sr-022812-4a"_
City of City Council Report
Santa Meaiea
City Council Meeting: February 28, 2012
Agenda Item: -°�
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Andy Agle, Director of Housing and Economic Development
Subject: Housing Needs Study Session
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council review and provide direction on issues relating
to the continued provision of housing in Santa Monica, including direction on the policy
issues and trade -offs identified in the report.
Executive Summary
This study session report is intended to provide the City Council with current information
about housing in Santa Monica, including existing resources, current needs, and trends.
This report also suggests key policy considerations related to housing in Santa Monica,
including desirable typologies for future housing, moderate - income housing needs, and
affordable housing as a community benefit of development.
Background
For many decades, a majority of Santa Monica residents have resided in small
households in rental housing. With the adoption of rent control in 1979, a large portion
of Santa Monica's rental housing stock was affordable to people with a diversity of
incomes. Since the implementation of state - mandated vacancy decontrol in 1999, over
sixty percent of rent - controlled apartments have been rented at stabilized market rates.
In addition to rent control, Santa Monica has an extensive history that prioritizes
affordable housing to preserve and promote a diverse and sustainable community.
Residents have affirmed this priority in local voter - approved initiatives, such as
Proposition R (1990), requiring that 30 percent of all new multifamily housing be
affordable, and Proposition 1 (1998), authorizing the City to participate financially in
creating affordable housing equal to one -half of one percent of the housing stock
annually (approximately 250 residences). A third local initiative, the Tenant Ownership
1
Rights Charter Amendment (TORCA; 2002), directed that condominium conversion fees
be used for affordable housing. City Council has further facilitated affordable housing
through adoption of land use incentives and administrative funding guidelines to
streamline affordable housing production and preservation, based on a policy
foundation supporting affordable housing in the General Plan Land Use and Housing
Elements. The Land Use Element also identifies affordable housing as a primary
community benefit in new development. The Affordable Housing Production Program
(AHPP) requires developers of multi - family housing to contribute to affordable housing
production through a flexible framework to help the City meet its affordable housing
goals. Finally, City Council has approved a local preference policy that prioritizes
affordable housing opportunities for Santa Monica residents and workers.
Demographic Trends
Demographic information for Santa Monica indicates the population is aging somewhat
and becoming more affluent. From 1990 to 2010, census data indicates that the median
age increased from 37.9 to 40.4 years, much higher than the Los Angeles County
median age (30.7 to 34.8, respectively). Also, while the young adult (25 -44 years)
population is decreasing, the middle age (45 -64 years) population is increasing (other
age groups, such as school age, college age and seniors are fairly stable).
The average household size of 1.8 persons has remained constant since 1990. Median
household income rose from $36,000 to $68,842 between 1990 and 2010. Adjusted for
inflation (70 percent inflation since 1990), the 1990 median income would be $61,200,
demonstrating moderate real growth (approximately 12.5 percent over 20 years) in
median incomes. Seniors represent 15 percent of current Santa Monica residents and
16 percent of current residents are persons living with disabilities.
Housing Stock
According to the 2010 census, there are a total of 50,912 housing units in Santa
Monica, of which 71 percent are in multifamily buildings. The American Community
Survey provides further information about the type of multifamily rental units in Santa
Monica, as follows:
2
Multifamily Housing
# of Bedrooms
Units
Studio
10%
One Bedroom
47%
Two Bedrooms
35%
Three or More Bedrooms
8%
Comparing the housing stock to Santa Monica's demographic information shows a
predominance of smaller households and multifamily residences of two bedrooms or
fewer to accommodate the smaller households.
Regarding affordable housing, there are currently 3,764 residences specifically
affordable for very low -, low -, and moderate - income households (seven percent of
multifamily units), with 675 more in the pipeline (either in construction or with zoning
approvals) for a total of 4,439 residences. Forty -five percent of the existing and pipeline
residences are for very low- income households, 36 percent for low- income households
and 19 percent for moderate - income households. More than two- thirds of these are
zero - bedroom and one - bedroom apartments, with the balance comprising mostly two -
bedroom apartments. The following tables summarize the portfolio of affordable housing
in Santa Monica:
Affordable Housing Stock Characteristics
Table 1 Table 2
Income Level
Unit Size
Very Low
Low
Moderate;
0 -Bdrm`
1 =Bdrm
2 -Bdrm
3 -Bdrm
4 -Bdrm'
45%
36%
19%
23%
46%
20%
1 11%
0 %*
Less than %z of 1%
The 4,439 affordable residences (completed and in pipeline) are generated through
public subsidies, regulatory approaches (such as the AHPP), or development
agreements. Approximately two- thirds of these received City financing and were
developed by nonprofit housing organizations, while the other one -third was built by for-
3
profit developers in concert with the development of market -rate housing. Recently,
several for - profit buildings have been constructed with studio apartments targeted to
moderate - income households ($60,000- $68,000 per year for one- to two - person
households) with rents of approximately $1,495 per month.
Rental Assistance Programs
Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, Shelter Plus Care vouchers, and HOME Tenant -
Based Rental Assistance vouchers are an important means by which affordable rental
housing is made available in Santa Monica. The City's Housing Authority currently
administers more than 1,400 vouchers that are funded primarily by the federal
government, with 82 of the vouchers dedicated to low- income seniors and previously
funded by redevelopment tax increment. Included in the 1,400 vouchers administered
by the Housing Authority are also vouchers specifically for formerly homeless and
special needs households. Each voucher provides direct rental payment assistance to
fill the gap between what a tenant can afford to pay and the actual rent charged. A
major challenge of the voucher program is that participants must find landlords willing to
accept the voucher program's allowable rent payment maximums (established by
household size and unit size). Unfortunately, market rents in Santa Monica typically
exceed the allowed payment maximums. This situation limits the opportunities for
program participants, other than in deed - restricted affordable housing which is already
subject to rent limits. In this instance, renting to a voucher household may be financially
advantageous if the payment standard is higher than the deed - restricted rent limit.
Approximately 300 rental voucher households are currently residing in buildings that are
also deed - restricted as affordable housing.
SCAG Determination of Housing Needs
Housing need is also projected by the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG) and through the periodic Regional Housing Needs Allocation process (RHNA).
Through the RHNA process, SCAG distributes regional housing demand among all
cities within its jurisdiction, in the categories of very-low, low -, moderate -, and above-
moderate - income housing. These housing targets must be addressed in each city's
4
Housing Element, and the next required update is due in 2013. SCAG's draft housing
need allocation for Santa Monica currently circulating for public comment indicates that
Santa Monica should demonstrate adequate sites to accommodate 1,674 housing units
during the next Housing Element cycle (2014- 2021), with 691 of these affordable to very
low- and low- income households.
