SR-410-001-05 (12)
e _
~CitYOf
Santa Moniea@
City Council Report
-::N l~ 11, zeo 10
City Council Meeting: June 2 ,2996
Agenda Item: 1$" 5 -/\
To:
Mayor and City Council
From:
Andy Agle, Planning & Community Development
Subject:
Bayside District Restaurant to Retail Conversion Ordinance
Recommended Action
It is recommended that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance to
regulate the loss of food uses on the Third Street Promenade.
Executive Summary
In January 2006, the City Council directed further consideration and preparation of an
ordinance to replace recently adopted standards restricting the conversion of restaurant
to retail uses on the Third Street Promenade. Specifically, the Council sought to
incorporate as appropriate recommendations prepared by the Bayside District
Corporation, which provide greater regulatory flexibility and opportunities to reduce
restaurant floor area in favor of retail uses. Currently, a request to convert space
requires approval of a discretionary permit, which is evaluated by the Planning
Commission. A proposed ordinance is included with this report as Attachment A.
In its review of the proposed ordinance, the Council may want to consider 1) how best
to manage the balance of land uses to ensure the Promenade's ongoing success; 2)
1
how the design, character and number of restaurants per block contribute to the
District's pedestrian-oriented environment; 3) potential impacts to the District by losing
or significantly reducing the size or area of one or more key restaurants; and 4) what is
the likely universe of properties potentially affected by any adopted regulation.
Also included with this report is a discussion regarding the use of the center court and
sidewalk edge as a potential Promenade dining opportunity.
Discussion
Backqround
For the last several years, an interim ordinance had been in place that limited the
establishment of new retail floor area on the Third Street Promenade. The intent of this
ordinance was to preserve the Promenade's continued vitality and pedestrian-oriented
environment through careful land use management. The interim standards were
replaced in February 2006. New standards require approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to convert any portion of a restaurant space on the first floor to a retail use.
An alternative approach to regulate the conversion of restaurant to retail space was
proposed by the Bayside District Corporation when this issue was last discussed by the
City Council. That recommendation provided greater regulatory flexibility and prompted
the Council to direct further consideration and preparation of a new ordinance. Adoption
of a new ordinance required review and recommendation from the Planning
Commission before returning to the City Council.
2
Analvsis
There are three alternatives presented in this report to better regulate the conversion of
restaurant space to retail and, therefore, preserve an appropriate balance of land uses
on the Promenade. Two of the alternatives are recommendations from the Planning
Commission and Bayside District Corporation; the third alternative is to retain the
existing ordinance, but approve minor modifications to enhance its effectiveness. The
table in Attachment D summarizes the differences between the alternatives.
The Promenade has five properties occupied by large restaurants that could reasonably
be reduced in size to accommodate retail uses. These restaurants include: Broadway
Deli, Yankee Doodles, Trastevere, Lago, and Monsoon. Other Promenade food uses
are either too narrow or too shallow in depth to accommodate any significant conversion
to retail use and still comply with the Planning Commission or Bayside District
Corporation recommendations. All five of the larger restaurants have existing
Conditional Use Permits (CUP) and three are located at cross streets. It is likely that
any change to these restaurant floor plans would require approval from the Planning
Commission to modify the existing entitlements.
Planning Commission Action / Recommendation
Given Council direction, the Bayside District Corporation suggestions were forwarded to
the Commission as a recommended approach to balance property owner flexibility with
other interests to preserve an appropriate balance of uses on the Promenade. A key
3
element underlying the recommendation was an assumption that the outdoor dining
area is the most critical component of a restaurant's operation in terms of its
contribution to the Promenade experience. Some of the more salient provisions of the
recommendation would require a minimum restaurant width and depth of 16 and 75
feet, respectively; require the same amount of outdoor dining area either at the existing
restaurant location or at another property on the same block; and, allow some outdoor
dining area to be recessed into the building beyond the front fa~ade, subject to approval
by the Architectural Review Board. The Board's review in this context would be to
ensure the design reinforced the Promenade's pedestrian-oriented environment and
encouraged public interaction between the outdoor dining area and the street.
In its review, the Planning Commission determined that the 16 feet minimum width was
too narrow since it could diminish the restaurant presence on the Promenade. While the
Commission favored other provisions of the proposal, the Commission recommended
that at least two-thirds of the existing restaurant frontage be required to remain, but in
no case shall the frontage be less than 16 feet in width. The Planning Commission
recommendation is included with this report as Attachment B.
