sr-070110-8a~;tYof City Council a oranu
Santa Monica
City Council Meeting: July 1, 2010.
Agenda Items
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Eileen Fogarty, Director, Planning and Community Development
Subject: Proposed Staff Clarifications and Responses to City Council Requested
Changes to Draft LUCE
Executive Summary
The City Council is receiving proposed language clarifications and City Council-
requested changes to the Draft LUCE based on comments and direction of the City
Council from the prior Council LUCE hearings. The Planning Commission's resolution
recommending adoption of the Draft LUCE, which was previously transmitted to the City
Council, consisted of two components:
1) Exhibit A -Draft LUCE November 24, 2009 (as corrected on February 24, 2010
for minor typographical errors)
2) Exhibit B -Changes to Draft LUCE
In light of clarifications requested by the Planning Commission, City Council, and during
public testimony, staff has carefully reviewed the Draft LUCE and Planning Commission
Exhibit B to ensure that the intent of the LUCE is reflected accurately in the language of
the document. Furthermore, at the June 10, 17, and 24 City Council hearings, various
Council members made comments indicating a desire for language to be brought back
for City Council review.
The purpose of City Council's review is to transform Planning Commission Exhibit B into
Exhibit B of the City Council resolution adopting the LUCE, which will incorporate all of
the City Council's changes. The attached document is intended to be a starting point
for City Council deliberation on appropriate changes to Planning Commission Exhibit B.
1
A revised draft of Exhibit B, based on the City Council's deliberations on July 1, will be
distributed to the City Council on Friday, July 2.
Prepared by: Jing Yeo, Special Projects Manager
Approved:
Ffrleen Fogarty
Director, Plann
Development
Forwarded to Council:
~ x
Rod Gould
City Manager
Attachments:
1. Proposed Staff Clarifications and Responses to City Council Requested Changes to
Draft LUCE, July 1, 2010
2
~~
.~.. Planning and Community Development
Proposed Staff Clarifications and
Responses to City Council Requested Changes to Draft LUCE
July 1, 2010
New changes for City Council consideration are in red.
Staff Clarifications in response to issues raised at City Council hearings
1. Modify incorrect segment titles for Santa Monica Boulevard to clarify that an existing automobile
dealership is allowed to expand on Pages 2.4-12 and 2.4-13 in Chapter 2.4 (Boulevards):
• Page 2.4-12: Centinela to ~6v'~eeE Cloverfield
• Page 2.4-13: ~~' Cloverfield to 20`h Street
2. Modify Policy LU7.3 in Chapter 2.1 (Land Use Policy) to clarify that services and uses supportive to
the hospitals are encouraged in areas beyond the Healthcare District:
• Encourage a variety of services and uses in the district, and in commercial districts throughout
the Citv, to support the changing needs of the healthcare community and hospitals.
3. Modify Exhibit B #88 to further expand the scope of Main Street issues to be addressed in the
zoning ordinance update: Add Policy D31.12 to Main Street District (Chapter 2.6 Districts):
• Ensure that disincentives for new and existine restaurants on Main Street as well as other issues
of concern will be addressed in an updated Main Street Master Plan and the Zonine Ordinance
update.
4. Modify Policy D32.7 for Main Street District (Chapter 2.6 Districts) in response to concerns from
the Main Street Business Improvement Association:
• Mixed-use developments should have active ground floor uses that face the bett4evar~ street
with residential or office development located on the upper floors. Entrances to upper level
uses, such as lobbies, should be limited in length along the sidewalk.
5. Modify Policy D32.8 for Main Street District (Chapter 2.6 Districts) in response to concerns from
the Main Street Business Improvement Association:
• Offices and other limited pedestrian access uses are discouraged on the ground floor facing the
beulevatd street. Entrances to upper level uses, such as lobbies, shall be limited in length along
the sidewalk.
6. Modify Tier 2 description on Page 3.2-5 (Chapter 3.2 Community Benefits) to provide flexibility
and allow the zoning code to define the specific type of discretionary permit that would be
required for Tier 2 projects:
• Commercial Projects and Mixed-Use Projects with Commercial Uses above the First Floor
between 35-45 Feetfiy-C~}Rthroueh a discretionarv process:
Unless a developer seeks a development agreement, a r~i°discretionarv process will apply to all
commercial projects and mixed-use projects that provide at least a limited amount of
neighborhood-serving or other non-residential uses above the first floor.
7. Remove references to a state density bonus for mixed-use projects in non-residential
designations.
~®
.. ~.. Planning and Community Development
8. Modify Tier 1 Development Parameters for all non-residential Land Use Designations (Chapter 2.1
Land Use Policy) to clarify that the number of required affordable housing units in Tier 1 projects
is based upon the total number of proposed units:
• A project will receive a 3-foot height bonus above the 32-foot base height, allowing for an
additional floor of housing, by providing the required affordable housing units in accordance
with the percentage requirements specified in the City's Affordable Housing Production
Program for the project as a whole.
9. Add text to `Plans for the Districts' on Page 5.0-12 (Chapter 5.0 Measuring Progress) to update
Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan. Note that current LCP Land Use Plan does not conflict
with LUCE as most provisions taken from existing zoning ordinance.
® Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan -Update the LCP Land Use Plan to be consistent with the
LUCE goals and policies for the Beach and Oceanfront District, Downtown, and residential
neighborhoods within the Coastal Zone.
10. Modify Exhibit B #4 in response to SMADA requests to allows existing auto dealership sales and
services facilities to be allowed to expand onto nearby commercial properties and include auto
sales with a CUP: Modify Policy B14.4 for Colorado Avenue (Chapter 2.4 Boulevards) to read:
• Maintain service/storage facilities for automobile dealerships as permitted uses west of 20th
Street. At existing or expanded dealership service and storage facilities. a discretionary approval
process may be implemented to authorize auto sales on lots that are contiguous to and are
associated with the a> existing or expanded dealership service and storage facilities.
Page 2 of 7
~®
,.~.. Planning and Community Development
City Council Actions
Council Comment: Motion 5-2 (McKeown and Holbrook dissenting) fora 50/SO land use mix in
Mixed Use Creative District with no more than s% deviation in either direction and follow-up
every 2 years.
11. Modify Land Use Parameters for Mixed Use Creative on Page 2.1-42 (Chapter 2.1 Land Use Policy)
to read:
At the ground floor, active, local-serving retail, service commercial, and creative arts uses are
allowed. Above the ground floor, creative office and affordable, workforce, and market-rate
residential uses are allowed, with a ^^^~•'^tareet of 50% residential to 50%
nonresidential uses and no more than a 5% deviation in either direction. In order to
monitor proeress in achievine the desired mix of uses. the City shall evaluate the residential to
nonresidential land use tar¢ets every two years. Uses that serve both employees and residents
of the area, such as child care, community meeting spaces, small restaurants, and neighborhood
markets are encouraged.
Council Comment: Motion 6-1 (McKeown dissenting) to explore possibility of not prohibiting
auto dealers on east side of Lincoln north of I-10.
12. Modify Exhibit B #3: Text for Mixed Use Boulevard -Wilshire and Lincoln north of I-10 on Page 2.1-
34 (Chapter 2.1 Land Use Policy):
Existing automobile dealers shall be allowed to expand using the urban auto dealership format
described in the Strateeic Approach for 20th Street to Lincoln Boulevard on Santa Monica
Boulevard (Chapter 2.4 Boulevards), and in a manner that is compatible with the surroundine
neighborhood. Auto dealers that do not expand are encouraged to upgrade their dealerships
into the urban auto dealership format, which contributes to Santa Monica's urban form with
multi-story buildings built to the street and parkin); in structures at the rear or undereround.
For purposes of calculating FAR, below Grade auto dealer facilities shall be excluded and rooftop
parking/automobile storage shall be discounted by 50%. During the review and adoption of the
Zoning Ordinance, consideration may be given on whether to provide for a discretionary
approval process to allow new auto dealerships on the east side of the Lincoln Boulevard
between I-10 and Santa Monica Boulevard.
Council Comment: Motion 7-0 to endorse activity center concepts, excluding heights, and bring
back the activity centers as a study session item to review community goals and boundaries.
Question regarding process of initiation and how to ensure that affordable grocery stores are
included.
13. Modify Policy ACl.l (Chapter 2.s Activity Centers) to add requirement for affordable grocery
stores.
An activity center overlay should create a true mixed-use development including uses such as a
o•.c=••; .*=~= a drugstore; local serving retail and convenience services; with a moderately-
priced, full-service grocery store/supermarket as an anchor: and small floor plate, local-serving
offices and a wide range of new housing.
Page 3 of 7
~~
...~~, Planning and Community Development
Individual Councilmember Requested Changes for Consideration
Council Comment: Require active ground floor uses for 100% affordable housing however, allow
flexibility for meeting this requirement if it creates a barrier to the production of affordable
housing.
14. Modify Exhibit B #13: The following clarifications are to be made to Chapter 3.3 (Housing):
• Page 3.3-4 One hundred percent affordable housing proiects will continue to be provided
existing incentives, including: an up to 50% density bonus in residential
designations, inclusive of the State density bonus requirement; building height
in non-residential designations not to exceed the allowable maximum height
limit at the highest tier. or 40 feet where applicable; reduced parking
requirements; flexibility in providing a-redeetiea-ia reouired ground floor
^"''""`'"~ ~•~^^'^'' '^' pedestrian orientation, ifae~ab#e-a hardship is
demonstrated; and administrative review of one hundred percent affordable
housing proiects with 50 units or less. One hundred percent affordable housing
proiects are defined as housing in which one hundred percent of the dwelling
units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the Citv for
occupancy by low or moderate income households. Such proiects may also
include non-residential uses. as long as such uses do not exceed a maximum
percentage'"'-`••~"-^~^^-^~ of the floor area of the total project to be
established in the Zoning Ordinance.