Housing Pipeline
Exhibit A lists housing developments that are in construction, have received approvals,
or are in the planning stages in Santa Monica. Recognizing that all currently proposed
projects may not ultimately be built, the data demonstrates general trends regarding
affordable and market -rate housing planned for Santa Monica. The data shows
development proposals involving more than 2,600 proposed residences, in addition to
nearly 1,000 residences that are under construction and another 381 residences that
have been approved for development. The bedroom breakdown of pipeline housing is
summarized below. As several of the pipeline projects are in preliminary stages and
have yet to define the exact number of residences and associated bedrooms, their
bedroom make -up is not included in the percentages.
The pipeline data shows that housing that is under construction will provide a greater
percentage of three - bedroom units and fewer studios and one - bedroom units relative to
Santa Monica's current multifamily housing stock. The "under construction" numbers
are likely skewed by the Civic Center Village and four low- income residential
9
Pipeline Residential Development
Number of
Bedrooms
Units
0
1
2
3
Under Construction
963
7%
36%
38%
18%
Approved
381
24%
34%
37%
6%
Pending Approvals
2650
30%
44%
23%
2%
TOTAL
3994
23%
44%
23%
2%
The pipeline data shows that housing that is under construction will provide a greater
percentage of three - bedroom units and fewer studios and one - bedroom units relative to
Santa Monica's current multifamily housing stock. The "under construction" numbers
are likely skewed by the Civic Center Village and four low- income residential
9
developments which emphasize family housing. Overall, the residential pipeline shows
a higher percentage of studios and a lower percentage of two- and three - bedroom units
relative to Santa Monica's current multifamily housing stock.
Home Ownership
Home ownership in Santa Monica is out of reach for low -and moderate - income
households. Over the last nine months, the median condominium sales price in Santa
Monica was $674,080 and the median single - family sales price was $1,368,500. Down
payment requirements, credit ratings, and homeowner association dues pose additional
barriers to ownership for families of limited means. While the prolonged recession
caused some reduction in median sales prices in Santa Monica, the decline has
generally not been large enough to make home ownership affordable to low -and
moderate - income families. Even households whose incomes exceed moderate - income
standards can have difficulty affording home ownership in Santa Monica. Purchasing
the median - priced condominium would require a down - payment of nearly $135,000 and
an annual household income of approximately $125,000, or approximately 145 percent
of the area median income. Purchasing the median - priced single - family home would
require a down - payment of over $270,000 and an annual household income of
approximately $275,000, or approximately 320 percent of the area median income for a
family of four.
Foreclosure
The Los Angeles County Assessor reported that in Fiscal Year 2011/12, one percent of
all housing units in Santa Monica completed the foreclosure process. Comparing July
2010 to July 2011, notices of default declined by 20 percent, the number of notices of
trustee sales declined by 37 percent, and real estate owned by the lender declined
by 56 percent. While the data indicates declining foreclosures in Santa Monica, the
overall numbers are small. For example, in July 2011, a total of 12 foreclosures were
filed.
A
Market -Rate Rental Housing
A large portion of market -rate rental housing is currently affordable to moderate - income
households as evidenced by the 2011 Rent Control Board's Annual Report. The report
indicates that median rents for zero- bedroom and one - bedroom apartments are at
levels affordable to moderate - income households ($85,400 for a four - person household;
2011). However, median rent for two - bedroom apartments is slightly above the
moderate - income affordability level and three - bedroom median rents are priced
considerably above the moderate - income affordability level. The following table
illustrates the 2011 market -rate median rents and rent levels affordable to moderate
income households:
Market Rents and fAffordability
Unit Type
Market Rent
(2011)
Affordable; Rent —
Moderate Income
0- Bedroom
$1,240
$1,495
1- Bedroom
$1,595
$1,708
2- Bedroom
$2,150
$2,028
3- Bedroom
$2,850
$2,316
Demand for Affordable Housing
Specific data on incomes, associated housing costs, and household size for all persons
that live or work in Santa Monica would precisely identify the need for housing, but such
data is not readily available. However, a good proxy of current demand for affordable
housing is found in the recent affordable housing waiting list established in late 2011 by
the Housing Authority. Out of more than 33,000 applicants who completed online
applications during a two -day enrollment period, 3,370 applicants either live or work in
Santa Monica and will therefore receive a priority ('local preference') for affordable
housing opportunities. Ninety -five percent of the applicants who live or work in Santa
Monica have incomes considered extremely low or very low- income. Significant portions
of the 3,370 applicants are seniors (25 %), disabled persons (33 %) and persons
experiencing homelessness (10 %), although these are not mutually exclusive groups.
7
For reference, 2011 income categories for various size households are shown in the
following table:
Table 3
Household Income Categories
Household
Size
Extremely
tow 30%
Very Low
50%
Low (80 %) ;
1
$17,950
$29,900
$47,850
2
$20,500
$34,200
$54,650
3
$23,050
$38,450
$61,500
4
$25,600
$42,700
$68,300
5
$27,650
$46,150
$73,800
6
$29,700
$49,550
$79,250
Seventy -eight percent of waiting list applicants are one- to two- person households at
extremely low- or very low- income levels. The remaining households on the waiting list
are also mostly extremely low- and very low- income, but are larger households with
three or more persons. Less than one percent of the waiting list applicants are
moderate - income households, while another one percent have incomes above the
moderate - income level. The following table summarizes the waiting list demographics
with respect to income level and household size for applicants who live or work in Santa
Monica:
Table 4
Waiting List Demographics
OVERALL
52%
15%
6%
4%
2%
7%
4%
2%
1%
0.4%
2%
1%
0.4%
0.2%
n/a
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.2%
0.7%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
E
100%
The following three tables summarize the waitlist information among seniors, people
with disabilities and homeless people:
Table 5
Waiting List Demographics
SENIORS (25% OF TOTAL
11% 4% 1% 0.5%
2% 1% 1% n/a
Table 6
Waiting List Demographics
DISABLED PERSONS (33% OF TOTAL)
6% 2% 1%
1% 0% 0.2%
0.2%
n/a
Table 7
Waiting List Demographics
HOMELESS PERSONS (10% OF TOTAL)
0.1%
n/a
0.1%
n/a
1% 1% 1% n/a 1%
0.3% n/a n/a n/a n/a
100%
100%
100%
Current Affordable Housing Programs and Policies
The City's approach to providing affordable housing involves direct funding of affordable
housing as well as requiring or negotiating consideration of affordable housing needs as
part of larger developments. Existing policies do not necessarily address all affordable
9
housing needs. For example, the AHPP does not require 'extremely low income' units
and generally requires two- bedroom units because of the requirement that affordable
units be comparable in size to the associated market -rate units. The Office Mitigation
Fee program excludes creative office space, a popular development trend in Santa
Monica that brings jobs and increases the demand for housing. The following table
describes the affordable housing programs associated with various types of
development.