Bayside District Corporation Recommendation
Since the Planning Commission's action, the Bayside District Corporation has modified
its proposal to include the Commission's recommendation with one significant change.
As proposed, restaurants would be authorized to reduce their restaurant and outdoor
4
dining linear frontage to no less than two-thirds of their current outdoor patio linear
frontage, subject to a minimum of 16 linear feet.
Staff Recommendation
Following the Planning Commission's discussion, staff reevaluated its recommendation
regarding the conversion of restaurant to retail use. After surveying the properties on
the Promenade and the location of restaurant uses, and assessing the number of
restaurants that would likely take advantage of the proposed ordinance,.. it is
recommended that City Council retain the existing, and originally recommended, code
provisions with some minor changes to address concerns reported over the last several
months.
Given the limited number of large restaurants remaining on the Promenade and the
potential impact to the balance of uses that have contributed to its success, the City
should continue its careful management of this area and review on a case by case basis
the loss of any portion of a food use on the Promenade. A notable concern is the
potential loss of a restaurant located at the intersection of Third Street and a cross
street; this condition applies to three of the five large restaurants identified earlier.
Corner restaurants have the ability to extend the dining area, increasing visibility and
promoting a more pedestrian-oriented environment.
Equally important is the design and function of the outdoor dining area. Some
restaurants are more successful at creating a barrier between the street and eating area
5
while providing an atmosphere that engages the public realm. The design of any
outdoor dining area is reviewed by the Architectural Review Board, but its scope of
review is limited. While the Architectural Review Board could be given the authority to
regulate the outdoor dining appearance and function, as was previously contemplated in
a recommendation to the Planning Commission, this review along with consideration to
the overall balance of land uses is more appropriately addressed by the Planning
Commission. Moreover, as stated earlier and amplified below, the Commission will be
involved in reviewing a discretionary application should one of these larger restaurants
seek approval to convert to retail.
A distinction between the recommended action and the other alternatives is when the
CUP amendment must be filed and who the applicant is. The existing regulations would
require the CUP be obtained prior to the loss of any portion of a restaurant and the
application would likely be filed by either the property owner or the future retail tenant.
Conversely, the other alternatives would put a greater onus on the restaurant owner to
obtain the discretionary amendment while plans for a retail tenant could be reviewed
administratively and more quickly. Conceivably, construction could begin on the tenant
space before discretionary approvals have been obtained, putting the restaurant owner
at risk for not operating in compliance with existing approvals.
6
Notwithstanding the recommendation to retain the discretionary review requirement set
forth in the existing regulations, some modifications are proposed, including:
introduction of a hardship; replacement of the term "restaurant" with "food use"; and,
adding an applicability standard that requires only those food uses that were in
existence on January 24, 2006 to be subject to the recommended provisions. This later
clause may encourage some property owners to lease to a future restaurant operator
without then being compelled to retain the food use indefinitely, as is currently required.
Alternatives
In addition to the recommended action, the City Council could 1) adopt the
recommendations of either the Planning Commission or Bayside District Corporation; 2)
modify the recommendations to better effectuate the Council's intent; or 3) not adopt
any ordinance - in effect retaining the regulations already in place.
The impact of any action would depend on how many food serving uses are ultimately
removed or reduced in size. The principle difference between the alternatives is the
level of review. The recommended action and existing code offer the greatest protection
by requiring a case by case review of any conversion. The Planning Commission and
Bayside District Corporation recommendations allow for administrative review based on
specified criteria, which creates a more predictable process for a retail applicant,
reduces costs and the amount of time it takes to obtain an approval; a discretionary
review would be required if certain criteria was not met. Taking no action would likely
discourage any Third Street Promenade adjacent property owner from establishing a
7
new restaurant because once established, there would be no assurance that it could
return to retail use.
Consistency with the General and Specific Plans
The proposed amendment is consistent in principle with several of the goals, objectives
and policies of the General Plan. Specifically, the amendment is consistent with the
Land Use Element Objective 1.3, which states that the City's land use policies should
seek to reinforce Downtown as the focus of the City, supporting the greatest
concentration of activity. The proposed amendments would continue to limit the amount
of retail uses on the Third Street Promenade and allow for the preservation of outdoor
dining opportunities to ensure the unique mix of restaurants, retail, and entertainment
uses, while maintaining the focus and concentration of activity on the Promenade and
Downtown area.
