SR-12-17-2013-7A - 400-04City Council Meeting: December 17, 2013
Agenda Item:
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: First Reading of an Interim Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance
No. 2439 (CCS); Update on the Status of Pending Development
Agreement Applications; and Modification of the Development Agreement
Float -Up Process for Limited Types of Projects
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
Introduce for first reading an interim ordinance to extend until May 31, 2014 the
effective date of Interim Ordinance No. 2439 (CCS) which established interim
development standards and procedures pending implementation of the Land Use
and Circulation Element (LUCE) through adoption of a new Zoning Ordinance;
2. Review the status of pending Development Agreement applications filed since
LUCE adoption in July 2010;
3. Modify the Development Agreement process to exempt limited types of projects
from Planning Commission and City Council early conceptual review (float -up)
discussions and maintain the requirements for a Community Meeting and an
Architectural Review Board float -up discussion prior to initiating project
negotiations between staff and the applicant; and
4. Affirm development of new affordable housing units as a priority item to be
considered during community benefit negotiations for proposed mixed -use
housing projects subject to a Development Agreement.
Executive Summary
This staff report addresses four planning and development - related items that are timely
as deliberations on the Draft Zoning Ordinance begin at the City's Planning Commission
this month. The adoption of a new Zoning Ordinance is anticipated by the first Council
meeting in April 2014. The current Interim Zoning Ordinance is in effect until February
28, 2014 and needs to be extended to the point in time when the new Zoning Ordinance
is anticipated to be in effect. The recommended extension to May 31, 2014 accounts for
the anticipated adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance on April 8th and the necessary
time before the effective date (30 additional days following second reading of an
ordinance).
This report provides another update on the status of pending Development Agreements
and also proposes a float -up process modification to exempt limited types of projects
from Planning Commission and City Council early conceptual review (float -up)
discussions and maintain the requirement for a Community Meeting and an
Architectural Review Board (ARB) float -up discussion prior to initiating project
negotiations between staff and the applicant. The proposed process modification would
apply only to projects that result in a de minimis expansion of existing, approved
buildings and provided they meet the following criteria: projects that involve a Zoning
Ordinance - permitted use of an existing structure; and new construction of less than
one - percent of existing floor area which may include a proposed increase in building
height.
This report also serves as follow up to the Council's discussions in January and
February about the status of pending Development Agreements and the early
conceptual review process implemented by staff for those applications. At that time, the
Council also outlined several project types that would be eligible for priority processing,
given the large number of pending Development Agreements filed since the LUCE was
adopted in 2010. In addition to that discussion of priority processing, staff also seeks
Council's affirmation that development of new affordable housing units may be
prioritized during community benefit negotiations for mixed -use housing projects that
are subject to a Development Agreement, when appropriate given project- specific
characteristics.
Background
Interim Zoning Ordinance
Following the adoption of the LUCE in' July 2010, Interim Zoning Ordinance (IZO)
Number 2345 (CCS) was first presented to establish interim zoning provisions and
standards on January 25, 2011 and was adopted on February 8 2011.
The IZO has been extended and modified several times as implementation of the LUCE
has moved forward:
• Ordinance No. 2356 (CCS), adopted on Agril 26 2011, extended the IZO 18-
months to October, 26, 2012.
• Ordinance No. 2394(CCS), adopted on February 28, 2012, primarily modified
restrictions pertaining to the number of restaurants on Main Street.
2
• Ordinance No. 2407 (CCS), adopted on August 28 2012, addressed several
issues related to auto dealerships in residentially zoned areas and extended the
IZO until August 14, 2013.
• Ordinance No. 2417 (CCS), adopted on February 26 2013 modified the
requirements for ministerial processing of 100% affordable housing projects of 50
or fewer units to encourage a greater mix in housing affordability levels, helping
address the City's need for low, very low and extremely low income affordable
housing units.
• Ordinance No. 2428 (CCS), adopted on June 25, 2013, extended the effective
date of the IZO to February 28, 2014 and exempted ground floor outdoor dining
on private property from a building's Floor Area Ratio calculation in the
Downtown District.