Santa Monica nonprofit affordable housing developments have been successful in
competitive funding applications. They also receive significant subsidy from City
Housing Trust Funds, which have recently averaged $285,000 per housing unit.
The largest source of the City's Housing Trust Fund had been redevelopment tax
increment which represented 75 percent of the City's housing trust funds (approximately
$100 million over the last 10 years). Other revenue sources include:
• Developer fees - $250,000 to $1.5 million annually over the last decade
• Condominium conversion fees — insignificant amounts over last several years
• Community Development Block Grant - approximately $1.2 million annually; used
primarily for non - housing activities
10
Development
Type
Affordable
Housing
Affordable Housing Production Program
required multifamily development to
Market -rate multifamily housing
contribute to affordable housing production.
Housing Trust Funds are invested by the
Low - income multifamily housing
City; redevelopment was primary source.
Zoning incentives are provided for the
Moderate - income multifamily housing
production of 100 percent affordable
housing.
Office Mitigation Fee Program collects a
General office space (excl. creative
fee that is applied toward affordable
space)
housing and parks.
All other development (e.g. hotel, retail,
No policy currently exists.
office other than general office
Affordable housing is negotiated as part of
Development Agreement
the development agreement.
Santa Monica nonprofit affordable housing developments have been successful in
competitive funding applications. They also receive significant subsidy from City
Housing Trust Funds, which have recently averaged $285,000 per housing unit.
The largest source of the City's Housing Trust Fund had been redevelopment tax
increment which represented 75 percent of the City's housing trust funds (approximately
$100 million over the last 10 years). Other revenue sources include:
• Developer fees - $250,000 to $1.5 million annually over the last decade
• Condominium conversion fees — insignificant amounts over last several years
• Community Development Block Grant - approximately $1.2 million annually; used
primarily for non - housing activities
10
• HOME Investment Partnerships Program - decreased by 20 percent over the last
several years; approximately $700,000 per year; used primarily for rental housing
vouchers.
Locally controlled funding has leveraged State funding, private tax - credit investor equity
and bank loans. However, the recent dissolution of redevelopment agencies in
California has eliminated Santa Monica's primary revenue source for affordable
housing. State funding from voter - approved bonds is also largely exhausted.
Discussion
Market -Rate Housing Typology
Santa Monica is an extremely desirable place to live. As a result, the demand for
housing far exceeds supply, making ownership and rental housing prices much higher
than regional averages. As a result of the unmet demand, strong housing values, and
high barriers to entry, the City continues to receive proposals to create new housing.
The City has a solid policy basis for allowing the continued production of all types of
housing in Santa Monica, including SCAG targets, the need to provide housing options
for Santa Monica residents as household needs change, and a desire to create housing
to meet the needs of the many workers employed in Santa Monica.
One critical question is what types of future housing would serve the needs of Santa
Monica residents and workers. Nationally, the 2010 Census found that less than 30
percent of households are families with children. Traditionally, many Americans have
considered the single - family house to be the most appropriate place for families with
children. With 29 percent of all Santa Monica housing in single - family dwelling units,
the availability of housing for families with children matches national trends. Of course,
not all single - family homes are occupied by families with children and many such
families live in multifamily housing. Additionally, it is unlikely that many new single -
family homes will be created in Santa Monica, given that most opportunities for new
residential development occur in Santa Monica's commercial districts.
11
A critical question then becomes what type of multifamily housing will serve the needs
of Santa Monica's current and future households. Santa Monica's average household
size of 1.8 people is well below the national average of 2.6, indicating smaller
households. For market -rate housing, the City could prioritize larger units in order to
attempt to increase the number of families with children in Santa Monica, though there
is no guarantee that larger units will be occupied by families with children. Alternatively,
the City could prioritize smaller units that reflect Santa Monica's current demographics.
A third course is to prioritize a mix of unit sizes in order to create housing for a variety of
current and future Santa Monica households. Finally, the City could let the private
market dictate what type of market -rate housing should be built.
An additional market -rate housing consideration is neighborhood stability. Even with a
majority of its housing stock in rental apartments, Santa Monica has enjoyed noteworthy
neighborhood stability as a result of rent control. Rent control has allowed many
residents to stay in their apartments for decades and become invested in their
neighborhoods. A concern is that newer market -rate apartments, which are not subject
to rent control, do not experience the same type of long -term residency. Owners of
newer apartment buildings explain that average tenancies are less than two years.
Greater turn -over may be caused by the high rents commanded by newer apartments,
the potential for significant rent increases in non - controlled apartments, and the fact that
monthly rents can be comparable to mortgage payments or rents for larger, older
apartments. Such transiency of the residential population makes it difficult to establish
residential stakeholders who have a sense of ownership in the community and who can
participate in community activities, such as neighborhood watch and other
neighborhood groups. The concern is particular acute in Downtown Santa Monica,
where approximately 2,000 rental apartments have been built in the last decade, while
only one condominium building has been built and another has received approvals. The
current lending environment makes it very difficult to secure financing for condominium
development. However, once the lending environment improves, Council may wish to
consider planning and entitlement mechanisms to support the creation of home
12
ownership opportunities in neighborhoods that are largely composed of market -rate
apartments without rent - control protections.
Affordable Housing Typology
The mismatch between supply and demand is particularly acute for low- income
households who are unable to afford market -rate housing. For example, the vacancy
rate in affordable residences is consistently around two percent; vacancies are rare and
quickly filled. Additionally, a total of four percent of all housing vouchers turn over
annually, which provides few opportunities for those on the waiting list. The vacancy
rates reflect a great demand for affordable housing, especially among the most
vulnerable populations (seniors, people with disabilities, and people experiencing
homelessness). As a result, opportunities for affordable housing resulting from available
vacancies or voucher turn -over are minimal.
If the affordable housing waiting list is representative of the overall community's
affordable housing needs, it indicates a need for deep affordability levels and smaller
apartment sizes to accommodate the needs of low- income Santa Monica residents and
workers seeking affordable housing. If the waiting list is not representative, it does
indicate, nonetheless, that over 3,000 Santa Monica resident and worker households
are seeking affordable housing in Santa Monica and need deep affordability and smaller
units to meet their needs.
Affordable Housing Typology in Private Development
Currently, the AHPP requires unit sizes and bedrooms of affordable housing to
generally match the unit sizes and bedrooms of the associated market -rate housing.