The amendment is consistent with Land Use Element Objective 1.4, which states that
the City's land use policies should seek to encourage revitalization of the Third Street
mall, recognizing the important role the Promenade can play in making Downtown the
activity focus of the City. The proposed amendments would continue to limit the
expansion of retail uses at the expense of restaurant uses and would encourage and
maintain the vitality of the Promenade and Downtown area by preserving the character
and unique mixture of uses, a key element to the success of the Promenade.
8
The amendment is also consistent with Bayside District Specific Plan Objective 3.2 B,
which seeks to attract and accommodate a mix of uses that serve the daytime and
evening Bayside District residents, City-wide residents, as well as the many visitors to
the Santa Monica area. The amendment achieves this objective by allowing for a
continued mix of land uses that support these populations and other area
establishments in the general vicinity.
Center Court Promenade Dininq
In April 2006, the City Council reviewed recommendations to expand restaurant dining
opportunities on the three block area of the Third Street Promenade. While the City
Council approved amendments to the Third Street Promenade Outdoor Dining
Standards to include the use of the pavilions for dining, discussion regarding center
court and sidewalk edge dining opportunities was deferred to coincide with the review of
the subject ordinance. A description of these expanded dining alternatives and
identification of know legal concerns were previously transmitted to the City Council in
its April 25, 2006 staff report. (http://santa-
mon ica. orq/citvclerk/council/aqendas/2006/20060425/s2006042508-A. htm) It is
recommended that Council continue its discussion and direct staff as appropriate.
Environmental Analysis
The proposed ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Class 5, minor alterations in land use limitations. Because the
9
ordinance reflects present retail concentrations, it will not result in any new changes in
land use or density and is, therefore, categorically exempt from CEQA.
Public Outreach
Staff met with the Bayside District's Land and Asset Committee on February 14, 2006.
Following the Planning Commission's discussion and recommendation, another meeting
was held with Bayside District Corporation representatives.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65804, notice of the public hearing for the
proposed text amendment was published in the "California" Section of the Los Anqeles
Times newspaper at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. Notice of
the public hearing was also sent to all neighborhood organizations and other members
on the City's standard mailing list.
Budqet/Financiallmpact
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact.
Prepared by:
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Principal Planner
Approved:
Forwarded to Council:
ndy Agle
Director, Planning &
Development
10
Attachments:
A. Proposed Ordinance
B. Summary of the Planning Commission's Recommendations
C. Existing Regulations
D. Alternatives Comparison Table
E. Correspondence
11
ATTACHMENT A
Proposed Ordinance
f: \atty\m u n i\laws \ba r\ba ys id ed istrictretai 1-6-2 7 -06
City Council Meeting 6-27-06
Santa Monica, California
(CCS)
ORDINANCE NUMBER
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS
9.04.08.15.020, 9.04.08.15.040 AND 9.04.08.15.085 TO REVISE THE REVIEW
PROCESS REGULATING THE CONVERSION OF ANY PORTION OF A FOOD USE
TO ANY OTHER NEW OR EXPANDED USE LOCATED ON THE GROUND FLOOR
LEVEL ADJACENT TO THE THIRD STREET PROMENADE
WHEREAS, in 1965, the City Council sought to revitalize its declining downtown
business district by closing three blocks of Third Street to vehicular traffic in order to
create a pedestrian shopping mall pursuant to the Pedestrian Mall Act; and
WHEREAS, the Third Street Mall did not attract shoppers; and, as a result, retail
businesses on the mall failed, and the downtown business district continued to decline;
and
WHEREAS, in 1986, the City Council again acted to save its downtown by
adopting the Third Street Mall Specific Plan to provide a framework for reviving the
Third Street Mall and surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan made diversity the foundation of the mall's future,
mandating a mixture of uses and activities sufficient to ensure that the mall would attract
a diverse group of residents and visitors; and
1
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan made diversity the foundation of the mall's future,
mandating a mixture of uses and activities sufficient to ensure that the mall would attract
a diverse group of residents and visitors; and
WHEREAS, thereafter, the City embarked upon a substantial effort to transform
the moribund Third Street Mall into a new kind of public space which would serve as a
community gathering place, attract visitors from near and far and define the City's
municipal character; and
WHEREAS, the redesign included numerous improvements to the pedestrian
street: retail pavilions, landscaping, water elements, public benches, street lamps, and
topiary dinosaur sculptures in the central landscaped area of each block and the area
was also renamed the Third Street Promenade; and
WHEREAS, this space was, from the time of its conception, distinguished from
other shopping areas, by the carefully planned and unusual mix of opportunities it
afforded, including street performers, sidewalk dining, cinema, bookstores, special
events, clothing stores, specialty shops, and night clubs; and
WHEREAS, as conceived, the Third Street Promenade was not simply a