• Ordinance No. 2439 (CCS), adopted on September 24, 2013, clarified that the
Bergamot Area Plan standards apply when provisions are in conflict with the
current Zoning Ordinance and established a Use Permit process in lieu of the
Minor Use Permit identified in the Bergamot Area Plan until adoption of the 2014
Zoning Ordinance.
Pending Development Agreement Applications and Float -Up Process
At its January 8, 2013 meeting, Council considered a December 11 2012 report and a
January 8, 2013 supplemental report that provided summary information about pending
Development Agreement applications that had been filed since the LUCE was adopted
in July 2010 and initiated a discussion on ways to address this large number of pending
applications.
At its January 8th hearing, Council directed staff to devise a framework for prioritizing
how applications would be processed going forward until the new Zoning Ordinance is
adopted. On February 12 2013, Council approved several categories of projects that
would be eligible for priority processing as a way to help determine allocation of staff
and decision - makers' time to the 35 Development Agreement applications pending at
that time.
Finally, at the January 8th Council hearing, staff recommended updated processing
procedures for early conceptual review (float -up) of Development Agreements. These
process revisions included shifting the responsibility for hosting the initial project
3
community meeting to the applicant and requiring a joint Planning Commission and
Architectural Review Board float -up discussion for all Development Agreement
applications. The Council approved these float -up procedures on January 8th and later
modified these steps on April 23 2013 to require separate Architectural Review Board
and Planning Commission float -up discussions — where the joint Board and Commission
discussion was previously recommended.
Discussion
Interim Zoning Ordinance Extension & Zoning Ordinance Update
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 review of Tier 1 and Tier 2
projects. The Interim Zoning Ordinance has been extended by the Council three times
and is currently set to expire on February 28, 2014.
The Interim Zoning Ordinance limits by -right projects to those that are ministerial under
the Zoning Ordinance and LUCE, and requires a Development Agreement for Tier 2
and Tier 3 projects Citywide and projects over 32 feet in height in the Downtown. The
proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance extension also continues to allow the ministerial
processing of 100% affordable housing projects of 50 units or less where a minimum of
25 % of the units are restricted to households with low, very low or extremely low
income, defined as 60% of Area Median Income or less, and the remainder of the units
restricted to moderate income at 80% of Area Median Income or less.
Adopted in February 2013, this threshold is a change from the previous provision which
allowed 100% affordable housing projects of 50 units or less, where 100% of the units
were restricted to moderate income of 80% or less, to be processed as an
Administrative Approval (AA). Since this change was adopted by Council, five pending
50 -unit affordable housing projects submitted as Administrative Approvals have been
withdrawn; of these five withdrawn applications, one project has been re- submitted as a
0
Development Agreement application. Finally, one Administrative Approval application
was redesigned as a commercial remodel without a residential component.
The Public Review Draft Zoning Ordinance was released on November 12, 2013, in
advance of the Planning Commission's first discussion of the draft on December 11,
2013. The purpose of the City's Zoning Ordinance update is to create a comprehensive
set of development standards and use regulations that implement the community
planning goals, objectives, and policies set forth in the 2010 Land Use and Circulation
Element of the City's General Plan. This is the first comprehensive update of the City's
Zoning Ordinance since 1988; the new Zoning Ordinance is structured to be easier to
use with updated procedures, standards, and requirements that are more clearly
written. The Draft Zoning Ordinance was developed with guidance provided through
public review of numerous Zoning Ordinance Update work products; Planning
Commission and ARB discussions; and community meetings. Table 1 outlines several
of these efforts to date.
Table 1: Zoning Ordinance Update Schedule of Work Products and Meetings
Topic/Document
Action
Date
Design Review Best Practices
Joint PC /ARB Study Session
March 28, 2012
Design & Development Standards
Community Workshop
May 14, 2012
Districts Issue Paper
PC Study Session
July 18, 2012
Uses, Terms, Definitions Issue Paper
PC Study Session
July 18, 2012
Community Benefits Issue Paper
PC Study Session
August 22, 2012
Single- and Multi - Family Standards
PC Study Session
September 19, 2012
Parking and Transportation
Community Workshop
September 20, 2012
Residential Design Guidelines
PC Study Session
November 7, 2012
Mixed Use Development Standards
PC Study Session
November 14, 2012
Use Regulations
PC Study Session
November 28, 2012
Parking
PC Study Session
January 30, 2013
Community Benefits Strategy
PC Study Session
May 1, 2013
Transportation Demand Management
PC Study Session
June 5 & August 28, 2013
Parking
PC Study Session
August 28, 2013
Public Review Draft Zoning Ordinance
Released
November 12, 2013
b1
There are a total of six Planning Commission study sessions scheduled for deliberations
on the Draft Zoning Ordinance starting on December 11th; Table 2 identifies the topics
recommended for discussion at each study session. Formulation of Commission
recommendations to Council is scheduled for February 5, 2014.