While such an approach helps ensure an element of equity between the affordable and
market -rate housing, it may not best serve the needs of low- income resident and worker
households. According to available data, low- income resident and worker households
who are seeking affordable housing could be accommodated by smaller units.
To address these needs, an alternative AHPP approach could promote a larger number
13
of smaller units, rather than fewer, larger units, to serve a greater number of needy
households. Council could also consider the provision of apartments that are affordable
to extremely low- income households as satisfying greater needs than a larger number
of apartments that are affordable to households with higher incomes. While making
such changes to the AHPP would require additional studies and analyses, Council could
consider endorsing such an approach in upcoming development agreement
considerations.
Entitlement Incentives
Downtown Santa Monica provides a case study in using entitlement incentives to
produce housing, particularly affordable housing. The zoning code allowed certain
residential developments that provided on -site or off -site housing pursuant to AHPP
requirements to be approved administratively. Under the zoning allowances, thousands
of apartments, and hundreds of affordable apartments, were constructed. Until a new
Downtown Specific Plan is adopted, most downtown development triggers the
requirement for a development agreement. In order to support the creation of
affordable housing, Council could consider providing entitlement incentives for housing
developments that provide far more affordable housing than required by the AHPP.
Providing entitlement incentives such as administrative approvals for housing
developments that meet certain affordable housing goals would run counter to the
desire for more public input in the development process. While Architectural Review
Board approval is required of administratively approved development, administrative
approval does not include the Planning Commission review associated with
development review permits or the Planning Commission and Council review
associated with development agreements.
Workforce Housing
There is general agreement about the need for housing that serves the needs of all
Santa Monica residents and workers. The LUCE identifies the construction of additional
affordable and workforce housing above current regulatory requirements as a
14
community benefit. Several current development agreement proposals are considering
this option. However, there are currently no adopted requirements for workforce
housing, which generally targets households earning up to 180 percent of the area
median income (approximately $154,000). Discussion of workforce housing has
generally focused on opportunities to address the housing needs of Santa Monica
residents and workers whose incomes do not qualify them for existing affordable
programs but who may struggle, nonetheless, to afford housing in Santa Monica.
Given that market -rate apartment rents do not differ significantly from moderate - income
rents, community benefits associated with creating apartments that are affordable to
moderate - income households (or households with incomes above the moderate - income
level) are questionable. There could be some community benefit associated with
providing three - bedroom or larger apartments that are affordable to moderate - income
households, though the data is unclear as to whether there are significant numbers of
moderate - income households searching for such housing.
Unlike rental opportunities, there may be workforce housing benefits associated with
creating ownership housing for moderate - income and above - moderate - income
households who work or live in Santa Monica. Households with these incomes
generally are unable to afford market -rate condominiums in Santa Monica.
As evidenced by the difficulty in securing financing for moderate - income condominiums
that were originally proposed for High Place East, the creation of such workforce
housing may be difficult.
Housing Locational Issues
The Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan set forth a framework for
allowing additional development to occur in a few select locations that are well - served
by transit and other infrastructure. The attributes that are favorable for all development
types are also favorable for housing development. In particular, the development of
three Exposition light rail stations in Santa Monica provides an outstanding opportunity
15
to provide excellent transit access for nearby residents. The LUCE encourages new
housing resources in complete neighborhoods near the new stations, generally in
locations where residential development was previously not allowed. It is critical that
new development near the stations include a significant component of affordable
housing. This is especially important because low- income people tend to be more
frequent users of transit and because the City's largest funding source for affordable
housing, redevelopment tax increment, is no longer available.
Primacy of Affordable Housing as a Community Benefit
The dissolution of redevelopment funding for affordable housing means the City's
primary new affordable housing pipeline may be housing built by for - profit developers as
a part of larger developments. The LUCE identifies affordable housing as a primary
community benefit. Council may wish to refine or expand this direction to ensure that
community diversity continues to be addressed.
Council may also wish to consider whether affordable housing should be provided by all
new development. Traditionally, affordable housing has been provided in concert with
market -rate housing. However, other development types, including hotels, retail,
creative office and general office, generate demand for affordable housing. Given the
variety of development agreements that Council will consider in the coming months and
years (see Attachment B), negotiating the provision of affordable housing as part of
commercial developments would provide Santa Monica with additional tools to address
affordable housing needs. The City could also prepare a nexus study to ascertain the
link between commercial development and affordable housing in order to address
affordable housing needs in developments that are subject to development review
permits.
Other Funding Sources
Affordable housing funding sources available to the City are small compared to what
was available through redevelopment tax increment. Leaders in Sacramento have
UP
committed to finding a new funding source. However, given the gridlock and financial
problems in Sacramento, it is unclear that a viable solution is readily available. If the
state government is unable to develop a long -term affordable housing funding solution
in the coming months, Council may wish to consider opportunities to develop a local
funding source, such as a tax or fee, that could be used to support affordable housing.
Ground -Floor Housing
Approximately one -third of the Santa Monica residents and workers on the affordable
housing wait list are people with disabilities. Many are people with mobility
impairments, who have expressed a need to reside in ground -floor housing in order to
access exits more easily in an emergency. In reviewing future development proposals,
Council may wish to consider ground -floor approaches that create engaging, sidewalk -
oriented storefronts without preventing opportunities to create access for people with
mobility impairments.
Commission Action
The Housing Commission discussed the study session information at its
February 16, 2012 meeting. The Commission was generally supportive of various
approaches to continue to support affordable housing. One Commissioner expressed
concern about efforts focused primarily on the production of smaller affordable housing
units rather than family housing, even though the data reflects the greatest need for
smaller units. The Commission recommended that studios and one - bedroom
apartments be well- designed to maximize livability for their residents.
Summary of Key Issues
This staff report covers a variety of important issues related to multifamily housing in
Santa Monica's future. Given the many development agreements that the City will
consider in the coming months, staff has prioritized the need for Council direction on the
following policy issues:
Should rental apartments that are affordable to moderate - income households be
considered a community benefit?
17
• Should affordable housing community benefits be targeted toward smaller units that
serve extremely low- and low- income households that make up the large majority of
the Santa Monica residents and workers seeking affordable housing?
• Should affordable housing be negotiated as a community benefit associated with
commercial development? If so, should staff begin to lay the groundwork for a
nexus study between commercial development and affordable housing?
• Should entitlement incentives be used to promote affordable housing development,
even if it means fewer opportunities for public participation?
• If workforce housing is proposed as a community benefit, should it be targeted
toward ownership opportunities?
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There are no financial impacts associated with conducting the study session. If Council
wishes to implement new programs or practices, staff will return with an evaluation of
resource implications.