shopping mall; it was a place to go for entertainment, company, relaxation, strolling; a
place where one could watch jugglers and dancers, dine outdoors, argue politics, listen
to music, browse a bookshop, take in a movie and more; and
WHEREAS, moreover, the Third Street Promenade was planned as a gathering
place for all segments of society: children, the elderly, and people from all cultural and
economic groups; and
2
WHEREAS, the plan succeeded, and the Third Street Promenade became a
resounding success as a favored destination for local residents, Southern Californians
and international travelers alike; and
WHEREAS, as such, it became, and still is, an engine which drives Santa
Monica's economy; however, this success has had its costs; and
WHEREAS, the influx of visitors to the Third Street Promenade has brought
significant traffic and parking problems; and
WHEREAS, at present, these problems are being addressed by a downtown
parking strategy; however, the problem is significant and the options are limited
because the area is very small, has been built out for decades and features a mixture of
uses, including residential, which is inconsistent with simply building larger and larger
parking structures; and
WHEREAS, maintaining the delicate balance of entertainment, restaurants and
retail, which is the foundation of the Third Street Promenade's success, has been an
ongoing challenge; and
WHEREAS, over the years, market forces have threatened the mix many times;
and the City has responded to preserve the Third Street Promenade's unique character
through the adoption of laws and polices which promote the general welfare by
maintaining the Promenade's eclectic character; and
WHEREAS, in 1996, the City revised the Third Street Mall Specific Plan through
the adoption of the Bayside District Specific Plan, a critical objective of which remained
to attract and accommodate a mix of uses serving residents, visitors and tourists during
both daytime and evening hours; and
3
WHEREAS, to this end, the specific plan established a ten-year projection and
plan for the controlled growth of retail outlets on the Third Street Promenade; and
WHEREAS, the actual growth of retail far outstripped the planned growth to the
point that the ten year projection was already met just five years into the planning
period; and
WHEREAS, as of 2001, there was already approximately 530,000 square feet of
retail on the three block Third Street Promenade and the pressure to create more retail
spaces continued unabated; and
WHEREAS, the massive influx of retail establishments displaced restaurants and
sidewalk dining; and
WHEREAS, five restaurants were lost in the two years prior to the adoption of the
initial interim ordinance and four more were near or at the end of their leases; frontage
devoted to sidewalk dining shrunk; and
WHEREAS, as reflected by these changes, the balance of uses on the Third
Street Promenade was once again threatened; this time by a loss of restaurants and
influx of additional retail; and
WHEREAS, if left unchecked, this trend will deprive the Third Street Promenade
of its unique character and vitality by rendering it simply a standard shopping mall; and
WHEREAS, the influx of retail not only impacted the mix of establishment located
on the Third Street Promenade, it also exacerbated parking and traffic problems; and
WHEREAS, residents and visitors come to the Third Street Promenade for dining
and entertainment, typically for many hours; in contrast, persons who are simply
shopping, stay for shorter periods of time, resulting in more people making more trips
4
and thereby placing ever-increasing demands on the downtown's already overtaxed
traffic and parking capacities; and
WHEREAS, these increased demands degrade the quality of residents' lives and
the desirability of the Third Street Promenade and the City as destinations and thereby
threaten the City's welfare; and
WHEREAS, in order to preserve the City's economic and social welfare, the City
Council must act in order to protect the unique qualities and vitality of the Third Street
Promenade by ensuring the best possible mix of restaurants, retail and entertainment;
and
WHEREAS, in general, the City must ensure the best possible mix of
restaurants, retail and entertainment so that the Promenade remains unusual and
attractive and does not become simply an average shopping mall through the continued
expansion of retail at the expense of other uses; and
WHEREAS, similarly, the City must preserve the outdoor dining opportunities
which have become one of the hallmarks of the Promenade; and
WHEREAS, exactly how best to accomplish this end is a complex question which
required detailed study, including a review of the specific plan; and
WHEREAS, in light of these concerns, the City Council adopted Ordinance
Number 2030 (CCS) on November 27, 2001, a forty-five day ordinance which
established a moratorium on new or expanded ground floor retail use on the Third
Street Promenade, adopted Ordinance Number 2032 (CCS) which extended Ordinance
Number 2030 (CCS) until January 9, 2003, adopted Ordinance Number 2062 (CCS)
which extended Ordinance Number 2030 (CCS) until September 9, 2003, adopted
5
Ordinance Number 2082 (CCS) which extended Ordinance Number 2030 (CCS) until
September 9, 2005, and adopted Ordinance Number 2162 (CCS) which extended
Ordinance Number 2030 (CCS) until March 26, 2006; and
WHEREAS, after adoption of Ordinance Number 2030 (CCS), the City Council
established a Promenade Uses Task Force to study the Promenade issues described
herein, to seek feedback and input from the community, and to make recommendations
to the City Council regarding the appropriate mix of uses on the Promenade; and
