050:
(1) Proposed project conforms to the current Secretary of the Interior's Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
(2) Proposed project conforms to the allowable land uses permitted in the
applicable Zoning District.
(3) Proposed proiect does not exceed the maximum unit densi~ permitted in the
applicable Zoninq District.
(4) Proposed qroiect does not exceed the heiqht permitted in the current Land Use
Element of the General Plan for the applicable Land Use Classification.
(5) Proposed proiect does not exceed the maximum height permitted in the
applicable Zoninq District by more than ten (10) feet.
(6) Proposed proiect does not exceed the maximum number of stories permitted in
the Land Use Element of the General Plan for the applicable Land Use
Classification and in the applicable Zoning District by more than one (1) storY
(7) Covered front porches and stairs of a desiqnated Landmark buildinq or
Contributing Structure to an adopted Historic District mav prolect into the
required front vard setback area a maximum of 12'-0" provided that the building
fa~ade complies with the front yard setback requirement in the applicable
Zoninq District.
(8) The only requirement related to the provision of private open space that can be
modified is the requirement that private open space be adiacent to and
19
accessible from, and at the same approximate elevation, as the primary space
of the dwellinq unit.
(9) Requirements for the provision of unexcavated area in vard areas may be
modified onlv when the strict application of such requirements would not allow
for the preservation of the Landmark buildinq or Contributinq Structure to an
adopted Historic District.
SMMC Section 9.04.10 Project Design & Development Standards
SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.450 (e) Construction Rate Program.
(e) The following projects shall be exempt from this Section:
(5) Proiects that include the retention and preservation of a designated
Landmark buildinq or Contributinq Structure to an adopted Historic District,
provided that a Variance has been obtained pursuant to Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.10.030(m).
SMMC 9.36 Landmarks and Historic Districts
SMMC 9.36.270 Preservation Incentives.
(a) Architectural Review Exemption.
~~: Provided that a Certificate of Appropriateness is obtained from the
Landmarks Commission, the following proiects shall be exempt from review b~
Architectural Review Board:
(i) All work to a desiqnated Landmark buildinq or Contributing Structure to an
adoqted Historic District; and
(ii) All additions to modifications of alterations of or new construction on a
Landmark Parcel or parcel containinq a Contributing Structure to an adopted
Historic District.
The Landmarks Commission may refer any of these matters to the Architectural Review
Board for comment.
20
SMMC 9.32 Architectural Review
Section 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 for which a certificate of
appropriateness is obtained from the Landmarks Commission (or City Council on
a eal
pursuant to Chapter 9_36 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. Non-contributing
structures located within Historic Districts shafl be subject to architectural review unless
otherwise exempted by the ordinance that establishes procedures for the alteration of
structures within the Historic District. Single-family structures, including accessory
structures, in all districts in the City are also exempt from Architectural Review Board
district boundaries.
SMMC 9.56 Affordable Housing Production Program
SMMC Section 9.56.030 Applicability of chapter.
(c) A desiqnated Landmark buildinq or Contributinq Structure to an adopted Historic
District that is retained and preserved on-site as part of a multi-family prolect shall not
be considered or included in assessinq any of the requirements under this Chapter.
21
ATTACHMENT C
Applicant-Proposed Text Amendments
22
Attachment C
Applicant-Proposed Text Amendments
PROPOSED NEW CODE SECTION:
Section 9.04.10.02.500. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PRESERVING A
LANDMARK. For new multi-family residential projects involving the preservation of an
officially-designated landmark, a use permit shall be obtained if the project does not
meet all of the objective development standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance for
the zone in which the property is located. This provision shall authorize, but not
obligate, the applicable City decision-making body to modify the objective development
standards otherwise applicable to the project; provided, however, that the project
(including the existing landmark to be preserved on the site):
(i) shall not exceed the maximum unit density allowed in the zone,
(ii) shall provide at least the number of parking spaces required by the code
(unless a parking variance or reduced parking permit is granted), and
(iii) shall not exceed the maximum total floor area that would be allowed for a
theoretical new conforming project that could otherwise be constructed on the
project site (assuming such project were to fully comply with the objective
deveiopment standards for the zone in which the project is located, including
lot coverage, height, number of stories, setbacks and building volume
envelope), calculated as if there were no landmark building to be preserved
on the site.
In no event shall the height of the new project exceed the maximum height (in feet)
allowed by the Land Use Element for the project site, and in no event shall the total
resulting floor area (including the landmark building to be preserved) exceed the
theoretical maximum floor area calculated as described above.
PROPOSED NEW CODE SECTION:
Section 9.04.10.08. finsert headinql . Notwithstanding Municipal Code Sections
7.24.050, 7.04.180, 9.04.10.08.080 and 9.04.10.08.190, and any other similar
provisions of the Municipal Code, projects involving the preservation of a landmarked
building in the multi-family zoning districts shall be allowed to retain existing curb cuts
and existing parking in the front yard provided such existing conditions are deemed
appropriate by the Landmarks Commission, or the City Council on appeal, when
considering a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project.
23
PROPOSED AMENDED CODE SECTION:
Section 9.04.10.02.450. CONSTRUCTION RATE PROGRAM.
(e) The following projects shall be exempt from this Section:
(5) Projects involving the preservation of a designated landmark.
PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
Section 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 for which a certificate of
appropriateness is obtained from the Landmarks Commission (or City Council on
appeal)
pursuant to Chapter 9.36 of the Santa Monica 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-family structures, including accessory
structures, in all districts in the City are also exempt from Architectural Review Board
district boundaries.
PROPOSED LANDMARKS AND HISTORIC DISTRICT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
Section 9.36.270 Preservation incentives.
(a) Architectural Review Exemption.
Provided a certificate of appropriateness is obtained from
the Landmarks Commission, the following projects shall be exempt from review by the
Architectural Review Board:
(i) all physical work to structures designated as Landmarks,
(ii) all additions to, modifications of, alterations of or new development on a
Landmark Parcel, and
24
(iii) any contributing building or structure within a Historic District.
The Landmarks Commission may refer any of these matters to the Architectural Review
Board for comment.
1891 /docs/TextAmendment.4002.k1k
25
ATTACHMENT D
Landmarks Commission Statement of Official Action, July 10, 2006
26
LANDMARKS COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT
SUBJECT: LC-06CA-004
ADDRESS: 954 5th Street
APPLICANT: Fifth Street Condo Project, LLC
REQUEST: Certificate of Appropriateness for design approval for a
proposed 4-unit condominium project that includes new
construction of three units on the rear of the parcel at 954 5th
Street and the on-site relocation of the Turn-of-The-Century
Cottage closer to the front property line. The subject Turn-of-
The-Century Cottage is a designated City Landmark.
LANDMARKS COMMISSION ACTION
07/10/2006 Date
X Approved based on the following findings and subject to the
conditions below.
Denied
Other
EFFECTIVE DATE OF ACTION
Effective Date of Zoning Ordinance Amendment l05TA-002)
Certificate of Appropriateness LC-06CA-004
EXPIRATION DATE OF PERMIT GRANTED
Two (2) Years from Effective Date of Zoninq Ordinance Amendment (05TA-002)
Certificate of Appropriateness LC-06CA-004
27
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FINDINGS (SMMC 9.36.140)
1. The proposed project at 954 5th street will not detrimentally change, destroy or
adversely affect any exterior feature of the Landmark Turn-of-the-Century
Cottage in that after the proposed relocation of the Cottage the structure would
still retain its historic character sufficiently enough to reflect its architectural
importance for which it was designated a City of Santa Monica Landmark. In
accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the applicant proposes
to retain all exterior character-defining features, materials, and finishes of the
Landmark Cottage. Examples of such features include the existing hipped roof
and exposed rafter tails, wood clapboard siding, full-height rounded bays, other
wood sash windows, and covered front porch. The Landmark Cottage will be
repainted using a color palette that is consistent with typical color selections for
19th and early 20th Century American residences. A new foundation will be
constructed using concrete and brick to match existing materials to ensure that
the structural integrity of the residence is preserved after on-site relocation. The
proposed new construction on the rear half of the parcel incorporates compatible
materials and significant stepbacks and articulation on the primary and
secondary elevations in order to highlight the existing Landmark Cottage rather
than visually compete with it. In accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation, the proposed new construction expresses a well-
defined, modern design and form that is compatible with, yet differentiated from,
the historic Turn-of-the-Century Cottage on site. Finally, the proposed project is
consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation in that the
new construction has been designed in such a manner that if removed in the
future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
will be unimpaired.
CONDITIONS
1. Proposed four-unit condominium project at 954 5th Street is subject to City
Council approval of pending Text Amendment 05TA-002. If Text Amendment
05TA-002 is not approved or is modified the by City Council in a manner that
results in changes to the proposed project, the applicant shall be required to
resubmit revised project plans that conform to any such disapproval or
modifications for review by the Landmarks Commission.
2. This approval is for the proposed project at 954 5th Street as shown on plans
dated June 2, 2006, which are on file in the City Planning Division.
3. This Certificate of Appropriateness shall not be effective until the effective date of
the zoning ordinance amendment implementing Text Amendment 05TA-002.
The approval of this permit shall expire if the rights granted are not exercised
within two (2) years from the permit's effective date. Exercise of rights shall
mean issuance of a building permit to commence construction. Should the
28
applicant be unable to comply with this restriction, an extension may be granted
pursuant to Section 9.36.250 for an additional 180 days maximum. The applicant
must request such an extension prior to expiration of this permit. After that time,
the applicant will be required to return to the Commission for approval. In
addition, this Certificate of Appropriateness shall expire if the authorized work is
suspended for a 180-day period after being commenced.
4. This decision may be appealed by properly filing with the Director of Planning
and Community Development a Notice of Appeal on a form furnished by the
Planning and Community Department. Such notice shall be filed within a ten (10)
day time period commencing from the date of the determination.
5. All required Planning and Building Permit approvals shall be obtained.
VOTE:
Ayes: Berley, Fresco, Genser, Levin, Lehrer, Shari
Nays: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Kaplan
29
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review
of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6,
which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1400.
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final
determination of the Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Monica.
Roger Genser, Chairperson
Date
F:\CityPlanning\Share\Landmarks\STOAS~2006\STOA 06CA-004 (954 5th Street).doc
30
ATTACHMENT E
Correspondence Received Regarding the Proposed Text Amendment
Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for
review at the City Clerk's Office and the Libraries.
ATTACHMENT F
Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 21, 2006, Item 9-C
Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office and the Libraries.