Loading...
sr-022575-8aCA RL7z:SIS:jst ~t~ TO : FRO"d: , SUBJECT: ~ Introduction 2-11-75 Mayor and City Council City Attorney Moratorium In Beach Front Areas This report transmits the attached ordinance decia a moratorium on new construction in the beach °'~° ~'®~ ~ ~"'~ ~ ~ ~e City of Santa Monica. °~~~~~ 1~7~J Background ~ `~iii~ ~,~ ~~ RE`CU~iP:~~ 3~ S~~ At the Council meeting of February CL~ 'S 45 4, 1~~5¢ u ion 75--1 was transmitted to the. City Couhcii from the City Planning Commission. This resolution of the Planning Commission, together with a staff report from City Staff recommended. the adoption of a one hundred eighty day moratorium on the issuance of building permits or commencement of construction under existing permits in the beach front areas. The City Council accepted the recommendations of City Staff and the Planning Commission and instructed the City Attorney's office to prepare an ordinance in conformity with those recommendations. The attached ordinance provides for a one hundred eighty day moratorium on construction in the beach area until August 12, 1975. The specific area affected is all property in the City west of Ocean Avenue and Neilson i~ay, with the exception of the Ocean Park Redevelopment Project property and :Palisades Park. -1- CA RLK:SIS:jst 2-11-75 Two ordinances are attached and the other one an emergency ordinance, One is a regular ordinance, Both ordinances are the same, except for the time at which they become effective. The reason for presenting both ordinances is to safeguard the. beach area from any further development at the present time, and to attempt to have the moratorium become .effective as quickly as possible, while at the same time providing assurance that the moratorium will be upheld.. The .emergency ordinance-will .become effective immediately upon. its adoption. The regular ordinance will have to be introduced at a subsequent Council meeting for second reading, and will become effective thirty days thereafter, if adopted. The ordinances basically prohibit the issuance by the Building. Department of any new building permit for construction in the beach area, and further prohibit any commencement of construction under existing building permits in the beach area, if such construction has not been begun as of the effective date of the moratorium. There are several exceptions to these prohibitions. -The first exception is that the Building Department may issue a new building permit for any project which does hot exceed $5,000.00 in estimated value. The second exception is that a building permit, if needed, may be issued by the Building Department, without Council approval, for the purposes of required repair and .maintenance of existing structures.. The third exception is that construction may begin, under a building permit existing as of the effective date of the moratorium, for any project the actual or estimated value of which is less -2- CA RLK:SIS:jst 2-11-75 than $5,000.00. Additionally, the ordinances contain a provision for the granting of a variance from the provisions of the moratorium by the City Council. The variance requirements are essentially the same as those. for the downtown moratorium, and are that the moratorium caould result in unnecessary hardships in any particular instance and exceptional circumstances exist in the particular situation and that the granting of the variance from the moratorium provisions would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of the moratorium. Alternative Solutions Not applicable. Recommendation It is recommended that the attached ordinances be adopted by the City Council. pursuant to its motion of the meeting of February 4, 1975, and pursuant to the recommendations of the Planning Commission-and City Staff. Prepared by: Richard L. Knickerbocker, City Attorney Samuel I. Streiehman, Assistant City Attorney RLK:SIS:jst -3- ~3. ~ '~ A~~Rtaa~~vr ,L r _ , ; i4Ql (7CfA$ FRO"ti ARdiA€FfAO€ (Pacific Coast Highway) GFFtCr' ~t,D SA3~TA fCA, CRL$F. ~iF 7NE E76$RCJ~i~ b23$6 _ rfgY rLE~i~ F~ B j ~ ~ Qg ~~'~bruary 18 , 1975 T0: Cl7Y L'F `.Asa "f r, d90~fCA TO BE PRF,SENT~D, AT COUNCIL MEETING ON The Honorable City Council Febxuary 18, 1975 City of Santa Monica, California THIS WILL PROTEST your adoption of any ordinance which takes away any normal property right of BEACH FRONT property owners. In 1946 a "MASTER PLAN" was adopted by Santa T°Tonica City Council, calling for aguisition of beach front property. By trading (giving