SR-01-08-2013-5ACity Council Meeting: January 8, 2013
Agenda Item: ? Pr
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: Supplemental Information on Development Agreement Application
Processing Procedures and Consideration of Policy Related to Average
and Minimum Unit Sizes in Mixed -Use Residential Developments
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Affirm shifting the responsibility for hosting the initial Development Agreement
project community meeting from City staff to the project applicant and direct staff
to provide applicant with guidelines to ensure meetings are consistent with City
practice.
2. Affirm revising the float up process as follows:
a. Projects requiring an Environmental Impact Report (EIR): replace
Planning Commission float up with a combined float up meeting of
Planning Commission (PC) and four members of the Architectural Review
Board (ARB); and
b. Projects exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
Add a float up float up with a combined meeting of Planning Commission
(PC) and four members of the Architectural Review Board (ARB).
3. Direct staff to develop possible approaches to prioritizing projects that meet
certain criteria and return to Council at a future date.
4. Direct staff to negotiate applications for mixed -use housing project with the goal
of achieving the recommended average unit size of 900 square feet gross floor
area and minimum unit sizes consistent with the City's Affordable Housing
Production Program (AHPP), as suggested in this report.
Executive Summary
Since the adoption of the LUCE in July of 2010, the number of Development Agreement
applications that have been submitted has outpaced expectations, with a current total of
32 Development Agreement applications pending review as of December 21, 2012.
There is limited capacity to process Development Agreement applications from the
perspective of ARB, Planning Commission and City Council workload and agenda
management, staff time needed to thoroughly evaluate a complex project and negotiate
i
Development Agreement terms, and the availability of evenings to calendar community
meetings in light of the broad range of public meetings involving land use issues. Due to
these limitations in staff and community resources, it is necessary to review current
Development Agreement processing procedures and determine if modifications to the
process are appropriate.
Background
This supplemental staff report contains updated charts and maps which include the
seven Development Agreement applications received since the distribution of the
December 11th staff report (Attachment A), as well as deleting one project that has been
withdrawn (AMC Theatre). It also includes additional suggestions for modifications to
the Development Agreement review process and further discussion related to minimum
and average unit sizes. Additionally, it requests Council feedback on whether or not
certain types of projects should be prioritized for processing.
Discussion
Pending Development Agreements
There are currently 32 Development Agreement applications pending review. The
charts below have been updated to reflect the amount of square footage proposed in
the pending Development Agreement applications.
Land Use Type
Gross Square Footage
Percentage
Multi- family Residential
(3,403 units) 2,272,785
64.0%
Neighborhood Serving Retail
276,478
7.8%
Hotel
(544 rooms) 318,500
9.0%
Creative /Arts /Studio Space
550,600
15.5%
General Office
0
0.0%
Education
29,400
0.8%
Auto dealership
102,500
3.0%
Total
3,550,263
100%
2
Because Santa Monica is generally a built -out city, new projects typically result in the
demolition of existing building square footage. The following chart represents the
potential net increase in the land use type for the 32 pending Development Agreement
applications.
Land Use Type
Net Square Footage
Percentage
Multi- family Residential
(3,395 units) 2,264,785
78.2%
Neighborhood Serving Retail
121,596
4.2%
Hotel
(248 rooms) 191,000
6.6%
Creative /Arts /Studio Space
230,400
8.0%
Education
24,600
0.9%
Auto dealership
61,000
2.1%
Subtotal
2,893,381
100%
General Office
- 130,900
Total
2,762,481
The numbers in the two preceding charts are based on current applications and plans
for pending Development Agreement projects. Project square footages and mix of uses
often change through the Development Agreement negotiation process and the
numbers represented in the charts are estimates based on current knowledge.
Development Agreement Application Processing
The number of pending Development Agreements has increased from 26 to 32 since
the distribution of the December 11th staff report. The 32 pending Development
Agreement applications fall into two categories in terms of application processing.
Twelve of the applications, which are for larger mixed -use projects and visitor - serving
uses such as hotels and auto dealerships, require the preparation of an analysis under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), most likely an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR). The other 20 applications appear to be exempt from CEQA. Nineteen are
for mixed -use projects located within a one half mile radius of a major transit stop and
3
one is for a new science building at Crossroads School for Arts and Sciences, which is
exempt because it is considered a minor addition to an existing campus. In the future,
after a Tier 2 approval process has been established, it is possible that some projects
would be processed through a discretionary permit process rather than through a
Development Agreement process.
Development Agreement Applications that Require an EIR
The map and chart below show the location and describe the status of the 12 pending
Development Agreement projects that under CEQA require the preparation of an EIR.
City of Santa Monica
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
1
Miramar Hotel
1133 Ocean Ave /
101 Wilshire Blvd
EIR Underway
Downtown
2
AMCTheatFP
(application withdrawn)
1119 «4. —�ct
coo U,,.1......
3*
Mini Cooper Dealership
1400 Santa Monica Blvd
Pending
Corridor
4
Toyota Dealership
1530 Santa Monica Blvd
Pending
Corridor
V,
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
5
Courtyard Marriott
1554 5th St
EIR Underway
Downtown
6
Papermate
1681 26th St
EIR Released
Bergamot
7
1802 Santa Monica Boulevard
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1802 Santa Monica Blvd
EIR Underway
Corridor
2121 Cloverfied Boulevard
8
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
2121 Cloverfield Blvd
In Float Up
Corridor
9
Roberts Center
2848 -2912 Colorado Ave
EIR Released
Bergamot
10
2919 Wilshire Blvd
2919 Wilshire Blvd
Pending
Corridor
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
11
Paseo Nebraska
3025 Olympic Blvd
In Float -Up
Bergamot
12
3402 Pico Boulevard
3402 Pico Blvd
In Float -Up
Corridor
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
13
Hampton Inn
501 Colorado Ave I
EIR Underway
Downtown
New since December 11, 2012 staff report
Development Agreement Applications without an EIR
The map and chart below show the location and describe the status of the 20 pending
Development Agreement projects that appear to be exempt from CEQA review.
City of Santa Monica
PPMI.. nnvwlnmm�nr aeroon,o�r.