15. Modify Exhibit a #17: The following additions and clarifications are made to land use designations
in Chapter 2.1 (Land Use Policy):
• Modify bullet under 'AII Tiers' regarding 100% affordable housing for all non-residential land
use designations that have housing:
• One hundred percent affordable housing proiects will continue to be provided existing
incentives, including: building height not to exceed the allowable maximum height limit at
the highest tier, inclusive of any development bonus far affordable housing; reduced
parking requirements; •^"~•~«:.... ..^., n^.;"~r«„ ,;.~~.,^ .^., ^a fi^^.
as-app~ables-zat~F administrative review of one hundred percent affordable housing proiects
with 50 units or less; and flexibility in providing required ground floor pedestrian-orientation
if a hardship is demonstrated.
• Modify bullet under "AII Tiers" regarding 100% affordable housing for General Commercial
(Lincoln and Pico) and Neighborhood Commercial (Pico only):
• One hundred percent affordable housing proiects have a base height of 40 feet (4 stories)
and 2.0 FAR, inclusive of any development bonus for affordable housing. Such proiects will
continue to be provided existing incentives, including: , •^,,'., •^-' ^•^ ^-"'^^-
Yew
^reduced parking requirements; aad-administrative review of proiects with 50
units or less: and flexibility in providing required ground floor pedestrian-orientation if a
hardship is demonstrated.
Page 4 of 7
~~
._~ ~ Planning and Community Development
Council Comment: Review document to ensure consistency of historic preservation terms
(addressed in Exhibit B #81 and #82J and policy intent
16. Modify HP2.1(Chapter 2.3 Historic Preservation) to clarify TDR sending and receiving areas and
ensure consistency with Historic Preservation actions that intended to allow sending areas to also
include boulevards:
Establish a program for the Transfer of Development Rights for significant historic resources and
character-defining structures, which will be considered a community benefit. '" "'^'" "'^~
",«.' w^"^a:+'"., ,.''..'~.'„ ., ^".~'"....... , ,.,,, i^.. ^"a'",..'«^. Identify receiving areas
such as boulevards, transit corridors, activity centers, and ""'~^''""~~^'"v2 Districts.
Council Comment: Need to have gateway features at key entrances to the City
17. Add text regarding gateway features to vision statements for Wilshire Boulevard (Page 2.4-5) and
Olympic Boulevard (Page 2.4-35):
Wilshire Boulevard is Southern California's grand street, connecting Downtown Santa Monica to
Downtown Los Angeles. With~The installation of a eatewav feature on Wilshire Boulevard at
the border of Santa Monica creates a distinct and eleeant entryway into the City.
Olympic Boulevard is one of the important eastern gateways to Santa Monica and immediately
establishes a sense of arrival throueh installation of a eateway feature while becoming the spine
of the new Bergamot Transit Village District and the Mixed-Use Creative District.
Council Comment: There should be different values applied to community benefits that benefit
the immediate neighborhood and those have citywide benefit: Meeting code requirements is
not considered a community benefit.
18. Add text to end of'Five Priority Categories of Community Benefits' on Page 3.2-3 (Chapter 3.2
Community Benefits) to read:
There are numerous factors in assessine the type and extent of community benefit that must be
provided. Benefits that merely meet or ~o slightly beyond standard requirements for all
projects, such as TDM or Green Building requirements, would not qualify as community
benefits. Benefits that are for the immediate neiehborhood should also be considered in
addition to those that apply citywide
Council Comment: Potential conflict between Policies 812.1 and 812.2.
19. Delete Policy 612.1 for Colorado Avenue (Chapter 2.4 Boulevards]:
Page 5 of 7
~~
Planning and Community Development
Council Comment: City Council appeared to agree with staff recommendation to allow Santa
Monica Boulevard between 19`h and 20t~ Streets to remain General Commercial (deletion of
Exhibit 8 #89J
20. Delete Exhibit B #89: ~
~4"
Page 6 of 7
~~
...~ . Planning and Community Development
Issues Raised in Deliberations
21. Bergamot Transit Village has some of the most intense development parameters in the LUCE in
anticipation of the future Bergamot Light Rail Station and opportunities to create a transit village
with a balanced mix of jobs and housing. The Bergamot Transit Village Development Parameters for
Tier 3 state:
'Subject to a discretionary review process and creation of an area plan, projects that
provide additional community benefits may request a height up to 75 feet and 3.5 FAR.
The average height cannot exceed 65 feet. The maximum allowable height of 75 feet
maybe achieved for no more than 50 percent of the area of the building footprint."
The LUCE requires an Area Plan for Bergamot Transit Village because Tier 3 projects are
afforded significant development incentives and the intent of the Area Plan is to ensure that
the District is not driven by piecemeal. development but is shaped by a comprehensive
community process that will address fundamental elements such as: amount and location of
open space; building mass and form; location of pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile
connections; prioritization of community benefits; district-wide TDM strategies; and future
shared parking facilities.
As shown in Exhibit a #63, the Planning Commission made changes to the Tier 3
Development Parameters by raising the maximum potential height to 81 feet with a
corresponding percentage decrease in FAR, required that the average height be at least 10
feet less than the maximum requested height, and deferred details on building form and
variation to the Bergamot Transit Village Area Plan.
A question has been raised as to whether Tier 3 projects should be allowed to proceed up to
formal hearings prior to the adoption of an Area Plan.
Page 7 of 7