sr-121774-10dSanta Monica, 'California, December 4, 19:'74
~ (~
T0: Mayor .and City Council E
OTY ~~~~
H'1'~OM: , city Sta=="f
DEC 171974 l
SUBJECT: -Architectural Review Districts TMs'
CITT CtERK'S aPFis~
f0A FA4l~d~
Introduction
This is a staff report covering a request by the Architectural
Review Committee for the City Council to designate certain areas
as Architectural Review Districts.
Background
Earlier his year the City Council created an Architectural
Review Committee and adopted an .Architectural Review Ordinance.
Under the provisions of that ordinance, the'City Council is em-
powered to establish Architectural Review Districts wherein plans
for all projects thereafter proposed must be approved by the
..Architectural Review Committee. Since its inception on October
2, 1974,"the Architectural Review Committee has considered the
areas in the city,which`it believes could most benefit from tha
.:initiation of Architectural Review and have recommended that the
following areas be designated as Architectural Review Districts:
1. Properties fronting on Wilshire Boulevard .and
Ocean Avenue.
2. The Beach and Pier areas including properties
fronting on Barnard. Way, Palisades Beach Road
.and. Appian ,Way.
_l_ ~ ~
3. Publicly assisted structures or public buildings
under the control of the City or Unified,School`'
District.
4. A11 development in the.C3 and CP Districts.
The Committee-has approved a resolution and map desig-
nating hese areas and the map, as submitted, has been endorsed-
by the Planning Commission,
Alternatives
Section 9509 of Chapter 5, Article IX of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code provides that the City Council upon secommenda-
tion of the Planning Commission, or on its own motion, may
establish Architectural Review Districts by,ordinance. 'The
City Council, therefore, has the power to accept, modify or
increase the areas recommended by the Architectural Review
'.Committee and the Planning Commission.
Recommendation
It is respectfully recommended that the recommendation
of the Architectural Review Committee and the City Planning
Commission 'f or the establishment of the proposed Architectural
Review Districts be approved and the City Attorney directed to
prepare the required ordinance for adoption.
Prepared by: 'James":Lansford
JWZ/js.
_2_
1tili.GliZ.!L4 1"tEI11ING OF 7rffs C.-l'I"i I'T~(1D11_VI1dG CO!'i["IISSIOI
N[Oi~IDAY, DECE:M1,:,R. 2, 1<~T-(- .F.T 7.:30 P, ii.
I~``f ~i~i~? COi?I'~iC:L:L C.;1A1"fBEP.S
1']FE;~'.:~i] L : SIBS:UL`dLL'
Cor, ~uesr Lor~.er D, :13. ~so~er, C A~~Aa r~~rr Paco ':C'~~:m Tlo J.e
y
Gc, L,;_st Lo>>.ec' <+
,,. y
A.. C,on.exi
Commissioner :ft, Gould VACANC~1:
Commis i orter L?. L. Lonsinger
Commissioner
Dm
G, M.=~lcolm One
Commis:i.oner S, Savage
FLhSO PL~rSEN'L' WERE Ti~;E F'O:L,1;0'(r1.1D?G:
Councilman P. van d.cn Steenhowen Council Lia:i.son
LZ. :Perry Dex~uty CitJ .E~tto.rn.ey
J, ti~l. Lansford Director of Planning
.R. 0. Ober°be<;k A.dm:Lnistrative Asst
V.
V. Pav:Lovskis .
Principal Planner
<T, M, Fisenhut Lon:i_:ag Inspector
J. S, Smith Secretary
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman Pro Tem a_nd
the .Pledge of A1legiancc cvas led by Mr, Savage.
The minutes of the 1Vovc.nbe:r 4- meeting ti,rere approved as
corrected..
Mr. James Connolly distributed the Handbooks for Commissioners
a_nd the Commission expressed their ap})recia'tion to the City Manager's
office for the preparation. of them.
PUBLIC EIEIARINGS:
8a. ~ppeat - 7. A. Case 3546-Y. Applicant rec;uested a
variance of area regu,lacions to permit the3 division or the
premises into two parce:Ls, Dane of which ~,~rs.ll be 75' ~ 1.4j' wit'h-
out access to the a_l_le,y excepti.r_g by means of .a 5' easernen;.