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
Pico Boulevard
1
Residential
Resi dential
1122 Pico Blvd
Pending
Corridor
1318 2nd Street
Z
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1 318 2nd St
Pending
Downtown
1325 6th Street
3
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1 325 6th St
Pending
Downtown
1415 5th Street
4
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1 415 5th St
Pending
Downtown
1425 5th Street
S
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1 425 5th St
Pending
Downtown
1443 Lincoln Boulevard
6
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1443 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
7*
1560 Lincoln Boulevard
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1560 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
1601 Lincoln Boulevard
8
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1601 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
9*
1613 Lincoln Boulevard
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1613 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
10*
1637 Lincoln Boulevard
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1637 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
11*
1641 Lincoln Boulevard
1641 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
12
1650 Lincoln Boulevard
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1650 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
1660 Lincoln Boulevard
13
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1660 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
Crossroads School
14
Science Learning Center
1731 20th St
Pending
Corridor
15*
234 Pico Boulevard
234 Pico Blvd
Pending
Corridor
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
16
3008 Santa Monica Boulevard
3008 Santa Monica
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
Blvd
pending
Corridor
17
3032 Wilshire Blvd
3032 Wilshire Blvd
Pending
Corridor
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
18*
501 Broadway
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
501 Broadway
Pending
Downtown
525 Colorado Avenue
19
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
525 Colorado Ave
Pending
Downtown
20*
601 Colorado Avenue
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
601 Colorado Ave
Pending
Downtown
*New since December 11, 2012 staff report
M
Processing Challenge
As described in the December 11th staff report, the processing and review of the large
number of pending Development Agreement applications in conjunction with the
preparation of the Downtown Specific Plan, Bergamot Area Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance present a challenge for staff as well as the various decision making bodies
and the additional seven Development Agreement applications received since the
distribution of the staff report have added to the challenge. Staff has continued to
consider the Development Agreement review process and through this supplemental
report has developed additional suggestions for modifying the process to provide
sufficient opportunities for input and review, but in a way that is more efficient and
minimizes impact on staff resources.
Community Meeting
One way to reduce the number of meetings required to be coordinated by staff is to shift
the responsibility for the community meeting from staff to the applicant. The current
practice is for staff to schedule and host a community meeting as the initial step in the
processing of a Development Agreement application. This practice not only requires
staff time for the coordination of the community meeting, it puts staff in a position of
representing a project at a time when staff has not yet had an opportunity to formulate a
position on the project. As an alternative to the current practice, staff is recommending
that the responsibility for the community meeting be shifted to the applicant. If directed
by Council, staff will prepare guidelines for community meetings that will be provided to
the applicant to ensure that the meetings are conducted in a manner that is consistent
with City practices. The guidelines would also require a report to be submitted by the
applicant following the community meeting. This report would include details about the
meeting including a sign -in sheet and meeting notes, and indicate if and how the project
has been modified to address issues raised at the community meeting prior to the
applicant submitting a development application to the City.
7
ARB and Planning Commission Float Ups
Staff had previously suggested the addition of Architectural Review Board and Planning
Commission float ups to provide opportunities for early input. While staff maintains that
there is value in obtaining preliminary and conceptual comments from the ARB and
Planning Commission, staff is recommending combining the ARB and Planning
Commission float ups into one joint meeting with the Planning Commission and four
ARB members. As proposed, the meetings would occur once a month and would focus
exclusively on Development Agreement applications. Given the large and growing
number of pending projects, the reduction in the number of steps will not mean that
Development Agreements are processed more quickly, but it would reduce the burden
on staff in that the number of meetings required for each project will be reduced.
Furthermore, it would provide the Planning Commission and a majority of the ARB an
opportunity to have a joint discussion about the projects and provide the applicant with
preliminary and conceptual comments about the project design and community benefits.
Proposed Development Agreement Process for Projects that Require an EIR
For projects that require the preparation of an EIR, staff had proposed maintaining the
current review process, with the addition of an Architectural Review Board (ARB) float-
up. Since the December Council meeting staff has considered another option that would
combine the ARB float up with the Planning Commission float up at a joint meeting with
the Planning Commission and four members of the ARB. The chart below indicates the
current process, the proposal contained in the December staff report, and the current
recommendation which would shift the responsibility for the community meeting to the
applicant and combine the ARB and Planning Commission float ups.
PC Float -up x x
CC Float -up x x x
Proposed Development Agreement Process for Projects that do not Require an EIR
To date, projects exempt from CEQA have not been subject to float -up review. The
float -up process was developed in part to provide an applicant with early feedback to
ensure that they did not invest time and pay the costs for environmental review if the
City decision makers were not interested in pursuing a Development Agreement on the
project. Since an EIR is not required for these projects, there is less financial risk for
the applicant to proceed without a float -up. Furthermore, when the interim zoning
ordinance was adopted, Council recommended that Development Agreement
processing be streamlined for smaller and /or less controversial projects, and these
CEQA exempt projects appeared to be good candidates for the streamlined process.
However, in processing these CEQA exempt projects, staff has determined that it would
be beneficial to obtain early input from the ARB and Planning Commission and had
recommended the inclusion of an ARB and Planning Commission float -up. However, as
previously described for projects subject to CEQA, staff has considered another option
that would combine the ARB float up with the Planning Commission float up at a joint
meeting with the Planning Commission and four members of the ARB.
The chart below indicates the current process, the proposal contained in the December
staff report, and the current recommendation which would shift the responsibility for the
community meeting to the applicant and combine the ARB and Planning Commission
float ups.
PC Float -u
CC
City Process for Development Agreements Exempt from CEQA
x x (by a
x
CC Hearing x x x
.0
The recommended process is similar to the review process recommended for the
projects that require an EIR, except that it does not include a City Council float -up. The
deferral of City Council review for CEQA- exempt projects is in recognition of the fact
that these projects are consistent with established City policy for locating higher density
housing in close proximity to major transit stops. It is not intended to indicate that the
projects will ultimately be approved by Council, but that from a policy perspective,
qualifying transit oriented development should move forward into the ARB /PC float up
review, Development Agreement negotiation and hearing stages.
Priority Projects
The current practice is for Development Agreement applications to be processed in the
order in which they are received, regardless of the type of project. However, in the past
the City has provided priority processing for certain types of projects, such as affordable
housing. The Council may wish to establish a process where certain projects receive
priority processing. For example, the City could establish criteria to encourage higher
percentages of affordable housing units, to support educational institution projects, to
encourage projects below a certain height, or to encourage projects that have
demonstrated through a traffic study and committed through specific measures to
reducing traffic impacts below that of a Tier 1 project on the same site. Moreover, the
City could favor those projects that generate the highest ratio of new revenues per
traffic generated, such as hotels and auto dealerships. If directed by Council, staff will
return with criteria for priority processing of these ideas or others.
Residential Unit Size
The December 11th report addresses community concerns regarding small unit sizes in
recently built and currently proposed housing projects by proposing the establishment of
an average unit size and minimum size for each type. Establishing minimums for
projects containing market -rate residential units would provide a guide to staff in
negotiating projects through the Development Agreement process. The two -part
recommendation includes:
10
• Establish an average unit size for a development of 900 square feet measured in
gross floor area (area of all parts of building with residential purpose, including
hallways and other interior common area). This would allow for the continued
production of some smaller units, balanced by some larger units resulting in a range
of housing options within a single development, and
• Set minimum unit -size guidelines based on established AHPP standards. The sizes
below reflect net square feet (i.e. livable space):
Studio: 500 sq. feet
1 bedroom: 600 sq. feet
2 bedrooms: 850 sq. feet
3 bedrooms 1,080 sq. feet
Council Direction
Staff seeks Council's direction on modifications to the current Development Agreement
processing procedures related to the following items:
1. Shifting of the responsibility for the hosting of the Community meeting from staff
to the project applicant.
2. Combination of the ARB and Planning Commission float ups into a joint meeting
comprised of the Planning Commission and four members of the ARB.
3. Council direction on the prioritization of projects that meet certain criteria, to be
determined and returned to Council at a future date.