As outlined in Table 2, the City Council is anticipated to begin its review on March 3,
2014 with second reading and adoption of the Final Zoning Ordinance recommended on
April 8, 2014. An ordinance requires 30 days until its provisions become effective,
necessitating an extension of the current Interim Zoning Ordinance to May 31, 2014.
Table 2: Draft Zoning Ordinance Deliberations
Planning Commission Dates
Topics
Covered
December 11, 2013
.
Overview
6
Division I — Introductory Provisions
®
Division V — General Terms
December 18, 2013
.
Division IV — Administration & Permits
•
Division II — Base & Overlay Districts:
Residential Neighborhoods
(Chapters 9.07 -9.09)
January 8, 2014
®
Division II — Base & Overlay Districts: all other
chapters
January 15, 2014
®
Division III — General Regulations
January 22, 2014
®
Division VI - Related Provisions
February 5, 2014
.
Recommendations to City Council
• Zoning Ordinance Provisions
• LUCE map & LUCE Amendments
• Environmental Review
City Council Dates
March 3, 4, 11, 25, 2014
.
CC Deliberations
•
First Reading of Ordinance
April 8, 2014
.
Second Reading of Ordinance & Adoption Final
Zoning Ordinance
May 8, 2014
®
Effective date of Final Zoning Ordinance
Status of Pending Development Agreement Applications
Staff reported in January and February on the status of Development Agreement
applications submitted since the adoption of the LUCE in July 2010. At that time, there
were 35 applications pending. As of December 1, 2013, there a total of 33
Development Agreement applications pending review; a summary of these projects is
provided as Attachment "A ". This reflects the following activity since staff's last report,
including projects approved and withdrawn and newly -filed applications:
12 approved Development Agreement applications since July 2010:
e 1800 Stewart Street — Agensys research and development facility. Project was
approved 10/28/2010. Construction completed in Winter 2013.
725 California Avenue — Saint Monica Catholic Community. Project was
approved 5/27/2010. Construction completed in Fall 2013.
e 702 Arizona Avenue — Mixed -use project approved on 11/8/2011. Construction in
progress; completion anticipated first quarter 2014.
1317 7th Street — Mixed -use project approved on 11/812011. Construction in
progress; completion anticipated first quarter 2014.
e 2834 Colorado Avenue — Colorado Creative Studios. Project was approved
8/23/2011 and is currently being reviewed by the Architectural Review Board.
e 710 Wilshire Boulevard — Mixed -use hotel project approved 5/11/2012. Design
review for the project is pending.
401 Broadway — Mixed -use project approved 2/9/2012 and an amendment to
allow on -site parking approved 10/8/2013. Plan check review is in progress.
e 2930 Colorado Avenue — Village Trailer Park site. Mixed -use project approved
on 4/912013. Notice of Closure issued in September 2013; implementation of
tenant relocation plan is in progress.
13182 nd Street — Mixed -use project approved 5/14/2013. Project is currently
being reviewed by the Architectural Review Board.
e 1731 20th Street — Crossroads Science Learning Center. Project was approved
6/25/2013. Plan check review is in progress.
e 1554 5th Street — Courtyard by Marriot Hotel project approved 11/12/2013.
Design review for the project is pending.
e 501 Colorado Avenue — Hampton Inn & Suites by Hilton project approved
11/12/2013. Design review for the project is pending.
