sr-012280-8aCA RLY.:SSS:e ~~
Council Meeting 01-22-80 Santa *%[oni ., California
~N 2 49€1
STAFF REPORT
T0: ~~ayor and City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: `gain Street Moratorium Ordinance
INTRODUCTION
This report transmits for second reading .and adoption
an ordinance imposing a six month moratorium on development
in the Main Street commercial area. This ordinance was intro-
duced at the January 8, 1980, meeting (Item 8D). At the
same time, the Council adopted an emergency moratorium to
same effect. Thus, this ordinance is already in effect in
its emergency form, and its adoption is primarily a formality.
ANALYSIS
At its January 8, 1980, meeting, the City Council
adopted an emergency ordinance declaring a six month moratorium
on development in the rgain Street commercial area. The
terms of this moratorium were developed by Main Street
residents and merchants, including members of the Main Street
Association and the Ocean Park Community Organization. The
specific terms of the moratorium are as follows:
Section One declares the need for the emergency ordinance.
It recognizes that controversy and problems have arisen in the
P4ain Street area, and that these problems should be aAproached
rationally, through the planning process. The preservation of the
character of the community during the planning process is sufficient
Cis ~,z` ~.y%-1~~+~`r~ )
justification for an urgency measure under Section 619 (c)
of the City Charter.
Section Two contains the terms of the moratorium.
There are three operating parts -- the area, which is
described on a map drawn by the Planning Department; the
duration, until June 25, 19$0; and the prohibitions,_as
follows:
(1) no new bars, restaurants, and other specified
uses; no addition of square footage, including
patios, on restaurants and bars;
(2) third floor windows with "peeping Tom" potential
must be of translucent glass up'to five foot
six inches above the floor;
(3) no new parking lot entrances or exits onto
residential streets;
(4) new construction abuttiha'resideritiaY
property may not exceed t}zirty feet in height,
including parapets;
(5) no demolitions in the moratorium zone.
Section Three creates a process for exceptions from the
moratorium. A property owner may demonstrate to the Planning
Commission that his proposed project will not alter the
character of the neighborhood
An appeal may he made to
the City Council.
Section Four provides for a vested rights determination
by the Planning Commission, with an appeal to the Council.
Persons who, before January $, 19$0, acquired the last
governmental approval necessary to completion of a project,
and spent substantial sums in good faith reliance on that
approval, may obtain a vested rights determination. The test
follows the basic rule established by the California Supreme
Court.
-2-
Section Five states the intent of the Council that the
moratorium is only to last six months, and that staff is to
develop a _"lain Street District Zone in cooperation with nSain
Street residents and merchants. The consensus that was reached
regarding the terms of the moratorium was based on a mutual
recognition that a moratorium was only a temporary solution,
and that all efforts should be made to avoid its extension
beyond its original six months duration. The creation of a
Main Street District Zone is a goa17 the ordinance recognizes
that other forms of solution may be devised.
The emergency ordinance is already effective. This
ordinance, which is presented solely to protect against the
contingency that the emergency declaration regarding the
moratorium might be attacked, would become effective on
February 22, 1980.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may adopt, reject, or modify this ordinance.
If this ordinance is modified, the Council should. then consider
whether it desires to modify the emergency moratorium as w@11.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the Council adot~t
the attached ordinance.
Prepared by: Richard L. Knickerbocker
Stephen S. Stark
-3-