4. Negotiation of Development Agreements for mixed -use housing projects with a
goal of achieving a minimum average unit size and minimum individual unit -size
based on the established AHPP standards.
11
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The recommendations presented in this report do not have any budgetary or fiscal
impact.
Prepared by: David Martin, Director of PCD
Approved:
David Martin, Director
Planning and Community Development
Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould
City Manager
Attachment A: December 11, 2012 CC Meeting, Item 813 Development Agreement
Application Processing Procedures and Consideration of Policy Related to Average and
Minimum Unit Sizes in Mixed -Use Residential Developments
12
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: Development Agreement Application Processing Procedures and
Consideration of Policy Related to Average and Minimum Unit Sizes in
Mixed -Use Residential Developments
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed slowdown in the
processing of pending Development Agreement applications and confirm that average
and minimum residential unit sizes should be sought in Development Agreement
negotiations.
Executive Summary
Since the adoption of the LUCE in July of 2010, the number of Development Agreement
applications that have been submitted has outpaced expectations, with 26 Development
Agreement applications pending review as of December 6, 2012. Of the 26 pending
applications; 14 are located in the Downtown, 10 of which are housing projects of 100
units or less with the remaining four being visitor - serving uses such as hotels and a
multiplex movie theater. There are three applications pending for projects in the
Bergamot area, which are mixed -use developments consisting of residential, retail and
creative arts space. The remaining nine applications are for an auto dealership and
mixed -use residential and neighborhood serving retail projects located along the transit
corridors of the city.
There is limited capacity to process Development Agreement applications from the
perspective of ARB, Planning Commission and City Council workload and agenda
management, staff time needed to thoroughly evaluate a complex project and negotiate
Development Agreement terms, and the availability of evenings to calendar community
meetings in light of the broad range of public meetings involving land use issues. Due to
these limitations in staff and community resources, processing of the 26 pending
Development Agreement applications requires a slowdown to ensure that projects are
carefully considered and informed by the applicable land use policies.
Staff is proposing changes to the Development Agreement processing procedures to
add additional float up steps which would slow down the pace of Development
1
Agreement application review and allow the Planning Commission and Architectural
Review Board to provide early input on proposed projects.
Additionally, staff is proposing minimum and average unit sizes that should be sought in
Development Agreement negotiations for multi - family residential developments.
Background
LUCE Adoption
In July 2010 the City Council adopted the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE)
following a six year public process which included a series of workshops, public
hearings and other forms of community involvement. Policies contained in the LUCE
call for the preservation of the existing land use and density of 96% of the City, while
focusing new development along transit boulevards and near the three Expo light rail
stations. The LUCE set forth the twenty year vision for the entire City, and the maximum
development parameters for all areas of the City except downtown. It also called for the
completion of a number of implementation plans and documents, including a new
zoning ordinance, the creation of bike and pedestrian action plans, the adoption of a
traffic impact fee and specific or area plans for downtown, the Bergamot Transit
Village /Mixed Use Creative areas, and Memorial Park.
The LUCE established a system of Tiers in most areas of the City, with Tier 1 allowing a
base height and floor area ratio (FAR) through a non - discretionary process, Tier 2
allowing additional height and FAR with the approval of a discretionary permit and the
provision of community benefits, and Tier 3 allowing more height and FAR with the
provision of additional community benefits and the approval of a Development
Agreement.
Interim Zoning Ordinance
In January 2011 the City Council adopted an interim zoning ordinance which set forth
the process by which projects would be reviewed prior to the adoption of the new zoning
ordinance, which will establish the process for the approval of Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects.
The Interim Zoning Ordinance has been extended by the City Council three times and is
r.
currently set to expire on August 14, 2013. The interim zoning ordinance limits by -right
projects to a maximum of 7,500 square feet, allows projects over 7,500 square feet that
are not considered Tier 2 or Tier 3 projects in the LUCE to proceed with a discretionary
permit, and requires a Development Agreement for Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects citywide
and projects over 32 feet in the Downtown. The interim zoning ordinance also continues
to allow the ministerial processing of 100% affordable housing projects (with affordability
levels up to 80% of Area Median Income) of 50 units or less.
Specific and Area Plans
Since the adoption of the LUCE, staff has initiated a number of major planning efforts.
These include the Bike Action Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan, the Bergamot Transit
Village /Mixed Use Creative Area Plan, and the Pedestrian Action Plan. Additionally,
staff will soon begin the preparation of the Memorial Park Neighborhood Plan. Below is
a description and timeline for the major planning efforts currently underway.
• Downtown Specific Plan. The Downtown Specific Plan process was initiated in
Fall 2011 to direct and coordinate public and private investment in the expanded
Downtown area defined in the LUCE, with the goal of integrating land use and
transportation strategies and incorporating the future Expo Light Rail Station. A
draft Downtown Specific Plan will be presented to the Council in Spring 2013,
with final adoption of the plan following the preparation of the required CEQA
analysis.
• Bergamot/Mixed Use Creative Area Plan. The Bergamot Area Plan was initiated
.in Fall 2010 to guide the transition of the former industrial lands into a more
walkable, accessible and diverse living and working neighborhood. The plan
focuses on urban form, including open space, the street network, land use,
mobility and culture. Key results of the plan will include the establishment of a
shared parking district and a Transportation Demand Management strategy. The
Bergamot Area Plan will be considered by the Council for adoption in Spring
2013.
3
Zoninq Ordinance
The comprehensive update of the zoning ordinance was initiated following the adoption
of the LUCE. Several stakeholder interviews and workshops have occurred and the
Planning Commission is currently holding a series of meetings on specific topics. A
draft of the updated zoning ordinance will be available for public review in early 2013
with final adoption of the new ordinance by the end of 2013.
The interim zoning ordinance currently requires a Development Agreement for all Tier 2
and Tier 3 projects. The new zoning ordinance will establish an alternative application
process for Tier 2 projects that will include defined criteria for community benefits.
Applications for Tier 2 projects will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and will be
appealable to City Council. Applications for Tier 3 projects will most likely always be
processed as Development Agreements, but the establishment of a process for Tier 2
projects will provide an alternative to the Development Agreement process and reduce
the number of Development Agreement applications.
Development Activity Since LUCE Adoption
Following the adoption of the LUCE, Santa Monica experienced an increase in the
number of project applications. This increase is the result of several factors including:
LUCE policies that encourage the construction of mixed -use residential projects along
transit boulevards and near light rail stations, a CEQA exemption for mixed -use housing
projects with 100 units or less located within one half mile of a major transit stop, an
increase in the number of rental housing units being proposed and constructed in the
Los Angeles region, historically low interest rates, the strong demand for housing in
Santa Monica, the stability of Santa Monica as a place to invest, and the overall
desirability of the city as a place to live.