Prepared by: Jim Kemper, Housing Administrator
Andy Agle, Director /
Housing and Economic Development
Attachments:
Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould
City Manager
A. Residences in Construction, Approved, or Proposed (as of February 22, 2012)
B. Planning Commission Caselist (as of February 16, 2012)
IN
ATTACHMENT A
Residences in Construction, Approved, or Proposed (as of February 22, 2012)
PROJECT # of Units
Number of Bedrooms
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Studio
1
2
3
4
Civic Center Village 318
0
88
147
83
0
High Place (CCSM) 91
0
0
32
59
0
2802 Pico (CCSM) 33
0
0
23
10
0
6th and Pico (CCSM) 32
0
0
22
10
0
26th and Broadway (CCSM) 33
0
0
21
12
0
1502 Broadway (NMS) 32
19
13
0
D
0
1420 -40 5th Street (NMS) 100
0
361
64
0
0
1427 7th Street (NMS) 50
7
16
27
0
0
Broadway and Lincoln (NMS) 98
12
84
2
0
0
Broadway and 9th (NMS) 98
32
66
0
0
0
Mayfair 38
0
21
17
0
0
519 Santa Monica Blvd 40
0
25
15
0
0
TOTAL 963
70
349
3701
174
0
APPROVED
Studio
1
2
3
4
401 Broadway 56
48
8
0
0
0
7th and Arizona 106
22
71
13
0
0
301 Ocean 20
0
0
5
14
1
525 Broadway 125
4
49
72
0
0
_ _
711 Colorado 26
11
0
15
0
0
15147th Street 26
6
0
20
0
0
3214 -3218 Highland Avenue 6
01
01
1
51
0
2323 28th Street 8
0
0
8
0
0
2438 Ocean Park Avenue 2
0
0
0
2
0
1518 11th Street 6
0
0
6
0
0
TOTAL 381
91
128
140
21
1
PENDING APPROVAL
Studio
1
2
3
4
Papermate 325
TED --- >
Village Trailer Park 481
2071
1981
761
0
0
Roberts Center * see note 169
48
80
23
0
0
Pasco Nebraska (NMS) 545
175
175
175
20
0
1802 Santa Monica 26
24
2
0
0
0
2901 Santa Monica (NMS) 50
0!
40
8
2
0
3402 Pico 300
771
139
68
16
0
1318 2nd Street 56
281
28
0
0
0
1443 Lincoln (NMS) 100
TBD - - ->
1650 Lincoln (NMS)
0
75
15
0
0
_ __90
1660 Lincoln (NMS) 82
1
61
20
01
0
1415- 335th(NMS) 200
TED --- >
1547 7th (NMS) 40
TBD - - ->
Miramar 120
TED --- >
2300 Wilshire 30
0
7
23
0
0
2919 Wilshire 26
0
6
13
7
0
1803 16th Street 10
0
5
5
0
0
_
*also has 18live /work units
TOTAL 2650
560
816
426
45
0
GRAND TOTAL
1 3994
721
1293
9361
240
1
ATTACHMENT B
Planning Commission Caselist*
List Prepared as of: February 16, 2012
* this list includes all discretionary applications that will require a public hearing by the Planning
Commission. Also listed are Development Agreement float -up discussions where an application has not
yet been formally submitted.
Tentative Hearing
Date
Project
Applicant
Planner
fCommercial Proiects
TA 05 -003, VAR 05 -011
David Forbes Hlbbert,
401 Wilshire Boulevard
AIA, Contact
310 - 394 -4045
To Allow Continued Use of 4800 sf Storage
Area on 4th Level of Subterranean Garage.
Douglas Emmett,
Applicant 310 - 255 -7700
Filed 4/14/2005
CUP 06 -020, DR 06 -019, TA 06 -007
(T. Kim)
1131 Arizona Avenue
Pending
Jeoung & II Hie Lee,
New 3- Story, Skilled Nursing Facility w/48 Beds
Applicants
Environmental Review
& 27 Parking Spaces to Replace Existing 1-
Community Meeting:
Story Facility. TA to Amend SMMC Sec.
1210112009; 31112011
9.04.08.06.060 & 9.04.08.06.070.
Filed 11/14/2006
Float -UP: 3/2312011
CUP 11 -010,
VAR 11 -023
3/21/2012
2800 Wilshire Boulevard
Fresh &Easy
Neighborhood Market,
(R. Bunim)
Remodel Existing 12,947sf Retail Store to new
Linda Haynes,
Market w/ Type 21 Alcohol License. Variance
Applicant
pp
Community Meeting:
for Parking: Site is Deficient 10 Stalls; 11
Bicycle Racks are Proposed.
31112012
Filed 11/08/2011
Fernando Martin,
FCUP,1
Applicant Howard
2/15/2012, Cont. to
Robinson, Contact 310-
2/22/2012
828 -0180
1654 Ocean Avenue
(R. Bunim)
Type 47 Alcohol License for New 1521 sf
Restaurant "Casa Martin" in the RVC District.
Filed 12/08/2011
CUP 12 -001 ---- - - - - -— –_ � _
Mani Brothers Portfino
1401 Ocean Avenue
Plaza LLC, Applicant
Proposed Restaurant w/ Type 47 Alcohol
Kevin Kozel, Contact
(S. Mizokami)
License & Request for Parking Variance.
310- 393 -1007
Filed 1/24/2012
RESIDENTIAL & MIXED -USE PROJECTS
DCP 03 -013,
TM 03 -014
3/21/2012
1803 -1807 Sixteenth Street
(L. Yegazu)
Steven W. Stapakis
11 -Unit Condominium, Townhouse - Style, 2-
949- 500 -3427
Pending
story w/ "tuck- under" parking below grade (25
Environmental Review
spaces) in 15,000 sf total.
Modification To
Project
Filed 9/10/2003
TM 05 -009, VAR 05 -010 [TTM #54420]
1211 Twelfth Street
(R. Bunim)
E -Ho Lin, Contact
15 -Unit Condominium w/ Semi - Subterranean
Turtle Sunset Villas LP
310- 478 -6873
Pending
Parking.
Environmental Review
Filed 3/31/2005, 4/14/2005
DR 06 -007 & TM 06 -021
[VTTM #66625]
(S. Mizokami)
Park Virginia, LLC,
2002 -2018 Twenty -First Street
Applicant
Pending
Farhad Ashofteh,
Environmental Review
19 -Unit Townhouse -Style Condominium w/ 42
Contact
Parking Spaces in Subterranean Garage.