WHEREAS, the Task Force met regularly between May 2002 and March 2003,
considering goals and objectives for the Promenade and the Downtown, reviewing
relevant City policies and regulations, and conducting community workshops; and
WHEREAS, the Task Force subsequently prepared a series of recommendations
for review by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, in March, 2005, the City Council adopted an ordinance implementing
the legislative changes for restaurants recommended by the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, at the time of the ordinance's adoption, it was not clear how these
legislative changes and other implementation measures would affect the viability of
restaurants on the Promenade; and
WHEREAS, due to this uncertainty, the City Council retained the interim
standards; and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2006, the City Council amended the City's Zoning
Ordinance by adopting Ordinance Number 2175 (CCS) to require a conditional use
permit for the conversion of any portion of a restaurant use or any associated
recreational or entertainment use to a new or expanded retail use located on the ground
6
floor level adjacent to the Third Street Promenade in the BSC-1 portion of the BSC
District subject to new standards and findings; and
WHEREAS, when the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2175 (CCS), the
Council also directed staff to return with proposed modifications which address the
continuing concerns expressed by members of the community including the Bayside
District Corporation; and
WHEREAS, the proposed ordinance would make several modifications to the
Zoning Ordinance in response to these concerns including imposing the conditional use
permit requirement only on food uses that were in existence on January 24, 2006,
broadening the scope of the ordinance to include all food uses, and establishing a
hardship finding as part of the conditional use permit process; and
WHEREAS, for the reasons described above, the City's Comprehensive Land
Use and Zoning Ordinance should be revised to adjust the restrictions on the expansion
or establishment of new ground floor retail uses on the Third Street Promenade to
ensure and maintain the district's unique mix of uses; to improve the effectiveness of
the regulation; and to clarify terms; and
WHEREAS, on April 5, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
adopt a Resolution of Intention which stated the Commission's intention to recommend
modification to the City's Zoning Ordinance to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted public hearings and considered
the proposed amendment on May 3, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed text
amendment on June 27,2006; and
7
WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is consistent in
principle with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the
adopted General Plan, specifically, Land Use Element Objective 1.3, which states that
the City's land use policies should seek to "reinforce Downtown as the focus of the City,
supporting the greatest concentration of activity; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment would continue to limit the amount of retail
uses on the Third Street Promenade and allow for the preservation of dining
opportunities to ensure the unique mix of restaurants, retail, and entertainment,
maintaining focus and concentration of activity on the Promenade and Downtown area;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is also consistent
with Land Use Element Objective 1.4, which states that the City's land use policies
should seek to "encourage revitalization of the Third Street Mall, recognizing the
important role the Third Street Mall can play in making Downtown the activity focus of
the City;" and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment would continue to limit the expansion of
retail uses at the expense of restaurant uses and would encourage and maintain the
viability of the Promenade and Downtown area by preserving the character and unique
mixture of uses, a key element to the success of the Promenade; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is also consistent with the Bayside District
Specific Plan Objective 3.2B which seeks to attract and accommodate a mix of uses
that serve the daytime and evening Bayside District residents, City-wide residents, as
well as the many visitors to the Santa Monica area; and
8
WHEREAS, the public health, safety, and general welfare the adoption of the
proposed amendment in that the amendment would help preserve the City's economic
and social welfare, protect the unique qualities and vitality of the Third Street
Promenade by ensuring the best possible mix of restaurants, retail, and entertainment,
and maintain the quality of residents' lives and the desirability of the Promenade and the
City as a destination,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.15.020 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
9.04.08.15.020 Permitted uses.
(1) The following uses shall be permitted in the
BSC-1 portion of the BSC District, provided that any such
use shall obtain a use permit pursuant to Section
9.04.13.060 if its Third Street Promenade first-floor frontage
exceeds fifty feet, and that the conversion of any portion of a
rest3ur::mt use or any 3ssociated recre3tion31 or
entertainment use food use in existence as of January 24,
2006 to any other new or expanded f8taH use located on the
ground floor level adjacent to the Third Street Promenade
shall obtain a conditional use permit pursuant to Section
9
9.04.08.15.085. All uses shall be conducted within an
enclosed building, except where otherwise specified:
(a) Art galleries.