In the two and a half years since the LUCE was adopted, eight Development
Agreements for projects that involve new construction have been approved and 26
2
Development Agreement applications are pending. The eight Development Agreements
approved represent a range of project types, including a research and development
facility (Agensys), the expansion of an existing religious institution (St. Monica's),
creative arts studio space (Colorado Creative Studios), conversion of a designated
landmark building into a hotel (710 Wilshire), the East Village project with 377
residential units and 25,000 square feet of neighborhood serving retail space, and three
downtown mixed use projects with a combined total of 539 residential units, 33 of which
will be deed restricted on -site affordable rental units. As required by City ordinance and
California State law, these projects are all consistent with the policies contained in the
2010 LUCE.
The Development Agreement applications submitted since the adoption of the LUCE
represent a large amount of development and have resulted in a high level of concern
from residents and decision makers. The issue of development was frequently raised
during the recent City Council election as well as at the Santa Monica Talks series of
community meetings held in November. Additionally, community meetings and hearings
on development projects are well attended by residents who often express concerns
related to traffic and the overall amount and pace of new development.
In addition to development activity in the City of Santa Monica, the City of Los Angeles,
which surrounds Santa Monica on three sides, continues to plan and build new
residential and commercial projects, including a large final phase of the Playa Vista
development. These projects, which are outside of the City's control, add traffic and
congestion to Santa Monica streets and infrastructure. And unlike development in Santa
Monica, the City has very limited ability to influence the scale of development, the mix of
uses, or the proximity to transit for new development in surrounding communities.
Development Agreement Application Review Process
Prior to the submittal of a Development Agreement application, staff meets with
potential applicants to determine if a proposed project is consistent with City policy and
applicable codes. As a result of these early meetings, projects are sometimes modified,
reduced in size, or abandoned. The number of Development Agreement applications
that reach the City Council for consideration is far less than the number of ideas and
concepts presented to staff by potential applicants.
SMMC Chapter 9.48 outlines the basic procedures for processing of Development
Agreement applications. The City has augmented those procedures with the
establishment of a "float -up" process that allows for early review of proposed
Development Agreements. The float -up process was developed to provide an applicant
with early feedback to ensure that they did not invest time and pay the costs for
environmental review if the City decision makers were not interested in pursuing a
Development Agreement on the project.
Additionally, the float -up process was created because of the significant amount of staff
time, developer resources, and community engagement that is necessary to bring a
Development Agreement project to a public hearing. The length and complexity of the
review process for Development Agreement applications allows the process to inform
the applicant, staff and decision makers regarding the potential negative impacts of a
project, as well as the potential benefits. The float -up discussion also:
• Sets community expectations for a proposed project with the opportunity to
signal to a developer if project concepts are in line with those expectations and
community benefits
• Allows the community to provide wide - ranging, early input on a project
• Identifies key points to direct staff in development agreement negotiations
• Shapes a project while it is still in a conceptual stage in key areas such as land
use, building form and massing, access and site design
• Assesses whether the City is interested in pursuing the proposed Development
Agreement at the proposed site or at all
9
The information obtained from the float up process often results in modifications to the
project proposal in terms of mix of uses, size of buildings, and other aspects of the
Development Agreement negotiations. Ultimately, if it is determined through the review
process that the project is not consistent with City policy and the benefits of a project
are outweighed by the negative impacts, Council can deny the Development Agreement
application.
Once approved, Development Agreement projects are typically provided more time to
obtain a building permit than projects approved under a Development Review or
Conditional Use Permit, sometimes up to ten years. As a result, the completion of
construction of an approved project may not occur until several years after approval of
the Development Agreement. In some cases, Development Agreements expire, the
entitlements are lost, and the projects are not built.
Discussion
Pending Development Agreements
The 26 Development Agreement applications for new developments currently pending
review feature a range of project types, including three hotels, a new downtown movie
theater, a new auto dealership, an addition to an existing private school, and several
mixed use residential developments, some of which include creative arts /studio space
and neighborhood serving retail. Each of the residential projects would provide a
minimum of 10% on -site affordable units, which could result in a combined total of
approximately 297 deed restricted on -site affordable rental units. Since these projects
are Development Agreements, however, the number of affordable units to be provided
is negotiable. The following chart represents the land use type and amount of square
footage proposed in the 26 pending Development Agreement applications.
7
Land Use Type
Gross Square Footage
Percentage
Multi- family Residential
(2,972 units) 1,961,800
60.8%
Neighborhood Serving Retail
214,000
6.6%
Theater
(2,167 seats) 83,000
2.6%
Hotel
(544 rooms) 318,500
9.9%
Creative /Arts /Studio Space
550,600
17.0%
General Office
0
0.0%
Education
29,400
0.9%
Auto dealership
70,000
2.2%
Total
3,227,300
100%
Because Santa Monica is generally a built -out city, new projects typically result in the
demolition of existing building square footage. The pending applications include the
proposed removal of approximately 757,400 square feet of floor area. Therefore, the 26
pending applications represent a net increase of built square footage in the city of
2,469,900. The following chart represents the potential net increase in the land use type
and the amount of square footage proposed in the 26 pending Development Agreement
applications.
Land Use Type
Net Square Footage
Percentage
Multi- family Residential
(2,964 units) 1,953,800
74.4%
Neighborhood Serving Retail
142,200
5.4%
Theater
(570 seats) 54,000
2.0%
Hotel
(248 rooms) 191,000
7.3%
Creative /Arts /Studio Space
230,400
8.8%
Education
24,600
0.9%
Auto dealership
31,800
1.2%
Subtotal
2,627,800
1000/0
General Office
- 130,900
Total
2,469,900
U
The numbers in the two preceding charts are based on current applications and plans
for pending Development Agreement projects. Project square footages and mix of uses
tend to change through the entitlement process and the numbers represented in the
charts are estimates based on current knowledge.
Development Agreement Application Processing
The 26 pending Development Agreement applications fall into two categories in terms of
application processing. Twelve of the applications, which are for larger mixed -use
projects, visitor - serving uses such as hotels and movie theaters and an auto dealership,
require the preparation of an analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), most likely an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The preparation of an EIR
for a project can add significant time and expense to the entitlement process. Staff has
determined that the other 14 applications appear to be exempt from CEQA. Thirteen are
for mixed -use projects located within a one half mile radius of a major transit stop and
one is for a new science building at Crossroads School for Arts and Sciences, which is
exempt because it is considered a minor addition to an existing campus.
Development Agreement Applications that Require an EIR
The map and chart below show the location and describe the status of the 12 pending
Development Agreement projects that under CEQA require the preparation of an EIR.
These projects are all subject to an extensive public review process which includes a
community meeting, float ups, and final hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council. Other than visitor - serving uses in the Downtown and an auto dealership on
Santa Monica Boulevard, most of these projects are generally larger mixed use
developments located in the Bergamot area or Pico corridor. A more complete
description of pending projects can be found in Attachment 1.