away) Gity owned beach to State, certain State money was made available to buy land for parking lots, but the money was always insufficient--such as for acquisition of Sunset Beach Tract, as the money always ran out, even though extensive publicity "spotted" the area for acquisition, and drove away potential buyers and/or users. NOW, if you adopt a restrictive measure, you will more or less repeat the same process, i.e., destroy normal property rights at a time when it is extremely improbable that any money will be available for purchase of beach frontage--especially in our area where the beach Itself is NOT private. If the City or State wants the beach property, let one of them buy it. You would be more fair if you gave the State a certain limited ', period in which to buy, axd after that time was up, remove all restrictions on any normal development. Also, from our observation both as residents of nth & Marguerita area, as well as our personal beach front home, we question the benefit to Santa Monica of extensive beach "recreational" type improvements. Santa Monica residents, in general, enjoy the beach as a BEACH, not as a rollicking "recreational" area with fire pits, dunes park, extensive ball playing, etc., etc., all of which would cater to several hundred thousand daily visitors, in addition to those who, even now, clog the freeway & highway, and at the end of a hot Sunday rush home again. ; The entire twenty eight (28) year "push" to accommodate L. A. City and County "mobs" has done nothing but degrade the City of Santa Monica and increase crime problems in the beach area. Further decrease of residential use of beach front, and expansion of large "recreational" areas will eventually make the entire beach a "no-man°s land" of crime & disorder. (Example--Playa Del Rey fire-pit area} Attached hereto is copy of letter previously sent to planning comm- ission protesting any limitation which would prevent our rebuilding in event of fire or other casualty, ~C/~ ~ v ~L~~ Yours very truly, s, I ~ ,~~ C ~~ }'~Z °~~~~~ Ralph A, Mc Donald a B. Mc Donald Mrs.R lph); SANDY BAY HOUSE APARTMENTS __ {4.3 ° ?'tC+3 Hint lull ~€ sroat=rc+~3a ;''~aiai:: .:;o..:t .~i,>riv,a.;~) i:aaz•Ga ''on3ca, ..~?lifa~,z':i i\ ~ ELI`-3c.:;'1 , City os :e~nt~, P os~ic~ pL~3I:Zi~t~ vL+°'t Z.>~: sic .,. , ai„~.ii -:F14° , .ire. iti0, ~ 1685 i~4ain~q,:tr3=et _rt~s~.t ~ ers=ira revision. Uanta iiQ3Ld 4iP, -~. E?.7 it • ,~G~s{Jl ~~~_.~':.?1~.. osnlbl~ pro ore of mayor repair ar reliu3ldinF of oxist3.ra@; atructur® +;` aztcaz~ fire, or other oaseaalty. ~`' We own apartmes~.ts, a;.d our o•+rn oEs:.c~t residence, at 14(31 Hi; '<$ ` ` 1~Fft2~.ii;i$: o kiaown ass ' :.:aS+ Y Tf. t rL`~?." . `~ his prop~srty is operated end m~sl.ntained in a r,;.su.er '>diSicl3 it f. credit to the Gity, as well r- 'n A8 to tY>e beech sr®a ,- .. ~}~ raciS~ c Coast i ;~~~aay) v(:c ,, ;, ` , :, ~ fde ga:q for very nsc,~ensivn in;~ur nee. ;w'aic„-, gill allow re 1 CEme oost sebuildin~ on t:a~ srxne prex~is~:s o~a1y. 'this, oP oouraS; iu -~ ~y oompiianoe wit2a whatever tTe iiept. o*"' ~au3ldiru; ;; .safety would ,~~,- ; consider 1e~~3.. ~~,,;' ~e are alarmed by +mendr~~1 e.~ci~ i iLibter ?" Zon, as reported 3.n Piovemher 2~th "Independent ncw~l.~x3~er, wni.ch states "r;3:L FUa<Tli~? '= PRZ9,'l">'` Dr'~i~C~;i13T Z2r Tai ~:...;.:.is ,.UT.: lie, k'tiOiiZs+I1WJ P3Y Sig CITY ~ `. IF this its the complete stet©ment, :te mi,;ht finM' that, aYter a ~ a..- • _, mayor firs or. other cz;sualty, thy: buildixt~; department would ~~` consider it ille~s.1 to ~ra~t us a permit to repair or rebuild. ; ~:'t{ 'de would oonsidcr this ~: great in~ustioe. `~ Could not this prohibitive st~~tc.a~ent by :,ualified by Qomn such ~` s&]it10n Fete "k;%G .FZ` s W:~ .~ i ::Zk G Ri. LUZ1..,IP3Cr Ga aXl~'xZPiii 3T;1':'.CIVi:~ ~.. ~ " ~~ri't'. e.Fia ' ~:Y C Ut1~Y iJ:;i; ,. } ....R-:., tsti'a' P ~i: vIMZ e.U 2'0 I IR~~, ~-.,: Z'#CdZuIP3G .t7vk. I3~;k'teZi. C1i; ii>~i13ZiiiP3.: .v B.,it CCit1ZI~Y 'si'x r.yZ:>`.CIi~C@ ~" _-" tsTt+P3llFs1?D9 Ui igl~~ A), i"%. t}S' i3iaC:. $,.er .r Y :,mill i,GYr`ZYi;~ ,~~.t . " °';, 'de urgay~ your serious end immeiiiate consideration of this, as while could imposaiatdestructiveureatriction upon ujvat apl$t~r~st~e•now ZF'money were evail~xbl~ to ,urchase our property very econ, we would not worry, but none o; u~ knos~r' not marry yeax°s it wi11 be beSOre mon©y is actually available to-buy our grt-gerty for public us®. Your:. vez~y truly, .. -. ., :~.~:. . _.L.., ... _ .. . i ;. ~. .. c.•r::~.1~.