Proper ;y is located. at 501 A.:Lta Avenue in the .Rl Dist-r:ict.
Eollotiring the sta%f report, the following per;~ons spoke in
fa~.ror of th.e appeal.:
Steve Lebowitz, Applicant Margaret Horst
Pat .Schneider
A letter from Mrs. Jean .Maloney, was also submitted in.
favor o:F the applicatioxi..
The follotivin.g persons spoke i:n opposition:
Marjorie lIelper
Nlc. Lcbowi.tz spoke in. zebu-ital.
The Rzblic I[earing ti~ra.s closed. Poll owing discussion b;Y the
Commission, M_c•, Malcolm moved to L;rant the appeal t,;ith the new
proposed >J1an and. the failing of an af.fid.avit w_i'th tkie City of
a Lee stmpl_e lea>~' for_ ~' ~%•~rs.. 'L'he motion tiaras SE=c;Ondc-;d by x9r.
~~ ~„~
7Op vS'. 1°_C ,. CO1 ;7r~ moVE?C1 i;0 C11aY1 Te u` .~~ "tU r~ .~ f, n
€, ~9 years ,zl I ass anci
f,o overru.le; the: Lo:nln~,; A&m~_nistrator`r~ determ~nai;:i.o~. Fol. ollrrg
1~.rt,Ler disco- ~::i_o~~,- `lr_. Cot;en rIlOzre>d to tab:te the r~ta!'~er c,:atil
r},~, nF;~i, rr,ce'i1n1, ,[y~,e rnot~on c~a~as seconds '.. b,y 't.r:. Uo:;.ld_ and :Lost
by tine E'o7..lowirrg x,ote:
A`rr?F;: Comrn:i. lone: > Conen, Gou.id
~;
~'•) rte, ~U?Il CT1:1>>10:Cl.ei .i 1~O.n;:i Y,. r%;:!:`, "ial COl tti, S-:^.'1,?`~,ge, l~Oper
IS ~C 1.1 ~L'': TVOx1Ei
V%~C[`>>\lY; One
__
''C'~i!1.1-iJ PLl. r3tal :~ O:i:~ v;a. ~i .-i~,v .v a~1aYi.~'~ ~: O.h.LI-L:. L;1 ~)"1. 12.. J, iJ.'~;. 1~ 7':~e 2..
~Lw1e Or1£1n8.1. mO'i:10Yi 1C1St by tL1 F9 f011.0.,J7_]1,v*, VO'te:
f.~ F'.~.ii: l~U.iiT!I.i FiS1Ui]c.rS liDL1 c^Tl., Dial COlm, EZop P.:C
NOLuia: GCmI';iS'~,7.OrlE)~'S GO"(',.Ld, l~Or1SL:CLgeY', iaVage
ILBr~f~.N'1': None
V..1C~I'CY: One
r_tiL c;:pp.l1G1'L"C; 4J .izS ad:V ~. ., :~~1 lU 1:Lle ~~ ~icv'I J^:C12r1 C',. ~„7.b 111 v-"'~;
the re~TZ~ed_ pl.ns a't the Toning '1.dmn:i.scra.tor 1F;ve1„
8b. Ap~ea1 - Z_ A. C~.~e 2?_H U_P. Appli.cant requested a
C,ondit:i.onal D:~-<: :Perm1~ to } ~ .rrni.t maintenance o:P anon-conormin.g
building for. .res:idc;ntial u.se Urithota't -bringing i"i~ in"to con.1'o_c~Lnance
with present yard -requ.irements, Property is located at 2835
Colorado Avenue (154-H Yale Stree"b) "in.'the .B? District,
l~ol:l_o~,ai.ng the sta)"f :re_por"t, the following persons spoke in
favor of the appeal;
GJil.ho S4:iller, applicani,
The following persons spolLe i.n opposition:
Ottar A-r~ne~;en. Armand Goudin
A7_ Wilkes Helen Day
Glen Dawson Tenant at 1537 Yale
I`rir. P'filler spoke inrebuttal; Also Jim Davis, prospective
tenant.