0
City of Santa Monica
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
TIER
1
Miramar Hotel
1133 Ocean Ave /
EIR Underway
Downtown
3
101 Wilshire Blvd
2
AMC Theatre
1318 4th St
EIR Underway
Downtown
3
3
Toyota Dealership
1530 Santa Monica Blvd
Pending
Corridor
2
4
Courtyard Marriott
1554 5th St
EIR Underway
Downtown
3
5
Papermate
1681 26th St
EIR Released
Bergamot
3
1802 Santa Monica Boulevard
6
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1802 Santa Monica Blvd
EIR Underway
Corridor
2
2121 Cloverfied Boulevard
7
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
2121 Cloverfield Blvd
In Float Up
Corridor
3
8
Roberts Center
2848 -2912 Colorado Ave
EIR Released
Bergamot
3
9
2919 Wilshire Blvd
2919 Wilshire Blvd
Pending
Corridor
3
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
10
Paseo Nebraska
3025 Olympic Blvd I
In Float -Up
Bergamot
3
10
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
TIER
3402 Pico Boulevard
11
3402 Pico Blvd
In Float -Up
Corridor
3
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
12
Hampton Inn
501 Colorado Ave
EIR Underway
Downtown
3
Development Agreement Applications without an EIR
The map and chart below show the location and describe the status of the 14 pending
Development Agreement projects that appear to be exempt from CEQA review.
Citv of Santa Monica
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
TIER
1122 Pico Boulevard
1
1122 Pico Blvd
Pending
Corridor
2
Residential
1318 2nd Street
2
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1318 2nd St
Pending
Downtown
3
1325 6th Street
3
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1325 6th St
Pending
Downtown
3
11
NO
NAME
ADDRESS
STATUS
AREA
TIER
1415 Sth Street
4
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1415 5th St
Pending
Downtown
3
1425 5th Street
S
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1425 5th St
Pending
Downtown
3
1443 Lincoln Boulevard
6
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1443 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
3
1560 Lincoln Boulevard
7
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1560 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
3
1601 Lincoln Boulevard
8
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1601 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
3
1650 Lincoln Boulevard
9
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1650 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
3
1660 Lincoln Boulevard
10
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
1660 Lincoln Blvd
Pending
Downtown
3
Crossroads School
11
Science Learning Center
173120th St
Pending
Corridor
2
12
3008 Santa Monica Boulevard
3008 Santa Monica
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
Blvd
pending
Corridor
3
13
3032 Wilshire Blvd
3032 Wilshire Blvd
Pending
Corridor
3
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
525 Colorado Avenue
14
Mixed Use Residential /Retail
525 Colorado Ave
Pending
Downtown
3
There are currently 14 pending projects that appear to qualify for a CEQA exemption.
These include the construction of a new science building at Crossroads School for Arts
and Sciences, and 13 mixed -use projects that appear to qualify under State law for an
exemption from CEQA because the projects are located within one half mile of a major
transit stop. These projects represent a combined total of over 1000 residential units,
located primarily in the Downtown, but in all cases within close proximity to transit.
The residential units in these proposed developments would provide additional
opportunities for Santa Monica workers to also live in the city, which would help address
the existing jobs /housing imbalance that contributes to local and regional traffic
congestion. As required by the City's Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP),
at least 10% of the units in these projects will be deed restricted affordable units. The
exact number of units, bedroom mix, and level of affordability will be determined through
the project review and Development Agreement negotiation process.
12
Processing Challenge
The processing and review of the large number of pending Development Agreement
applications in conjunction with the preparation of the Downtown Specific Plan,
Bergamot Area Plan and the Zoning Ordinance present a challenge for staff as well as
the various decision making bodies. There is limited capacity to process Development
Agreement applications from the perspective of ARB, Planning Commission and City
Council workload and agenda management, staff time needed to thoroughly evaluate a
complex project and negotiate Development Agreement terms, and the availability of
evenings to calendar community meetings in light of the broad range of public meetings
involving land use issues.
Additionally, the 26 Development Agreement applications are being reviewed and
processed as several major planning efforts called for by the LUCE are underway,
including the Bergamot Area Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance. While the various plans are not required to be adopted by Council prior to
action on the pending Development Agreements, it is important that the plans be far
enough along to adequately inform decisions made related to pending applications.
Staff is proposing modifications to the review process for both categories of
applications; those that require an EIR and those that are exempt from CEQA. These
changes would slow the pace of development which would help with capacity issues
and allow for plans to further advance.
Proposed Development Agreement Process for Projects that Require an EIR
For projects that require the preparation of an EIR, staff is proposing maintaining the
current review process, with the addition of an Architectural Review Board (ARB) float-
up, which would occur after the community meeting and before the Planning
Commission float -up. This additional ARB review would provide the applicant with an
early indication of any design issues and allow the ARB to make recommendations to
inform the Planning Commission discussion on the project. The project would still be
13
required to return to ARB for final design review if the Development Agreement is
approved by City Council. With the addition of the ARB float up, the process for review
of DA projects not exempt from CEQA would be as follows:
1. Community meeting
2. ARB float -up (new step)
3. Planning Commission float -up
4. City Council float -up
5. EIR scoping meeting
6. 45 -day public review period of the draft EIR
7. Planning Commission hearing on the final project
8. City Council hearing on final Development Agreement
9. ARB review of final building design, colors, materials, landscaping and signage,
subject to Development Agreement negotiations
The addition of the ARB float -up would not add significant time to the overall process of
a Development Agreement application. Under a typical timeline and work load,
Development Agreement applications that require an EIR, which are not subject to
Permit Streamlining requirements, can take from two to three years to process.
However, while staff will continue to bring projects forward to the ARB, Planning
Commission and City Council when the project is ready and when agenda space is
available, there is a limited capacity on the part of staff, the ARB, the Planning
Commission and City Council to hold hearings and review applications. For example,
since each project requires at least two hearings before the Planning Commission (one
float -up and one final hearing), assuming the Planning Commission can hear one
Development Agreement application per month, it would take 52 months (over 4 years)
for the Planning Commission to hold hearings on the 26 pending Development
Agreement applications. Since some of the pending Development Agreements have
already had Planning Commission float -ups, this time line would be reduced, but it is
14
important to acknowledge that because of the large number of pending projects, the
current timeline of two to three years would likely extend to at least three to four years.
Proposed Development Agreement Process for Projects that do not Require an EIR
To date, projects exempt from CEQA have not been subject to float -up review. The
float -up process was developed to provide an applicant with early feedback to ensure
that they did not invest time and pay the costs for environmental review if the City
decision makers were not interested in pursuing a Development Agreement on the
project. Since an EIR is not required for these projects, there is less financial risk for
the applicant to proceed without a float -up. Furthermore, when the interim zoning
ordinance was adopted, Council recommended that Development Agreement
processing be streamlined for smaller and /or less controversial projects, and these
CEQA exempt projects appeared to be good candidates for the streamlined process.
However, in processing these CEQA exempt projects, staff has determined that it would
be beneficial to obtain early input from the Planning Commission and community at a
Planning Commission float -up, especially with respect to the negotiation of appropriate
community benefits. Additionally, given the number of pending projects and the fact that
these CEQA exempt applications potentially represent over 1,000 residential units, staff
recommends the addition of a Planning Commission float up to provide the Commission
an opportunity for early input into the overall massing and composition of these projects.
Staff is also recommending the addition of an ARB float -up for these projects. As
described in relation to the ARB float. up for non -CEQA exempt applications, the
additional ARB review would provide the applicant with an early indication of any design
issues and allow the ARB to make recommendations to inform the Planning
Commission discussion on the project.