7
Five withdrawn Development Agreement applications since December 1, 2012:
® 3402 Pico Boulevard — former Grammy site
® 3025 Olympic Boulevard — Paseo Nebraska Project
® 2919 Wilshire Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail at Jerry's Liquor site
® 1425 5th Street — Mixed -use residential /retail
® 2121 Cloverfield Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail at Pico & Cloverfield
16 new Development Agreement applications since December 1, 2012:
®
1641 Lincoln Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 12/6/2012)
®
601 Colorado Avenue — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 12/612012)
®
1613 Lincoln Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 12/11/2012)
®
1637 Lincoln Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 12/11/2012)
®
1402 Santa Monica Boulevard — Mini auto dealership
(filed 12/6/2012)
®
501 Broadway — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 12/6/2012)
•
234 Pico Boulevard — Mixed -used residential /retail
(filed 12/11/2012)
•
1431 Colorado Avenue — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 1/8/2013)
•
603 Arizona Avenue — Mixed -use residential retail
(filed 1/8/2013)
•
2041 Colorado Avenue — Mixed -use residential retail
(filed 2/19/2013)
®
101 Santa Monica Boulevard — Hotel, cultural, residential
(filed 2/28/2013)
•
120 Colorado Avenue — Hotel and residential
(filed 6/6/2013)
®
1318 Lincoln Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 816/2013)
•
500 Broadway — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 8127/2013)
®
12355 th Street — Mixed -use residential /retail
(filed 10/8/2013)
• 315 Colorado Avenue — Santa Monica Place Cinemas (filed 10/1512013)
Priority Processing
The allocation of staff time spent on Development Agreement processing has been
based, in, part, on the following five Development Agreement application priority
processing categories that were established by Council on February 12 2013:
R
1. Education - related projects.
2. Revenue - generating projects.
3. Mixed -use / housing projects that include the following two levels of affordability:
o 15% of units deed - restricted for 50% of median household income
o 5% of units deed - restricted for 80% of median household income (three -
bedroom units).
4. Projects that comply with LUCE Tier 1 and Tier 2 parameters.
5. Mixed- use /housing projects that include all of the following unit -mix parameters:
• Maximum of 20% studio units
• Minimum of 20% two- bedroom units
• Minimum of 10% three - bedroom units.
Based on these Council- identified categories, of the 33 pending Development
Agreement applications, 18 applications are priority projects. These 18 projects are
listed in Table 3 along with three pending projects where substantial progress has been
made with respect to staff review in preparation for public hearings (pipeline projects).
In addition to this summary of Development Agreement applications eligible for priority
processing, staff also seeks Council's affirmation that development of new affordable
housing units may be prioritized during community benefit negotiations for mixed -use
housing projects that are subject to a Development Agreement. Production of affordable
and workforce housing was identified in the 2010 LUCE as one of the following five
priority community benefit categories:
2090 LUCE Priority Community Benefit Categories:
• New affordable and workforce housing
• Greenhouse gas and vehicle trip reduction requirements
• Community physical improvements (e.g., open space, street improvements,
gathering places)
• Historic preservation
• Social, cultural, and educational facilities
9
However, due to the elimination of the City's Redevelopment Agency by the State of
California, which has diminished the City's ability to build new units, affordable housing
may be prioritized ahead of other community benefit categories for negotiated mixed -
use projects, when appropriate given project- specific characteristics. While housing
affordability is also one of the Council- identified priority processing categories for
Development Agreements, this recommendation would underscore staffs discretion to
further prioritize affordable housing production during Development Agreement
negotiations, in particular with proposed mixed -use housing projects.