310 - 399 -9995
Community Meeting:
11/18/2010
Filed 7/1212006 [TM] & 7118/2006 [DR]
DR 06 -012, DCP 06 -012, TM 06 -027 [VTTM
PLUS Architects,
NOTE: EIR Process
#67005]
Shahab Ghods, Contact
Suspended per
310- 478 -0439
Applicant.
1639 Eleventh Street
Pacifica Equities LLC,
(G. Page)
66 -Unit Artist Lofts in 3- Stories Over 2- Levels of
Property Owner
Subterranean Parking (147 Parking Spaces) in
Pending
M -1 District.
Environmental Review
Total 54,058sf
Community Meeting:
Filed 9/12/2006
111212009
DR 06 -020, DCP 06 -009, TM 06 -034 ]VTTM
3/21/2012
#68096]
Danny Soroudi,
2300 -2320 Wilshire Boulevard
Maxxam Enterprises,
(G. Page)
Applicant
New Mixed -Use Building, 3- Stories w/ 24,910sf
Draft EIR Released
Ground Floor Commercial; 35,990sf (30 -Unit
Roberto Moreno,
912912011; Comments
Condominium) on 2nd & 3rd Floors w/ 2- Levels
Contact Moule &
Due 1111212011
of Subterran -ean Parking.
Polyzoides, Architects
626 -844 -2400
Community Meeting:
Filed 11/30/2006
31312011; 10/1112011
TM 06 -048 [VTTM #68473]
Harvey Goodman, C.E.,
1134 Euclid Street
Contact
(G. Szilak)
310- 829 -1037
6 -Unit Condominium w/ Moderate Income Unit
Pending Changes to
Over Subterranean Garage.
Khadijeh Momtaz,
Parking & Affordable
Applicant/Property
Housing Requirement.
Owner
Filed 12/28/2006
TM 09- 002___ -_
[VTPM #68198]
927 -929 Lincoln Boulevard
Ali Sharifi,
Applicant Harvey
(S. Albright)
Relocation of Existing Historic Bungalow On-
Goodman, Contact 310 -
Site & Construction of 3 Condominium Units w/
829 -1037
Semi - Subterranean Parking.
Filed 3/19/2009
TM 09 -003 [TPM #71063]
1047 Ninth Street
Camille Zeitouny,
Proposed 3 -Unit Condominium 2- Stories w/
Applicant
(C. Townes)
Subterranean Parking (6 Parking Spaces) in
626 -581 -7899
7004sf total.
Filed 4123/2009
TM 11 -004
[TTM #715151
1533 Eleventh Street
Shokrollah M. Jahromi,
Applicant 310 - 678 -2543
(D. Banks)
5 -Unit Condominium, 2 -Story w/ Mezzanine &
Subterranean parking.
Filed 8/11/2011
DR 11 -003
17th Street Villas, LLC,
1041 -1047 Seventeenth Street
Applicant
4/18/2012
Extension Request for 3 Years for DR 09 -002.
Kevin V. Kozal, Contact
(G. Szilak)
310 - 451 -4138
Filed 9/29/2011
DR 11 -004
1453 Third Street Promenade
Promenade Gateway,
LP, Applicant
4/18/2012
Modify DR #374 to Add a New Condition
Requiring the Public Passageway to Remain
Howard Robinson,
(L. Yegazu)
Open to the Public from 7:OOAM to Midnight
Contact 310 - 838 -0180
Daily.
Filed 12/13/2011
FPeVe[OplTtent Agreements [Pending & Filed]
e
�
—��
(J. Yeo)
DEV 07 -005
Float -Up: Review by
2930 Colorado Avenue
PC 811612007;
Forwarded
Proposed LEED - Certified Mixed -Use
Recommendation to
Development on 3.85 acres: 240 Condominiums
City Council to Begin
Units, 109 Apartment Units (Low- Income &
DA Process.
SRO), in approximately 181,800 sf w/
Village Trailer Park LLC
Commercial (40,030sf) & Retail Space
Mark. L. Luzzatto,
NOP for EIR Released
(8,030sf); 503 Parking Spaces in 1 -Level
Contact 310 - 261 -8777
6/10/2010
Subterranean Garage & At -Grade Covered &
Uncovered Parking. TOTAL SF: 229,860sf. Also
NOA for DEIR:
Requesting Zone Change from R -MH
Released 10/14/2011,
(Residential - Mobile Home) District to LMSD
Comments Due
(Light Manufacturing & Studio District).
11/28/2011
Filed 6/25/2007
DEV 07 -006
710 Wilshire Boulevard (& associated
addresses: 718 Wilshire Boulevard, 1213 -33
Seventh Street)
1/25/2012, Continued for
Design Changes to
Proposed hotel & mixed -use project located on
2/15/2012
8 lots fronting on Wilshire Boulevard, Seventh
Street and Lincoln Boulevard. The proposed
Forwarded
project includes 2 potential development
Recommendation to
scenarios. The first scenario ( "Development
City Council to
Scenario 1 ") would involve construction of a
Approve DA.
285 -room hotel & 16,421 sf retail/ restaurant
Maxser & Company,
project, including adaptive reuse of an existing
Ltd., Applicant
(J. Yeo)
Landmark building structure (Santa Monica
Professional Building), & a separate mixed -use
Ken Kutcher, Attorney,
Float -Un Hearing:
24 -unit residential building w/ 1,600sf of ground
Contact 310 - 441 -3669
009 Forwarded
floor retail on a separate lot across 7th Court
Recommendation to
Reco
alley w/ frontage on Lincoln Boulevard. The
Howard Laks, AIA,
City Council to Begin
hotel & retail/ restaurant project would occupy
Architect 310 - 393 -4455
DA Process.
the lots currently addressed as 710 Wilshire
Boulevard, 718 Wilshire Boulevard and 1213-
1233 7th Street. The mixed -use building would
City Council Float -LID:
May 25, 2010
occupy an adjacent lot addressed as 1218
Lincoln Boulevard. The second scenario
( "Development Scenario 2 ") would involve the
NOA for DEIR
development of the same hotel & retail/
Comments Due
restaurant project components of the first
9/1/2011
scenario, but would not include the development
of the mixed -use residential building.
Filed 7/2412007
DEV 09 -001
1802 Santa Monica Boulevard
(S. Mizokami)
[1407 & 1413 18th Street]
Plus Architects,
Float-Up Hearing:
3- Story, Mixed -Use Building w/ 32 Residential
Applicant
211612011
Units (8 -Units Workforce Housing - Median
Shahab Ghods, Contact
Recommendation to
Income) & 9400sf Ground Floor Commercial
310 - 478 -6149
Proceed Forwarded to
Space Over 2- Levels Subterranean Parking
City Council to Begin
Garage w/ 95 Parking Spaces. Total Square
DA Process.