With the recommended modifications, the process for review of DA projects that are
exempt from CEQA would be as follows:
15
I . Community meeting
2. ARB float -up (new step)
3. Planning Commission float -up (new step)
4. Planning Commission hearing on the final project
5. City Council hearing on the project and negotiated Development Agreement
6. ARB review of final building design, colors, materials, landscaping and signage
subject to Development Agreement negotiations
The recommended process is similar to the review process recommended for the
projects that require an EIR, except that it does not include a City Council float -up. The
lack of a City Council float up from the process for CEQA exempt projects is in
recognition of the fact that these projects are consistent with established City policy for
locating higher density housing in close proximity to major transit stops. It is not
intended to indicate that the projects will ultimately be approved by Council, but that
from a policy perspective, the project is consistent and should therefore move forward
into the review, Development Agreement negotiation and hearing stages.
While Development Agreement projects that are exempt from CEQA do not require the
preparation and circulation of an environmental review document, they are still subject
to a series of community meetings and hearings. Under a typical timeline and workload,
these types of projects can take over a year to process. While staff will continue to bring
projects forward to the various boards and commissions when the project is ready and
when agenda space is available, there is a limited capacity on the part of staff, the ARB,
the Planning Commission and City Council to hold hearings and review projects.
Therefore, existing applications and any new ones submitted in the near future will be
subject to extended timelines.
Moratorium on Development
In this report staff has outlined a path forward for managing the large number of pending
Development Agreement applications. Another potential approach would be for Council
16
to direct staff to return with an ordinance to place a moratorium on the processing of
development applications. In order to impose a moratorium, state law requires both
urgency findings and a four -fifths vote, which for a 7- member council means 6
affirmative votes (Government Code section 65858). Moreover, an urgency ordinance
which affects multi - family housing projects cannot be extended without findings
demonstrating that these projects would have a specific adverse impact on public health
and safety based on objective written standards. (Government Code section 65858(c).)
As an alternative to a moratorium, the Council could consider amending its
Development Agreement Ordinance at Municipal Code chapter 9.48 to require that in
areas of the City in which a specific or area plan has been initiated or in which the
LUCE requires that preparation of a specific or area plan, that plan must be in effect
before a Development Agreement in that area may be processed. While this is an
option, staff has concerns about this approach because it would prevent all projects
from moving forward, even those considered desirable by the community, and could
result in a large back log of projects that will require processing when the moratorium
ends.
Pendinq Administrative Projects
Administrative projects are development applications that are reviewed for precise
conformance with the Zoning Code and are approved at an administrative level. As
allowed by the interim zoning ordinance and consistent with LUCE policies, the majority
of administrative projects are 100% affordable housing developments (up to 80% of
AMI) of not more than 50 units. There are currently four administrative projects pending
approval. Each of these projects include 50 residential units and are located in the
downtown area. A detailed description of these projects can be found in attachment 3.
Residential Unit Size
Feedback received through the Housing Element update outreach process has
identified a desire for a variety of types and sizes of market rate housing in new multi-
family projects near transit in order to offer attractive and feasible opportunities for a
17
range of individuals and families. During outreach to boards and commissions, there
was clear concern expressed about the number of small units in recently built and
currently proposed in housing projects. Concerns were related to potential unintended
consequences, such as the potential impact such units might have on. the future
population because of an assumption that small units cater to single person
households. Many participants at outreach meetings also expressed concerns about the
need for family housing and the desire for two and three bedroom units.
Staff is proposing the establishment of a policy for market -rate residential units with an
average unit size of 900 gross square feet measured in gross floor area (area of all
parts of building with residential purpose, including hallways and other interior common
area). This would allow for the continued production of some smaller units, balanced by
some larger units resulting in a range of housing options within a single development.
Staff is also recommending a minimum individual unit -size based on the established
AHPP standard.
Proposed Development Agreement Process
Staff seeks Council's approval to proceed with the processing of pending and future
Development Agreement applications as follows:
1. The Development Agreement process for projects that require an EIR will be
augmented to include an ARB float -up, and the processing time for such
applications will be extended to ensure that projects are carefully considered and
properly informed by the applicable land use policies.
2. The Development Agreement process for projects that do not require an EIR will
be augmented to include an ARB float -up and a Planning Commission float up
and the processing time for such applications will be extended to ensure that
projects are carefully considered and properly informed by the applicable land
use polices.
W
3. Staff will negotiate Development Agreements for mixed -use housing projects with
a goal of achieving a minimum average unit size of 900 square feet measured in
gross floor area and minimum individual unit -size based on the established
AHPP standards.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The recommendations presented in this report do not have any budgetary or fiscal
impact.
Prepared by: David Martin, Director of PCQ
Approved:
id
David Martin, Director
Planning and Community Development
Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould
City Manager
Attachments:
1. Approved and Pending Development Agreements
2. CEQA Section 21159.24
3. Pending Administrative Projects
19
ATTACHMENT
APPROVED AND PENDING
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
20
APPROVED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
• Agensys. This Development Agreement allowed the addition of 31,200 square feet
of floor area to a previously entitled 130,000 square foot project to create a research
and manufacturing facility for Agensys, a company engaged in the research and
development of pharmaceuticals for the treatment and prevention of cancer. The
complex, which is currently under construction, will consolidate several existing
Agencys facilities into one location, within walking distance of the Bergamot Expo
station. The project includes a pedestrian path that breaks up a large industrial
parcel and provides a direct pedestrian connection from the neighborhood east of
Stewart Street to the Bergamot Station arts complex and the Expo light rail line.
• St. Monica's Catholic Church. Currently under construction, this project will include a
new community center, make improvements to the elementary and high school
facilities, and add a 154 space subterranean parking garage to the existing church
campus.
• 7th and Arizona Mixed Use Housing. Similar in height and scale to the mixed -use
housing developments that have been constructed in the downtown over the past
several years, this building on the southeast corner of 7th Street and Arizona Avenue
will provide approximately 8,500 square feet of neighborhood serving retail space
and 106 residential rental units, including 11 on -site very-low income units. The
building, which is currently under construction, replaces a 13,500 square foot office
building and a surface level parking lot.
• Colorado Creative Studios. This development is envisioned as a headquarters
opportunity for a studio /entertainment company. In addition to 170,000 square feet
of creative office space and 9,000 square feet of neighborhood serving retail, the
project will provide over 600 parking spaces, some of which will be available for
shared parking within the Mixed Use Creative District. The layout of the project is
consistent with the vision contained in the LUCE for the Mixed -Use Creative District,
in that it allows for the extension of Pennsylvania Avenue east of Stewart, which will
break up the large industrial block and facilitate access and circulation in the area.
The Colorado Creative Studio, which will replace approximately 38,000 square feet
of manufacturing space, has not yet been approved by the Architectural Review
Board and it is anticipated that construction will not commence for several months.
Under the terms of the Development Agreement, the applicant has up to five years
from the approval date to commence construction.
• 710 Wilshire Hotel. As part of this development, the Wilshire Professional Building, a
designated City Landmark constructed in 1928, will be restored and converted from
an office building to a hotel, resulting in the removal of 30,000 square feet of
downtown office space. The project, which also includes the construction of a new
building on the site of an existing surface level parking lot, will include a 285 room
hotel and approximately 19,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. Design
21
plans for this project have not been submitted and it is anticipated that building
permits will not be issued anytime soon. The Development Agreement for the project
allows the applicant up to seven years from the approval date to obtain a building
permit.