The Pt?:o1ic Hearing was closed, Following discussion by the
Commission, Mr. Savage moved to deny the appeal and uphold the
deter°min.ation of the Coning Administrator. The motion was seconded
by Nir, Cohen and carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commiti~sioners Cohen, Lonsi.nger_, Malcolm, Savage,
Roper
NOES: Commissioner Gould
ABSENT: None
V11C.A.NCY : One
d Business:
ga. Tentative Tract'32455• 7 unit condominium conversion,
95H - l.Hth Street, R2. Arnold Doty & 'James Bowers,
Fol_l_owing the staff report,_and comments on the CC&Rs,by.
'the Deputy Gity Attorney, the following persons spoke in favor
of the application:
Arnold Doty
Joyce Hansen
There being no one else present wishing to speak on the
matter, the Public FIearing was closed.
The Commission recommended that funds for maintenance be
included and "that two parking spaces be assigned to each unit.
Following further discussion, Mrs. Gould moved. to denzy the '
application. The motion was seconded by Ntr_ Cohen and lost by
the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Cohen, Gould, Roper
NOES: Commissioners Lonsinger, Malcolm, Savage
ABSENT: None
VACADTGY : One
-2-
' E ~ 111 a.7 ~°I~8t1~"].t° of the ~i 1.'. ,y ti. i. o_C).'~.]_ng LO ~iI`115;:?:L011 .L.2-2-%~r 'v r;e j
M,r.,. Cob.en moved. to a~~as'ove ~ ha s:nn7 ication. `he mot, o~~ +;at~.e
~cconcLed by NLr.s. G4onLd aru~ Lost off. thr: :E'ollo-ri:ug Vote:
a5'~E~`i: Ci0rnm1SS10:17.eC's liOnk)ilYloer, f'taiCOlm, savage
lid v.uiJ: ("i0m7i:1SS10tiO.rS COiTc':il., G'OUldj Rop P: r.
i .
v2!,.G'~,;`~C; Y : 0.2.E
)b. =E.I,:EZ„ financial 1'1aza.
E'ol louring the Staff Report, P9r„ Cohen moved 'Lo return -the
dsa_t 11.~C„R, back to the ~i.eve:Lop;'r for. :i_nclusion o:P t_^_e ao.di-
t:ional material outl.:ined in t11e staff report o.~ November 22,
l.y'~4 a:rd also the i.nc_lus:ion. oi' <zn analysis of l-',ae ctu;nalative
effects of tiuch proje<;ts. The motion was seconded. by P!fz'. lialco:Lm
and carried unanimously.
P1r, Cohen moved to act on Ibems l0a and 10b before hers ~c.
The motion was seconded by P'Lr. Savage and carried una_~imously.
New Business:
1.Oa. Beach Plaster Pt.an,
Following discussion of the staff' report, the following
recommendations were made:
.L, More specific terminology needed in place of
"public coastal recreation."
2. Some plans fo'r security rind. protection of beach
users needed.
3„ 0-bher options in tx'ansportation and par'~~:inr; should
be explored; such as rnai.ntaining par}.sing in sorvbh
a_e'ea w..ith a 'brain or same other means of movi:rg people
to the north beach areas.
4A `Lhe "Introduction" anal "Overview" should be revised
Lo eliminate poss:ib7.e contradictions and. to clarify
meaning.
5. The Breakwater should not be allowed 'to deteriorate,
6, Eliminate Option 2 under :Parkin,
~~. On.e of the lo:rn.g ter~rn goals should be the elimination
of all parkin; westerly of the Pacific Coast FI;ghwa;y.
t3. Planning Commission go on record a.s favoring a Beach
Master Plan„
lOb. .architectural Review Committee Resoluti.oa and S'Iap.
Following the sta:E:P report anal discussion by the Commission,
Mr. Zo:nsinger moved to endorse the .resolntior and map. The
motion was seconded by Mr. ]'~iaicolm and carried unanimously.
The n.e:xt regular meeting; o.% 'b1:re Planni.n~ Commissi on. wi1l..
be held. on. Monday, Jo_x)i ary 5, lc ` _Ltem gc. , /onrng .ilodiaica-
~75~ - ~ ~ -
tions wi:.L1 be placed on tk)e _Agenda of 'bhat meet:ixig,
There being no f.'u=rther btxs:ixress 'to come before the Commission,
upon rno~b~.~:)n duay made and seconded, the :meeting was adjour.~aed. at
1.i ;4-5 P. 1°I„
--_