Loading...
sr-090809-7b~ir City of Santa Monica City Council Report City Council Meeting: September 8, 2009 Agenda Item: ~~ To: Mayor and City Council From: Eileen Fogarty, Director of Planning & Community Development Subject: Introduction and First Reading of an Interim Ordinance to Modify the Development Standards in the OP-4 Ocean Park Multiple Residential District Relating to Side Yard Setback and Open Space Requirements. Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading the attached interim ordinance. Executive Summary The OP-4 side yard setback standards are intended to require greater side yard setbacks for portions of developments with large windows or glass doors to provide for more privacy between adjacent properties. The Code required side yard setbacks in the OP-4 Ocean Park Multiple Residential District produce unintended consequences for exceptionally wide parcels because when three-story buildings are proposed on parcels 125' or more in width, the side yard setback requirements for portions of buildings with blank walls and smaller (secondary) windows are equal to or greater than those for large (primary) windows. The attached interim ordinance will ensure that the side yard setbacks for primary windows are greater than those for blank walls or secondary windows. In addition, the proposed ordinance will require that developments on parcels in excess of 99 feet in width incorporate courtyards and will add references to third floor setbacks and private open space since the OP-4 district allows three story structures. Background The side yard setback standards in the Ocean Park multi-family residential districts are intended to preserve privacy between adjacent properties. As such, the side setback standards differ for portions of a building with a primary window and those with a blank wall or secondary window. A primary window is defined as the largest glazed surface (glass door or window) in a primary space which is a living room, dining room, family 1 room, or library. A secondary window is defined as a window in a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, stairway or corridor, storage area or is a smaller window in a primary space. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section g.04.08.54.060(g) includes the side yard setback requirements for the OP-4 district. The side yard setback for a secondary window or blank wall is based upon the following formula: 5 + (stories x lot widthl 50' On a typical 50' wide parcel, atwo-story building in the OP-4 district would require a seven foot side setback and eight feet for athree-story building. The side yard setback for the portion of a building with a primary window on a 50' parcel is a minimum of 12'. Therefore, the portion of a building with a large window in a living room or glass door to a balcony off a living room would have a 50% or greater side setback than the portion of a building with bedroom or kitchen windows. However, the above formula results in unintended consequences for exceptionally wide parcels. For athree-story building, the side yard setback for building portion with a secondary window would be .greater than the 12' required for a primary window on a 125' wide parcel. This situation is contrary to the intention of the side yard requirements in the OP district to preserve privacy between adjacent parcels. In addition to the side yard issue discussed above, SMMC Section 9.04.08.54.060 allows structures up to three stories in height within the OP-4 district yet erroneously does not reference the third floor of structures in subsection (g)(3) and Q). The attached ordinance will add a third story reference. Discussion As noted above, the side yard setback requirements for lots greater than 125' in width in the OP-4 district do not adequately address the privacy and open space issues as originally intended. In addition, when the formula-derived side yard setbacks are applied to developments on wide parcels, the building has to be set back so substantially at the 2 side yards, there is a disincentive to provide a courtyard or other break in the front elevation of the building that reduces its streeffront mass and provides a more pedestrian oriented design. Staff proposes modifying the side yard setback requirements in a manner similar to those adopted for the R2, R3 and R4 districts in 2004 which have proven to be effective. The existing side yard setback formula is a function of the building height expressed in stories where different setbacks apply to buildings of different height in the same zoning district. Typically, side yards are either used for access to units or private outdoor living space. The justification for the modifications to the side yard setbacks in the R2, R3 and R4 districts in 2004 centered around the fact that the side yard setbacks should be tied to the usability and livability of the spaces rather than the height of the building. For a typical two-story development on a typical 50' wide parcel, the side yard setback requirement was seven feet. As such, the side yard setbacks were increased to a minimum of eight feet with a requirement that an additional two foot average setback be provided per story. As discussed later in this report, the modifications in 2004 also required courtyards for developments on wide parcels which were intended to break up building mass and provide more common open space. Therefore, on lots 50' or greater in width in the OP-4 district, staff recommends requiring a minimum side yard setback of eight feet for portions of buildings with a secondary window, blank wall, or primary window on a side yard facing the street (i.e., on a corner lot). For portions of buildings with primary windows, staff recommends maintaining a minimum side setback of 12' in order to achieve privacy and open space. as originally established with the Ocean Park standards. The proposed modifications to the side yard setback requirements reduce the side setbacks on the widest parcels, thus increasing the building mass at the streeffront. Included in the modifications to development standards in the R2, R3 and R4 districts in 2004 was a requirement for astreet-facing central courtyard for developments on 3 parcels which exceed 99 feet in width. The purpose of the courtyard requirement was to reduce the mass of the building at the streetfront, improve the pedestrian orientation of the building at the sidewalk and provide meaningful common open space within the development. Since the issues with respect to building mass, pedestrian orientation and common open space are identical for wide lots in the OP-4 district, staff recommends that the same language requiring courtyards in the R2, R3 and R4 districts be incorporated in the OP-4 development standards. The proposed language reads, in part: Parcels having a width greater than 99 feet and located in the OP-4 district shall provide a courtyard centered on the lot. Courtyards shall comply with the following design criteria: (1) Courtyards shall be no less than ten percent of the total lot area and must be designed to accommodate a rectangular area not less than one thousand square feet with a minimum width of eighteen feet measured parallel to the front parcel line. Required setback area shall not count toward the minimum width or one thousand square foot requirement. (2) Courtyards shall be open to the sky, but may include permitted projections for side yard projections. Courtyards shall be visible and accessible from the sidewalk and each ground floor unit. If mechanical or utility equipment is placed in the courtyard, it shall be screened visually and acoustically and shall not encroach into the minimum courtyard area. (3) Courtyard entry gates, if provided, shall be seventy percent transparent to the courtyard, designed in a complementary style to the building's architecture, and constructed using high quality, durable materials. The interim ordinance will be in effect for a period of 60 days from its effective date and may be subsequently extended by the Council for a maximum period of 50 months and 15 days. Public Outreach Notice of the proposed ordinance amendment and the Council hearing was published in the Santa Monica Daily Press a minimum of 10 days prior to the hearing. 4 Alternatives Alternatives that the City Council may consider include: 1. Modify or eliminate specific components of the ordinance relating to setbacks or the courtyard requirement. 2. Allow modifications to side yard setbacks, subject to Architectural Review Board review and approval. Environmental Analysis The proposed interim ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental. Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation Guidelines in that CEQA applies only to projects having the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. The interim ordinance includes only a minor modification to development standards in the OP-4 district. Financial Impact & Budget Actions The recommendation in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impacts. Prepared by: Paul Foley, Principal Planner Approved: Forwarded to Council: Eyl~en Fogarly~ ~ ~-/P~larrydrit Ewell Director, Plan g & Com u y C anager Development Attachments: Exhibit A: Interim Ordinance 5