Footage: 36,OOOsf
Filed 12/10/2009
Development Agreement DEV 10 -002
Hines 26th Street LLC,
4/25/2012
Applicant
1681 Twenty -Sixth Street (Papermate site)
Colin Shepherd,
(J. Yeo)
Contact 213 -626 -5200
Proposed Mixed -Use Project: Creative Arts
Community Meelings:
Office Space; Ground Floor Commercial
Harding Larmore
(Neighborhood Serving); Housing - Mix of
Kutcher & Kozal LLP
1211512009
Affordable, Workforce & Market -Rate; Ground
310 - 393 -1007
Floor Public Open Space For Community
Float -Up Hearing:
Gathering & Cultural Arts Venue; Street
1/2712010 Forwarded
Improvements - New North /South Street to
Recommendation to
Bisect Site for Vehicle / Bicycle Access; New
City Council to Begin
East/West Street for Service Access on North of
DA Process.
Site; & North /South Pedestrian Access From
Olympic Boulevard Through Site; &
NOP for EIR Released
Subterranean Parking.
11/16/2010
Filed 5/20/2010
DEIR Comments Due..:
3/12/2012
CC Float -UP:
3/22/2011 - CC did not
move this project
forward.
812312011 Council
Meeting #2
DEV 11 -001
(R. Tanemori)
AMC Theater Project
AMC Entertainment,
Community Meeting:
1318 -1320 Fourth Street
Inc. & Metropolitan
Pacific Capital, Inc,
April 12, 2010
Applicant
Construction of an Approximately 63,OOOsf
Float -Up Hearing:
theater Building Which Includes Approximately
Dale Goldsmith,
6/1612010; Cont. to
2,197 Theater Seats; An Approximately 21 00s
Contact Armbruster
7/2112010-
Retail Tenant Space; & An Interior Restaurant
Goldsmith & Delvac
Recommendation to CC
Space That Will Be For Theater Patrons & Also
LLP 310 - 209 -8800
to Being DA Process
Open to the Public; Removal of 324 Existing
Parking Spaces in Parking Structure #3
(Demolish Parking Structure).
City of Santa Monica,
Property Owner
NOP EIR Comments
Filed 1/7/2011
Due 6/112011
DEV 11 -003
(R. Tanemori)
Miramar Hotel Development Agreement
Community Meeting:
Ocean Avenue LLC c/o
613012011
1133 Ocean Avenue (aka: 101 Wilshire
MDS Capital
Boulevard)
Alan Epstein Contact
Proposed Revitalization Includes: Preserving
310 - 458 -3600
Float -Up Hearing:
Morton Bay Fig Tree & Palisades Building;
2/08/2012, Cont. to
Providing Increased Open Space w/ New Plaza
2/22/2012
@ Corner of Wilshire & Ocean; Removing
Surrounding Walls; Replacing 2 Surface Parking
Lots w/ New Retail Shops; Adding Up to 120
For -Sale Condominiums & Affordable Housing
Per Code; Creating 150 New Jobs; Objective to
Obtain LEED Silver Certification for All New
Buildings; & Provide for All Uses (freeing up
100 -150 On- Street Parking Spaces).
Application Submittal
Digital Plans
Filed 4/2011
DEV 11 -004
[Salvation Army Site]
(S. Albright)
1666 Eleventh Street & 1665 Tenth Street
NOI & draft MIND
Howard Laks, AIA,
Released 9/6/2011,
Proposed New 2- Story, 60,800sf Rehabilitation
Applicant & Contact
Comments Due By
Center w/ 1 -Level Subterranean Parking &
310 - 393 -4455
10/5/2011
7,500sf Surface Parking Lot @ 1665 Tenth
Street,
Filed 5/12/2011
DEV 11 -005
4/18/2012
1660 Lincoln Boulevard
DE Architects, Don
Empakeris, AIA as
(G. Page)
Applicant 310-451-7917
82 -Unit, 6 -Story (59 -Ft.) 100% Affordable &
Community Meeting:
Workforce Housing Apartment Complex w/
1660 Lincoln NMS LLC,
111712012
Subterranean Parking & 1500sf Retail space.
Property Owner
Filed 6116/2011
DEV 11 -006 - - -- ---- - - - - --
—
- - - ---
1447 Lincoln Boulevard
Expand the Ground Floor Retail / Residential
Lincoln Studios LLC /
Floor Area from 7000sf to 13,100sf (Comprised
NMS Properties,
3/21/2012
of Additional 4,333sf Retail & 1,767sf
Applicant
Commercial (for Residential Leasing Office), for
(T. Kim)
Total Floor Area Not to Exceed 46,475sf. Initial
Tim Ball, Contact
Project Approval for 97 -Unit, 100% Affordable
310- 593 -4224
Housing Project w/ 3- Levels Subterranean
Parking (Currently Under Construction).
Filed 6/30/2011
DEV 11 -009
OTO Development LLC,
Applicant
501 Colorado Avenue
(S. Mizokami)
Michael Gallen, Contact
Proposed 136 -Room, 5 -Story Hotel w/
310 - 379 -4030
Community Meeting:
Subterranean Parking for Hampton Inn & Suites
1012712011
by Hilton.
Float -Up Hearing:
Filed 7/14/2011
12/14/2011
DEV 11 -010
1554 Fifth Street
OTO Development LLC,
(S. Mizokami)
Applicant
Proposed 136 -Room, 6 -Story Hotel w/
Community Meeting:
Subterranean Parking for Courtyard by Marriot.
Michael Gallen, Contact
1012712011
310- 379 -4030
Filed 7/14/2011
Float -Up Hearing:
12/14/2011
DEV 11 -012 ------ -- �— ._ - - -
--
- - -- —
1548 Sixth Street
LUXE LLC -NMS
Add 4 -Units to Existing 50 -Unit Mixed -Use
Properties, Inc.,
Applicant
5/16/2011
Project. Units will be within Existing Bldg.
Envelope. New FAR: 2.11. Request that Current
Tim Ball, Contact
(R. Bunim)
Parking (102 Spaces) Satisfy Parking
310 - 893 -4224
Requirements.
Filed 7/2612011
DEV 11 -013
NMS Broadway
819 -829 Broadway
Properties, LP.,
Applicant
Expand Ground Floor Retail Space * & Add 1
3/21/2012
SRO Unit to a 97 -Unit, Mixed -Use Affordable
Tim Ball, Contact
Housing Project Currently Under Construction.
310 - 893 -4224
(T. Kim)
*Expansion from 7,OOOsf to 9915sf & Total
Residential SF from 33,375sf to 34,435sf.