(b) Artist studios above the first floor and at the rear
seventy-five feet of a parcel.
(c) Bakeries.
(d) Barber or beauty shops.
(e) Business colleges.
(f) Child day care centers.
(g) Cleaners.
(h) Congregate housing.
(i) Cultural facilities.
U) Dance studios.
(k) Domestic violence shelters.
(I) Exercise facilities.
(m) General offices above the first floor and in the
rear seventy-five feet of a parcel.
10
(n) General retail, subject to the limitations
contained in Section 9.01.08.15.085.
(0) Homeless shelters with less than fifty-five beds.
(p) Medical, dental and optometrist clinics and
laboratories above the first floor and in the rear seventy-five
feet of a parcel.
(q) Multi-family dwelling units.
(r) Museums.
(s) Outdoor newsstands.
(t) Pawnbrokers.
(u) Photocopy shops.
(v) Places of worship.
(w) Restaurants, subject to the limitations contained
in Section 9.04.08.15.080.
(x) Senior group housing.
(y) Senior housing.
(z) Sidewalk cafes, subject to the provisions of the
Outdoor Dining Standards for the Third Street Promenade,
11
approved by resolution of the City Council, and subject to the
limitations contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080.
(aa) Single-room occupancy housing.
(bb) Tailors.
(cc) Trade schools.
(dd) Transitional housing.
(ee) Accessory uses which are determined by the
Zoning Administrator to be necessary and customarily
associated with and appropriate, incidental, and subordinate
to, the principal permitted uses and which are consistent and
not more disturbing or disruptive than permitted uses.
(ff) Other uses determined by the Zoning
Administrator to be similar to those listed above and which
are consistent and not more disturbing or disruptive than
permitted uses.
(2) The following uses shall be permitted in the
BSC-2, BSC-3 and BSC-4 portions of the BSC District. All
uses shall be conducted within an enclosed building, except
where otherwise specified:
(a) Art galleries.
12
(b) Artist studios above the first floor.
(c) Appliance repair shops.
(d) Bakeries.
(e) Banks and savings and loan institutions.
(f) Barber or beauty shops.
(g) Business colleges.
(h) Child day care centers.
(i) Cleaners.
(j) Congregate housing.
(k) Cultural facilities.
(I) Dance studios.
(m) Domestic violence shelters.
(n) Exercise facilities.
(0) General offices above the first floor and in the
rear seventy-five feet of a parcel.
(p) General retail.
(q) Homeless shelters with less than fifty-five beds.
13
(r) Laundromats.
(s) Medical, dental and optometrist clinics and
laboratories above the first floor and in the rear fifty feet of a
parcel.
(t) Multi-family dwelling units.
(u) Museums.
(v) Outdoor newsstands.
(w) Pawnbrokers.
(x) Party equipment rentals.
(y) Photocopy shops.
(z) Places of worship.
(aa) Restaurants, subject to the limitations contained
in Section 9.04.08.15.080.
(bb) Senior group housing.
(cc) Senior housing.
(dd) Single-room occupancy housing.
(ee) Tailors.
14
(ff) Theaters.
(gg) Trade schools.
(hh) Transitional housing.
(ii) Accessory uses which are determined by the
Zoning Administrator to be necessary and customarily
associated with and appropriate, incidental, and subordinate
to, the principal permitted uses and which are consistent and
not more disturbing or disruptive than permitted uses.
oD Other uses determined by the Zoning
Administrator to be similar to those listed above and which
are consistent and not more disturbing or disruptive than
permitted uses. 9.04.08.15.020
SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.15.040 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