• 4th and Broadway Mixed Use Housing. This project, which will replace an
automotive repair facility and a surface level parking lot on the northeast corner of 4th
Street and Broadway in the heart of Downtown Santa Monica, will include
approximately 9,800 square feet of neighborhood serving retail and 56 residential
rental units, including six on -site affordable units. Since the approval of the
Development Agreement, the applicant has elected to request an amendment to the
Development Agreement which would allow the addition of an automated parking
system with space for up to 50 cars. The Development Agreement amendment will
be presented to the City Council within the next few months.
• Village Trailer Park. This project, which was approved by City Council last month,
would provide 216 condominiums, 161 apartments, and 24,940 square feet of
neighborhood commercial space, 4250 of which could be converted to production
use.
PENDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
PROJECTS REQUIRING EIRs
• Hines /Papermate. The Council float up for this mixed use development was
completed in August 2011. The project proposes 498 residential units, 30,000
square feet of neighborhood commercial, and 375,000 square feet of creative office
space. The Final EIR is underway.
• Roberts Center. The Council float up for this mixed use development was completed
in July 2011. The project proposes 231 residential units, 23,000 square feet of
neighborhood commercial space, and 37,000 square feet of creative office space.
The Final EIR is underway.
• AMC Theater. At an August 2010 City Council Float -Up hearing, the Council directed
staff to proceed with negotiations on this project, which would result in the
construction of a 12- screen state of the art theater complex on the existing site of
Parking Structure #3. The draft EIR public review began in October and closed on
November 26th. Response to Comments and the Final EIR are currently in
preparation.
• Courtyard by Marriott/Hampton Inn. An EIR is currently in preparation for two hotel
developments proposed at the intersection of the Colorado Avenue and 5th Street.
In April, 2012 the Council directed staff to initiate negotiations for these two projects.
Courtyard by Marriott would be located at the northwest corner of Colorado Avenue
WIA
and 5th Street and provide 136 guest room and approximately 78,750 square feet of
floor area within a six story, 80' height envelope. Two subterranean levels would
accommodate 100 parking spaces. The Hampton Inn would be located at the
northeast corner of Colorado and 5th. This six story hotel would include 143 guest
rooms and 100 parking spaces in a two level subterranean garage. The EIR is
underway and it is anticipated that the Draft EIR will be released in early 2013.
• Miramar Hotel. Incorporating both preservation of the Landmark Moreton Bay Fig
Tree and rehabilitation of the historic Palisades building, this proposal would
redevelop the existing hotel property with new food and beverage facilities, spa,
banquet facilities, retail space, and condominiums on the upper floors of the new
building. Total project square footage would be approximately 556,000 square feet
and would also include an affordable housing component on hotel owned property
located on Second Street. Based on comments received at the Council Float Up
hearing in April 2012, redesign is currently underway. Once plans are resubmitted,
the project EIR will be initiated, followed by the EIR review and comment period and
Planning Commission and City Council hearings.
• 3402 Pico Boulevard. This Development Agreement would replace an existing office
complex that formerly housed the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences
with a mixed use development. Located at the eastern edge of the City, the project
proposes 300 residential units and approximately 5,000 square feet of ground floor
commercial space divided within four separate buildings. The project height ranges
between two and four stories. A community meeting was held in January, 2012.
Neighborhood concerns included the project's density and potential traffic impacts.
The Planning Commission held a float -up hearing in July, 2012. While the
Commission recommended that Council authorize Development Agreement
negotiations, the Commission also recommended that particular attention be paid to
the project density and it relation to trip generation. Council held a float -up hearing
on this project in November, 2012 and direct staff to proceed with the preparation of
an EIR to study various alternatives for the site, but did not authorize the negotiation
of a Development Agreement. Another float -up before the City Council will be occur
after preparation of the EIR.
• 2121 Cloverfield Boulevard. Located at the northeast corner of Pico and Cloverfield
Boulevards across from Virginia Avenue Park, this mixed use development would
replace an existing two story office complex. The project would provide 157
residential units and 23,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space. The mix
of residential units includes studio, one bedroom, two bedroom, and three bedroom
units. The project had a community meeting on October 22, 2012 and will require a
Planning Commission and City Council float up, an EIR scoping meeting, 45 day EIR
public review period, and Planning Commission and City Council hearings.
• Paseo Nebraska. Located at 3025 Olympic Boulevard, this project is a new
application for the site, which has been subject to other development proposals.
23
The project would provide a grouping of four, five -story, mixed use buildings on a
3.27 acre parcel. A total of 545 residential units, 272 of which would be affordable to
moderate income households, are proposed in addition to 80,000 square feet of
creative office and retail space. A three level subterranean garage would provide
1000 parking spaces. The project will be subject to a community meeting, Planning
Commission and City Council float up, an EIR scoping meeting, 45 day EIR public
review period, and Planning Commission and City Council hearings.
• 1802 Santa Monica Boulevard. This project involves the construction of a three
story mixed use building that would include 24 studio and two one bedroom units, a
13,590 auto dealership use, and a 1,390 square foot restaurant. A four level
subterranean garage would provide 130 parking spaces. The three parcel site is
composed of two vacant lots and an eight unit apartment building. A draft EIR is
currently being prepared.
• 2919 Wilshire Boulevard. Filed in early November, this five story, 83 unit
development would include 9000 square feet of ground floor neighborhood
commercial retail space on the site of the Jerry's Liquor Store.
• 1530 Santa Monica Boulevard. This project, which was filed in early December.
2012, is located on the southwest corner of Santa Monica Boulevard and 16th Street,
The proposed urban format auto dealer would provide a new home for Santa Monica
Toyota.
PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA
• 1318 2nd Street. This project would replace an existing 11,500 square foot office
building and surface level parking lot with a three story mixed use project containing
56 residential units, 6,800 square feet of neighborhood serving retail space and 66
subterranean parking spaces. The project is consistent in height and scale with the
surrounding buildings and the standards contained in the Bayside District Specific
Plan. A community meeting was held for this project in May of this year.
• 1415 5th Street. Located in the downtown on the east side of Fifth Street between
Broadway and Santa Monica Boulevard, this project was filed as an eight story, 84
foot tall building, containing 4,500 square feet of ground floor retail and 100 units
over a five level subterranean garage. However, because the submitted project is
non - compliant with the General Plan six story maximum height limit, the project is
currently in redesign. A community meeting will be scheduled and Development
Agreement negotiations will commence once project plans are resubmitted.
•
14255 th Street. This companion project to the 1415 5th Street development features
a similar mix of uses, square footage, and height. The project is also in redesign
and will advance through the application process following plan resubmittal.