Filed 7126/2011
DEV 11 -014
1650 Lincoln Boulevard
4/18/2012
1650 Lincoln MNS,
Proposed 90 -Unit, 6- Story, Mixed -Use Project
LLC., Applicant
Over 2 -Level Subterranean Parking Garage.
(G. Page)
Project Consists of 34 Market -Rate One-
Tim Ball, Contact
Bedroom Units; 56 Affordable Units (22
310 -441 -3700
Community Meeting:
Workforce & 19 Moderate Income Units & 15
111712012
Very -Low Income Two - Bedroom Units) &
1500sf Ground Floor Retail.
Filed 8/30/2011
DEV 11-015
David Forbes Hibbert,
3008 Santa Monica Boulevard
AIA, Applicant
310-394-4045
New 2-Story Office Bldg. w/ Ground Floor Retail
(G. Page)
Over 2-Levels Subterranean Parking (71 Pkg.
Albinas & Vita
Spaces) in 25,21 Osf Total.
Markevicius Trust,
Property Owner
Filed 10/27/2011
DEV 11-016:
Community Meetings:
March 13,2009; May 7,
"Roberts Center"
2009
2848 - 2912 Colorado Avenue
The Roberts
Float-Up Hearina:
Mixed-Use Project: Approx. 300,000sf w/
Companies, Robert
1111012010
Production, Post-Production Studio Space,
Blumenfield, Applicant
Forwarded
Creative Office Space & Ground Floor
Recommendation to
Neighborhood Serving Retail & Restaurant
E.D.D.G. Inc., Contact
CC to Begin DA
Space & Between 169 - 231 Rental Units (Multi-
Sami El Bayar
Process.
Family housing); 2-Levels Subterranean Parking
310-503-1295
[510 Spaces] & Public Spaces w/ Pedestrian
City Council Float-Up:
July 26, 2011
Access on 2.8 acres.
Filed 11/30/2011
NOP for EIR Released
1211412011, Comments
Due 112612012
DEV 11-017
3402 Pico Boulevard, 2337 Continela Avenue
& 2403-2409 Centinela Avenue
(T. Kim)
Gregg Amees,
Applicant TC Pico
Proposed 4-Story, 300-Unit Apartment Building
Development LLC
Community Meeting:
w/ 5000sf Ground Floor Retail & Two Levels
112612012
Subterranean Parking w/ 554 Parking Stalls.
Filed 12/15/2011
DEV 12-001
1318-1324 Second Street
David Forbes Hibbert,
AlA, Applicant
(S. Mizokami)
Proposed 4-Story, Mixed-Use Project w/ 56-
Kati Joyce, Contact
Units on 3 Stories Above Ground Floor Retail
310-394-4045 x110
[6840sq in 47,171 sf Total. 2-Levels
Subterranean Parking [66 Parking Stalls] in
28,103sf.
Filed 1/13/2012
Proposed Development Agreement: Paseo
Nebraska
(R. Tanemori)
3020, 3030 -3060 Nebraska Avenue, 3025
Nebraska Studios, LLC,
Community Meeting:
Olympic Boulevard, & 1819, 1820 Berkeley
Developer
January 14, 2010
Street
Dale Goldsmith,
Proposed Approximately 545 Multi - Family
Contact Armbruster
Housing Units (20% Moderate Income, 60%
Goldsmith & Delvac
Workforce Housing, 20% Market Rate); Approx.
LLP 310 - 209 -8800
Float-Up Hearing:
80,OOsf Neighborhood Serving Commercial
2/3/2010
Space & Creative Office Space; Series of
Forwarded
Publicly Accessible Pedestrian Paseos to
Recommendation to
Connect Public Streets Through the Site; Public
CC to Begin DA
Street Improvements & Construction of Approx.
Process.
1000- Space, 2 -Level Subterranean Garage.
Text Amendments & General Plan Amendments
TA 08 -004
201 Palisades Beach Road
The Beach Club,
Applicant
Amend SMMC Section 9.04.08.12.060(f) to
David Forbes Hibbert,
(L. Bar -EI)
Eliminate Everything After the Works "Rear
AIA, Contact
Yard Setback Fifteen Feet."
310 - 394 -4045
Filed 5/23/2008
TA 08 -007
1144 Twelfth Street
1144 12th Street, LLC
(G. Page)
Amend Bootleg Unit Ordinance.
310- 315 -1956
Filed 10/21/2008
TA 12 -001
C -4 & CM Districts
City of Santa Monica,
Planning & Community
5/16/2012
To Permit Off- Street Food Truck Venues in the
Development
Department,
C -4 & CM Districts by Performance Standard
Applicant 310 -458-
(P. Foley)
Permit (PSP).
8341
Filed 1/26/2012
ito]
TA 12 -002
City of Santa Monica,
Citywide
Planning & Community
Development
3/7/2012
Department,
Amendment to Add Subchapter 9.73,
Applicant 310 -458-
(B. Rolandson)
Establishing a Transportation Impact Fee.
8288
APPEALS TO PLANNING COMMISSION
-- - - - - -- - - - - -- ------
APPEAL 11 -006
- - - - --
--------------- - --
137 Hart Avenue
Appeal of Zoning Administrator's Denial to Allow
'low
Robert Ward, AIA,
4/18/2012
One, Sub - standard Parking Space in 10
Applicant & Appellant
(R. Bunim)
Setback.
Appeal Filed 7/27/2011
APPEALS TO CITY COUNCIL
APPEAL 10 -004
of DR 07 -006, VAR 07 -018, & EIR 09 -003
Vickie Neemeyer,
2919 -23 Wilshire Boulevard
Appellant
310 - 279 -5900
Date Pending
Approved by PC 6116/2010: Mixed -Use Building
W/ 11,259sf Retail / Commercial & 26 -Unit
Wilshire Structures,
(G. Page)
Apartments; & 100 Parking Spaces in
LLC, Applicant
Subterranean Garage;38281sf Total
310 - 829 -0200
Appeal Filed 6/2812010
APPEAL 11 -010 of DR 09 -001; CUP 10 -023,
VAR 10 -021 & Denial of SOC
1907 -1929 Lincoln Boulevard
Proposed One - Story, Retail Building w/ South
Dillon Tidwell, Applicant
At -Grade Parking (31 Parking Spaces)
/Appellant 970 -282-
Date Pending
Accessed from Bay Street & Lincoln Court & w/
1038
Basement Stock & Electrical Room. Total:
(L. Yegazu)
11586 Gross Sq. Ft. EIR Certified 9/21/2011;
CA Lincoln & Pico LLC
SOC Denied 11/2/2011.
c!o Tatum Real Estate
Appeal Filed 11/16/2011
11