9.04.08.15.040 Conditionally permitted uses.
(1) The following uses may be permitted in the
BSC-1 portion of the BSC District subject to the approval of
a conditional use permit. Additionally, any use for which the
Third Street Promenade first-floor frontage exceeds fifty feet
shall obtain a use permit pursuant to Section 9.04.13.060,
and the conversion of any portion of a restaurant use or ::my
15
3ssoci3ted recre3tion31 or entert3inment use food use in
existence as of January 24, 2006 to any other a new or
expanded retaH use located on the ground floor level
adjacent to the Third Street Promenade shall obtain a
conditional use permit pursuant to Section 9.04.08.15.085:
(A) Bars, subject to the limitations contained in
Section 9.04.08.15.080;
(B) Billiard parlors;
(C) Bowling alleys;
(D) Cinemas;
(E) Clubs and lodges;
(F) Convention and conference facilities;
(G) Fast-food food courts, subject to the limitations
contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080;
(H) Homeless shelters with fifty-five beds or more;
(I) Hotels and motels;
(J) Nightclubs, subject to the limitations contained
in Section 9.04.08.15.080;
(K) Open-air farmers markets;
16
(L) Skating rinks;
(M) Theaters.
(2) The following uses may be permitted in the
BSC-2, BSC-3 and BSC-4 portions of the BSC District,
subject to the approval of a conditional use permit:
(A) Automobile parking lots and structures;
(B) Bars, subject to the limitations contained in
Section 9.04.08.15.080;
(C) Billiard parlors;
(D) Bowling alleys;
(E) Cinemas;
(F) Clubs and lodges;
(G) Convention and conference facilities;
(H) General offices uses on the ground floor in that
portion of a parcel between twenty-five feet and seventy-five
feet from the front parcel line;
(I) Homeless shelters with fifty-five beds or more;
(J) Hotels and motels;
17
(K) Nightclubs, subject to the limitations contained in
Section 9.04.08.15.080;
(L) Open-air farmers markets;
(M) Skating rinks.
(3) In addition to those uses specified in subsection
(2) of this Section, the following uses may be permitted in
the BSC-3 portion of the BSC District subject to the approval
of a conditional use permit:
Expansion or intensification of automobile repair
facilities existing as of July 8, 1997 provided such property is
physically improved to comply with the Bayside District
special project design and development standards set forth
in Section 9.04.08.15.070 and the special conditions for auto
repair facilities set forth in Section 9.04.14.050.
SECTION 3. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.15.085 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 9.04.08.15.085. Conversion of any portion
of a restaurant use or any associated recreational or
entertainment food use to any other new or expanded
mail use located on the ground floor level adjacent to
the Third Street Promenade.
18
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this
Section , ~ln the BSC-1 portion of the BSC District, the
conversion of any portion of a restaurant use or any
associated recreational or entertainment use food use in
existence as of January 24. 2006 to a any other new or
expanded fetaH use located on the ground floor level
adjacent to the Third Street Promenade shall require a
conditional use permit subject to the follo'Ning requirements
pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section Part
9.04.20.12 and one of the followinq additional findinqs beinq
be made in the affirmative:
fat All standards, required findings, and conditions for
conditional use permits pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal
Code Part 9.04.20.12 shall apply.
fGtill The 3ddition31 finding of fact shall be made:
tHe proposed use would preserve the unique mixture of
restaurants, retail and entertainment on the Third Street
Promeriade and maintain the vitality and diversity of the
Promenade and the Bayside District';'...QL::
(2) The strict application of the provisions of this
Section would, due to unique site conditions or special
circumstances, result in practical difficulties or unnecessary
19
hardships, not includinq economic hardships or economic
difficulties. for the business or property owner.
fs).lQl The provisions of this Section shall apply to all
restaurant uses located on the ground floor level adjacent to
the Third Street Promenade. However, tlhe conversion of
the rear portion of a ground floor restaurant to a fetai.l any
other new or expanded use shall not require a conditional
use permit provided that the retail area new or expanded use
is located within the rear more than 75 feet ef-tRefrom the
front property line and access to the retail area new or
expanded use is taken from an alley.
SECTION 4. 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 5. 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.
20
SECTION 6. 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:
0-
21
ATTACHMENT B
Summary of the Planning Commission's Recommendations
The Planning Commission recommended amendment modifies the Zoning Ordinance to
only apply to those food uses that were in existence as of January 24, 2006; this is the
date the Council introduced for first reading the existing standards. This change allows
property owners to consider leasing space to a new restaurant without then being
compelled to retain the food use indefinitely as is currently required. A property owner
would be less likely to establish a new food use under the existing ordinance, but might
be encouraged to lease space to a future restaurant with the assurance of being able to
return to a retail use as necessary.
The term "restaurant" in the existing ordinance has been replaced with "food use" in the
proposed amendment to clarify the intent to regulate all food uses on the Promenade,
such as coffee outlets, which might not otherwise be considered a restaurant by code.
