sr-052279-8c
CA REF:: A~2K : dd ~~AY 2 ~ 38l .
Council n4eeting 05-23-79 9
Santa Monica, California
TO: ?~ayor and Cite Council
rr^ROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance T~eclaring a moratorium on all
Future Acceptance for Processing of Applicatians
for Condominium, Stoch Cooperative, and Community
Apartment Projects.
Introductdh
As requested by Members of the City Council, this report
transmits a proposed emergency ordinance expanding the scope
of the condominium eioratorium declared by the Council on
rZay 8, 1979.
B ackcsround
Pursuant tc the recommendation of the City Planning
Commission, the City Council imposed a moratorium until
September 4, 1979, on the processing a.nd approval of all
applications for tentative tract maps, parcel mans and perrmits
for condominium, stock. cooperative and community apartment
developments filed with the City after April 10, 1979, and involving
existing controlled rental units. The Council further directed
the Planning Commission to develop proposed revisions to the City's
Condominium Code during the moratorium to reflect changes in
the housing needs of Santa Monica and the recent adoption of the
Rent Control Charter Amendment. As declared on Slay 8, 1979,
the moratorium does not apply to near developments on vacant.
The proposed revisions tci the City's Condominium Code
may encompass new physical standards (concernir_a, for example,
density or parking), as ;cell as socio-economic criteria related to
the impact of condominium developments on-'the Ctv's housinc
market. If the City Council feels that there. is a high.
probability that the new standards would apply to developments on
properties crhich are not encompassed in the moratorium imposed
on_ May 8, 1979, it s?could adopt the proposed ordinance. Such
action would ensure that all future condominium development
is consistent with. the new standards.
If the neca standards desired by the Council are of a type.
wh:.ch would not apply to properties which are vacant or which do ;
not contain controlled rental units, it should reject the proposed
ordinance. The council. mig;rt also consider that a moratorium
encompassing the many vacant properties in the City will delay the
re-development and use of such properties,
Alternatives
The City Council may adopt the proposed ordinance as
drafted, modify it in scope or re}ect it, thereby confining
the moratorium tc7. properties containing controlled rental units.
These choices are matters of policy, and staff makes no
recommendation.
Prepared By: RICHARn „ ,YtISCS:ERBOCP.ER
AiQ`7E KIRLIN
o . ~~~ ,~
,~
~ m
~~
~~ e~,s~
~ ~ ~~ _~~~
~~~ ~~~ ~~
~ ~ ~~~~
d 8 m/ F9
a~r~ p
s~ ~
'~
-W
~,
~P
~F
E ~ -~
~' ~
~~ ~~
m
~a
~a ~
~p
~~ o
~~
~.~
k
~~
a a f,
~-~~.
~~~~~,
~~-~ ~ . ~
~, ~,
"a~cu/"~/6$~ t~/~ ~~.°.'~ffi:9~.¢~~0-.h~~l ~~'~~`~~~+~ti k, ~f~.~d~~~.. d~~lL. ~.~r,.4r. Vii.
m~rz w~..~o we rmm wrm
aGTN $TREET
712-1
~~.~ l
~~~~~
~QTN $iRELT
~~~~-~
J~.~°~o
~~
o~'y~d
^. ~'~~
~-i~~o
1.97
24-.1