Table 3: Pending Development Agreement Applications — Priority Processing
Application Address
Priority Type
Status
CEQA Review
1681 26 Ih St -
Pipeline project
PC hearings
Final EIR
former Paper Mate site
2848 -2912 Colorado Ave -
Pipeline project
Negotiations in
Final EIR
Roberts Center
progress
13184 I St — AMC Theater
Pipeline project &
Project on hold
Draft EIR released
Project
Revenue- generating
for public review
1802 Santa Monica Blvd —
Tier 2 &
Community meeting
Draft EIR in
Mixed -use auto dealership
Revenue - generating
& float -up completed;
progress
and residential
project review in
progress
1133 Ocean Ave —
Revenue - generating
Community meeting
Draft EIR in
Miramar Hotel Mixed -Use
& float -up completed;
progress
Project
project review in
progress
3008 Santa Monica Blvd
Tier 2
Community meeting
CEQA exempt
& first ARB float -up
completed
3032 Wilshire Blvd
Affordability levels
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
completed
1650 Lincoln Blvd
Settlement
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
agreement
completed
1660 Lincoln Blvd
Settlement
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
agreement
completed
1415 5' St
Affordability levels
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
com feted
1112 -1122 Pico Blvd
Tier 2
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
& ARB float -up
completed; project
review in progress
10
Application Address
Priority Type
Status
CEQA Review
1601 Lincoln Blvd —former
Affordability levels
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
Norms site
& float -up completed;
project review
pending
1560 Lincoln Blvd —
Affordability levels
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
Denny's site
& float -up completed;
project review
pending
501 Broadway
Affordability levels &
Community meeting
CEQA Exempt
residential unit mix
completed
101 Santa Monica Blvd -
Revenue - generating
Community meeting
Environmental
Ocean Avenue Project
& ARB float -up
review has not
completed
commenced
1530 Santa Monica Blvd -
Revenue - generating
Community meeting
Environmental
Toyota Auto Dealership
completed; Float -up
review has not
pending
commenced
1402 Santa Monica Blvd -
Tier 2 &
Community meeting
Draft EIR in
Mini Auto Dealership
Revenue- generating
& float -up completed;
progress
project review
pending
120 Colorado Ave — Santa
Revenue - generating
Community meeting
Environmental
Monica Hotel by the Pier
completed;
review has not
Float-up pending
commenced
1318 Lincoln Blvd
Residential unit mix
Community meeting
CEQA determination
pending
pending
500 Broadway
Residential unit mix
Community meeting
EIR consultant
pending
selection in progress
315 Colorado Ave — Santa
Revenue - generating
Community meeting
Draft MND in
Monica Place Cinemas
pending
progress
The overall number of pending Development Agreements may change once the new
Zoning Ordinance is adopted and the development standards, community benefit
program, and procedural requirements for Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects have been
implemented.
Float -Up Process Modification
At its January 8, 2013 meeting Council adopted staff's recommendations to provide
early /conceptual Architectural Review Board review of pending Development
Agreement applications through a combined meeting of the Planning Commission and
the ARB. The Council agreed that it is important to include the ARB in the float -up
11
process to provide the applicant with an early indication of conceptual but significant
design issues such as massing, scale, form, and relationship to the surrounding context.
The Council also modified the float -up process in April to require separate ARB and
Planning Commission review in order to maintain consistent meeting schedules and
facilitate agenda management for both the Commission and Board meetings. Today,
the float -up process for Development Agreement applications includes the following four
steps:
1. Applicant- hosted community meeting;
2. ARB float -up discussion (not required for Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects and specified
Downtown projects);
3. Planning Commission float -up discussion (not required for Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects
and specified Downtown projects);
4. City Council float -up discussion and direction to staff on whether to initiate
negotiations (not required for CEQA exempt projects).
It is recommended that the Council modify this float -up process to exempt limited types
of projects from Planning Commission and City Council float -up discussions and
maintain the requirements for a Community Meeting and an Architectural Review Board
float -up discussion prior to initiating Development Agreement negotiations between staff
and the applicant. This abbreviated float -up process would apply only to applications
that result in de minimis expansion of an existing, approved building and provided they
meet the following criteria:
• Use of an existing structure, or portion thereof, that is consistent with allowed
uses in the Zoning District; and
® New construction /building additions of less than one - percent of existing floor area
which may include a proposed increase in building height.
This recommended two -step float -up process has been narrowly crafted in order to
allow Development Agreement projects of a limited scope to proceed with staff -
applicant negotiations following a Community Meeting and an Architectural Review
Board float -up discussion, in lieu of the four -step process currently implemented for
12
most proposed Development Agreement projects (with the previously -noted
exceptions). As proposed, the recommended process would apply to a project such as
the pending Development Agreement application for the Santa Monica Place Cinemas
that was filed on October 15th by Macerich SMP GP, LLC. This application proposes a
new, 1,500 seat cinema within the existing 3`d floor of the Santa Monica Place Mall
located at 315 Colorado Avenue. The proposed change of use from retail to theater use
is consistent with permitted uses in the Downtown District and would require a de
minimis increase in floor area (several hundred square feet are currently contemplated).