A hardship finding has been introduced as part of conditional use permit process for
those property owners that are unable to comply with the proposed exemption criteria
and that can demonstrate a hardship, other than an economic hardship, or other special
circumstance to warrant the conversion.
A provision has been introduced to require any change to the Promenade's remaining
fast-food food court to obtain a conditional use permit, without exception, if any
conversion to a non-food use is proposed. This will ensure that any modification to the
food uses on this property will be reviewed by the Planning Commission in a public
forum.
Food uses in existence as of January 2,4, 2006, with or without outdoor dining ,areas,
may be converted to a non-food use, without a conditional use permit or other
discretionary process, except as required by existing entitlements and for design review,
subject to the following criteria:
The minimum dimension of the food use adjacent to the Third Street Promenade shall
not be less than two-thirds of the width of the existing restaurant frontage and no less
than 16 feet in width. The restaurant shall maintain a 75 foot depth adjacent to the
Promenade frontage.
Any outdoor dining area associated with the food use is either retained or relocated, or
reconfigured with the same square footage in one of the following manners:
. The outdoor dining area is relocated to another food use within the same block
provided any existing outdoor dining area at the proposed location is not
diminished and the relocated outdoor dining remains in place until such time that
it is either restored to the original location, or relocated consistent with this
provision; or,
. The outdoor dining area is reconfigured at the subject location with the same
square footage, but may be recessed into an unenclosed portion of the building
provided the recessed depth does not exceed 20 feet, subject to review and
approval by the Architectural Review Board. In its review, the Architectural
Review Board must find that the proposal is compatible with improvements on
the subject and immediately adjacent properties and that the design has the
appearance and function of an easily accessible outdoor dining area that
reinforces the Promenade's pedestrian oriented environment and encourages
public interaction between the outdoor dining area and the street. The
Architectural Review Board may restrict the recessed depth of the outdoor dining
area into the building and require fa~ade modifications in order to make these
finding determinations.
ATTACHMENT C
EXISTING REGULATIONS
Section 9.04.08.15.085. Conversion of any portion of a restaurant use or any
associated recreational or entertainment use to a new or expanded retail use located on
the ground floor level adjacent to the Third Street Promenade.
In the BSC-1 portion of the BSC District, the conversion of any portion of a restaurant
use or any associated recreational or entertainment use to a new or expanded retail use
located on the ground floor level adjacent to the Third Street Promenade shall require a
conditional use permit subject to the following requirements:
(a) All standards, required findings, and conditions for conditional use permits pursuant
to Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.12 shall apply.
(b) The additional finding of fact shall be made: the proposed use would preserve the
unique mixture of restaurants, retail and entertainment on the Third Street Promenade
and maintain the vitality and diversity of the Promenade and the Bayside District.
(c) The provisions of this Section shall apply to all restaurant uses located on the
ground floor level adjacent to the Third Street Promenade. However, the conversion of
the rear portion of a ground floor restaurant to a retail use shall not require a conditional
use permit provided that the retail area is located within the rear 75 feet of the property
and access to the retail area is taken from an alley.
ATTACHMENT D
Alternatives Comparison Table
*
Alternatives Comparison Table
2/3 of Existing
frontage, but no less
than 16 feet
Retain same area as
existing; area may be
recessed into building
up to 20 feet, or
located off-site within
the same block
If compliant,
approved by Zoning
Administrator
CUP Required if
unable to comply;
ARB to review
recessed outdoor
dining area
Restaurant front may
be reduced to 33
feet; outdoor dining
area must be
retained but may be
recessed into building
subject to ARB
approval
2/3 of Existing
Outdoor Dining
frontage, but no less
than 16 feet
75 Feet
Retain same area as
existing; area may be
recessed into building
up to 20 feet, or
located off-site within
the same block
Not Specified
If compliant,
approved by Zoning
Administrator
CUP Required if
unable to comply;
ARB to review
recessed outdoor
dining area
Restaurant front may
be reduced to 23
feet; outdoor dining
area must be
retained but may be
recessed into building
subject to ARB
approval
Applies to restaurants with existing outdoor dining area
40
Existing restaurant
frontage reductions
approved through
discretionary review
75 Feet
Retain size of
outdoor dining area,
reductions approved
through discretionary
review
Outdoor dining area
reductions approved
through discretionary
review
None
CUP Required
Any reduction to
restaurant frontage or
outdoor dining area
requires a CUP
ATTACHMENT E
Correspondence
Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for
review at the City Clerk's Office and the Libraries.