24
• 13256 th Street. Similar in height and scale to the mixed -use housing developments
that have been constructed in the downtown over the past several years, this
building located on the east side of 6th Street adjacent to the Santa Monica Main
Library parking lot, would provide approximately 2,400 square feet of neighborhood
serving retail space and 87 residential units, including 66 single room occupancy
units, five one - bedroom units, and 16 two- bedroom units. 12 of which would be
restricted to very-low income tenants. The building would replace a surface parking
lot currently serving 52. A community meeting was held for this project on August
30, 2012.
• 525 Colorado Avenue. Proposed as an eight -story, 84 foot tall mixed use building,
this project is currently in redesign due to non - compliance with the General Plan
number of stories requirement. The submitted project includes 77 units with
approximately 3000 square feet of ground floor commercial space. The number of
units will likely change due to the project redesign.
• 1443 Lincoln Boulevard. This project would replace existing retail buildings with a
six -story mixed use project containing 100 residential units and approximately 2,800
square feet of retail space. Four levels of subterranean parking are also proposed.
The building, which would total 40,000 square feet of floor area, conforms to the
height and floor area standards established in the LUCE. A community meeting will
be scheduled to introduce the project to the community and obtain input on potential
community benefits to consider during Development Agreement negotiations.
• 1601 Lincoln Boulevard. The existing Norm's restaurant located at the southeast
corner of Lincoln Boulevard and Colorado Avenue would be demolished as part of
this proposal and replaced with a five story, C- shaped building, containing 100 units
and 13,600 square feet of ground floor commercial space. The residential unit mix
includes 28 studios, 69 one - bedroom units, and three two- bedroom units. A
community meeting was held on November 8th, 2012.
• 1650 Lincoln Boulevard. This proposal would replace existing single story buildings
with a six -story mixed use development containing 1500 square feet of ground floor
retail, 90 residential units, and two levels of subterranean parking with 86 parking
spaces and two motorcycle spaces. The project provides one and two- bedroom
units, some of which would be affordable to low income and senior households. A
community meeting was held for the project and it is currently pending Planning
Commission and City Council consideration once Development Agreement
negotiations are completed.
• 1660 Lincoln Boulevard. A bookend to the project immediately to the north at 1650
Lincoln, this project would also replace an existing one story building with a six story
mixed use development composed of 1500 square feet of ground floor retail, 82
residential units, and a two level subterranean garage with 79 parking spaces and
two motorcycle spaces. As with the neighboring project, this development would
25
include one and two- bedroom units, some of which would be affordable to low
income and senior households. A community meeting was held for the project and it
is currently pending Planning Commission and City Council consideration once
Development Agreement negotiations are completed.
• 3008 Santa Monica. Located at the southeast corner of Santa Monica Boulevard
and Stanford Street, this project proposes a three story mixed use building with
4,238 square feet of ground floor retail and 30 residential units above a two level
subterranean garage with 68 parking spaces and 40 bicycle parking spaces. The
project would provide a mix of studio, one bedroom, and two bedroom units. A
community meeting was held on October 18, 2012.
• 1122 Pico Boulevard. Located along the south side of Pico Boulevard between 11th
Street and Euclid Street on a vacant site, this project proposes a four story, 32 unit
building with four very -low income units. Subterranean parking would provide 64
parking spaces accessed from the rear alley. A community meeting was held for
this project on September 13, 2012 and negotiations with the applicant have been
initiated.
• 1731 20th Street. A proposed new science building for Crossroads School would be
three stories, 45 feet tall, and total 29,356 square feet. A community meeting was
held for this project on November 26, 2012.
• 3032 Wilshire Boulevard. This project is on the site of an existing Bank of America
building. The five story development would provide 100 units and 12,000 square feet
of ground floor neighborhood commercial space.
• 1560 Lincoln Boulevard. The existing Denny's restaurant located on the northwest
corner of Lincoln Boulevard and Colorado Avenue would be demolished as part of
this proposal and replaced with a five story mixed -use development. The project
would contain 100 residential units and 13,680 square feet of ground floor retail
space.
26
ATTACHMENT
CEQA SECTION 21159.24
(PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE)
27
CEQA SECTION 21159.24
(PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE)
(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), this division does not apply to a project if all of
the following criteria are met:
1) The project is a residential project on an infill site.
2) The project is located within an urbanized area.
3) The project satisfies the criteria of Section 21159.21.
4) Within five years of the date that the application for the project is deemed
complete pursuant to Section 65943 of the Government Code, community -level
environmental review was certified or adopted.
5) The site of the project is not more than four acres in total area.
6) The project does not contain more than 100 residential units.
7) Either of the following criteria are met:
(A) (i) At least 10 percent of the housing is sold to families of moderate income,
or not less than 10 percent of the housing is rented to families of low
income, or not less than 5 percent of the housing is rented to families of
very low income.
(ii) The project developer provides sufficient legal commitments to the
appropriate local agency to ensure the continued availability and use of
the housing units for very low, low -, and moderate - income households at
monthly housing costs determined pursuant to paragraph (3) of
subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5 of the Government Code.
(B) The project developer has paid or will pay in -lieu fees pursuant to a local
ordinance in an amount sufficient to result in the development of an
equivalent number of units that would otherwise be required pursuant to
subparagraph (A).
8) The project is within one -half mile of a major transit stop.
9) The project does not include any single level building that exceeds 100,000
square feet.
M
10)The project promotes higher density infill housing. A project with a density of at
least 20 units per acre shall be conclusively presumed to promote higher density
infill housing. A project with a density of at least 10 units per acre and a density
greater than the average density of the residential properties within 1,500 feet
shall be presumed to promote higher density housing unless the preponderance
of the evidence demonstrates otherwise.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), this division shall apply to a development project
that meets the criteria described in subdivision (a), if any of the following occur:
1) There is a reasonable possibility that the project will have a project- specific,
significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
2) Substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
being undertaken that are related to the project have occurred since community -
level environmental review was certified or adopted.
3) New information becomes available regarding the circumstances under which the
project is being undertaken and that is related to the project that was not known,
and could not have been known, at the time that community -level environmental
review was certified or adopted.
(c) If a project satisfies the criteria described in subdivision (a), but is not exempt from
this division as a result of satisfying the criteria described in subdivision (b), the
analysis of the environmental effects of the project in the environmental impact
report or the negative declaration shall be limited to an analysis of the project -
specific effect of the projects and any effects identified pursuant to paragraph (2) or
(3) of subdivision (b).
(d) For the purposes of this section, "residential' means a use consisting of either of the
following:
1) Residential units only.
2) Residential units and primarily neighborhood - serving goods, services, or retail
uses that do not exceed 15 percent of the total floor area of the project.
29
ATTACHMENT
PENDING
ADMINISTRATIVE PROJECTS
'I1]
PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE PROJECTS
• 1437 5`" Street. Six story mixed use development with 50 unit affordable housing
units, ground floor retail, and restaurant on the sixth floor. Pending Planning review.
• 1318 Lincoln Boulevard. Five story mixed use development with 50 affordable units
and ground floor retail. Pending Planning review.
• 1438 Lincoln Boulevard. Five story mixed use development with 50 affordable units
and ground floor retail. Pending Planning review.
• 1430 Lincoln Boulevard. Five story mixed use development with 50 affordable units
and ground floor retail. Pending Planning review.
31