The increase in building height is proposed in order to accommodate stadium - theater
seating and would not increase the number of building stories.
The Community Meeting and ARB float -up would allow residents and interested parties
to provide comments on the proposal and also ensure that early conceptual design
feedback and direction from the ARB is provided to address urban design and visual
compatibility issues. Staff believes this adjustment would still provide adequate
opportunities for community input on projects prior to formal Development Agreement
hearings and help balance the significant Planning Commission and City Council
workload related to development applications.
13
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared by: Roxanne Tanemori, AICP, Senior Planner
Approved:
"U 4 —
David Martin, Director
Planning and Community Development
Attachments:
Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould
City Manager
A. Approved and Pending Development Agreements, December 2013
B. Proposed Development Agreement Float -Up Process, December 2013
C. Draft Interim Zoning Ordinance
14
1 ( 1
I WIN
a U �l I =1 ol }
December 2013
15
APPROVED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS SINCE JULY 2010
• 1800 Stewart Street — Agensys. Construction of a new facility for Agensys, a
company engaged in the research and development of pharmaceuticals for the
treatment and prevention of cancer. 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. Project was approved 10128/2010. Construction was
completed in Winter 2013.
• 725 California Avenue — Saint Monica Catholic Community. Construction of a
community center, addition of a 154 space subterranean parking garage, and
improvements to the elementary and high school facilities, at the existing church
campus. Project was approved 05/27/2010. Construction was completed in Fall
2013.
• 702 Arizona Avenue — Five -story (50') mixed -use project with 8,500 SF of retail
space and 106 residential rental units, including 11 on -site very-low income units.
Project is under construction; completion is anticipated during the first quarter of
2014.
•
13177 TH Street — Five -story (50') mixed -use project with approximately 2,929 SF of
commercial space and 57 rental units, including six very-low income units. Project is
under construction; completion is anticipated during the first quarter of 2014.
• 2834 Colorado Avenue — Colorado Creative Studios. This development is
envisioned as a headquarters opportunity for a studio /entertainment company. In
addition to 170,000 SF of creative office space and 9,000 SF of retail, the project will
provide over 600 parking spaces, some of which will be available for shared parking.
The project was approved 08/23/2011 and is currently being reviewed by the
Architectural Review Board.
• 710 Wilshire Boulevard — Mixed -use hotel project that includes restoration and
rehabilitation of the Wilshire Professional Building, a designated City Landmark
constructed in 1928. This building would be converted from an office building to a
hotel, resulting in the removal of 30,000 square feet of downtown office space. The
four -story (57') 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 SF of retail and restaurant space. The project was approved
05/11/2012 and is pending design review.
• 401 Broadway — Five -story (56') mixed -use project with 28,869 SF total (5,217 SF
commercial); 56 residential rental units, including six on -site affordable units; and 92
bicycle parking spaces. The project was approved 02/09/2012. An amendment to
the Development Agreement was approved on 10/22/2013 to permit 49
16
subterranean parking spaces accessed by a car elevator and minor modifications to
the ground floor plan.
• 2930 Colorado Avenue — Village Trailer Park site. Mixed -use project consisting of
341,290 SF total (24,940 commercial); 377 residential units, including 38 affordable
units, 705 subterranean parking spaces, and 638 bicycle parking spaces. The
project was approved 4/9/2013.
• 13182 nd Street — Four -story (45') mixed -use project with 46,421 SF total (6,664 SF
commercial); 53 residential units, 6,664 SF of retail space, 66 subterranean parking
spaces, and 132 bicycle parking spaces. The project was approved 6/25/2013.
• 1731 20`h Street — Crossroads School Science Learning Center. New three -story
(41'), 23,856 SF science learning center and temporary modular classrooms; 50
bicycle parking spaces. The project was approved 6/25/2013.
• 15545 th Street — Courtyard by Marriot Hotel. 136 guest- rooms, six -story, 78,750 SF
hotel with 78 subterranean parking spaces and 43 bicycle parking spaces. The
project was approved 11/26/2013.
• 501 Colorado Avenue — Hampton Inn & Suites by Hilton. 143 guest- rooms, six -story,
78,750 SF hotel with 78 subterranean parking spaces and 45 bicycle parking
spaces. The project was approved 11/26/2013.
PENDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
NEW APPLICATIONS FILED SINCE DECEMBER 1, 2012
• 501 Broadway — Proposed six -story (76') mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of 51,480 SF total (6,040 SF commercial); 65 units (13 studios, 21 one -
bedroom units, 24 two- bedroom units, seven three - bedroom units); and 154
subterranean parking spaces. 15 of the 65 units would be affordable units.
Application was filed 12/6/2012.
• 1641 Lincoln Boulevard — Proposed five -story (60') mixed -use residential /retail
project consisting of approximately 56,674 SF (7,884 SF commercial); 78 units (34
studios, 40 one - bedroom units, four two - bedroom units); and 104 parking spaces.
Application filed 12/6/2012.
• 601 Colorado Avenue — Proposed six -story (84') mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of approximately 58,353 SF (8,753 SF commercial); 73 units (58 one -
bedroom units and 15 two - bedroom units); 160 subterranean parking spaces; and
146 bicycle spaces. Application filed 12/6/2012.
17
• 1613 Lincoln Boulevard — Proposed five -story (59') mixed -use residential /retail
project consisting of approximately 44,443 SF (6,953 SF commercial); 56 units (24
studios, 28 one - bedroom units and four two- bedroom units); and 75 subterranean
parking spaces. Application filed 12/11/2012.
• 1637 Lincoln Boulevard — Proposed five -story (59') mixed -use residential /retail
project consisting of approximately 55,800 SF (7,450 SF commercial); 75 units (19
studios, 52 one - bedroom units and four two- bedroom units); and 114 subterranean
parking spaces. Application filed 12/11/2012.
• 234 Pico Boulevard — Proposed four -story (45') mixed -used residential /retail project
consisting of 100,245 SF total (20,100 SF commercial); 91 residential units (45 one -
bedroom units, 46 two - bedroom units); Twelve of the 91 units are proposed as
affordable units. 260 subterranean parking spaces are proposed along with 182
bicycle parking spaces. Application filed 12/11/2012.
• 1431 Colorado Avenue — Proposed four -story (47') mixed -use residential /retail
project consisting of 44,900 SF total (12,585 SF commercial); 50 residential units (38
studio units and 12 one - bedroom units) and 140 parking spaces. Application filed
1/8/2013.
• 603 Arizona Avenue — Proposed six -story (60') mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of 27,500 SF total (2,500 SF commercial); 39 residential studio units, and
37 subterranean parking spaces. Application filed 1/8/2013.
• 2041 Colorado Avenue — Proposed four -story (47') mixed -use residential /retail
project consisting of 179,922 SF total (22,103 SF commercial); 174 residential units
(111 studios, 42 one - bedroom units, 21 two- bedroom units); and 380 parking
spaces. Application filed 2/19/2013.
• 131.8 Lincoln Boulevard — Proposed six -story mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of 41,242 SF total (2,602 SF commercial); 60 residential units; and 160
parking spaces. Application filed 8/6/2013.
• 1402 Santa Monica Boulevard — The MINI Dealership project proposes a new two -
story, 33,750 square foot automobile dealership building containing vehicle
showrooms, indoor /outdoor cafe, and a concealed service /repair and parts
departments. The maximum height of the proposed building would be approximately
35 feet. Customer parking will be located at -grade within the building. A one -level
subterranean garage will be constructed with parking for customers and employees,
on -site inventory parking, and facilities for vehicle preparation /services. A community
meeting was held for the project on March 28, 2013; the Architectural Review Board
float -up discussion was held on June 3, 2013; the City Council float -up was held on
August 14, 2013. Preparation of the Draft EIR and project negotiations are in
progress. Application filed 12/6/2012.
in
• 500 Broadway — Proposed seven -story (84') mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of 171,675 SF total (39,600 commercial); 250 residential units (40 studios,
126 one - bedroom units, 54 two - bedroom units, 30 three - bedroom units); and 561
parking spaces. Application filed 8/27/2013.
• 101 Santa Monica Boulevard — Ocean Avenue Project. Proposed mixed -use hotel,
cultural, retail and residential development. 125 -room hotel with meeting room and
banquet space; 19 replacement rent - controlled apartments and up to 5 affordable
rental units; 22 market -rate condominiums; ground -floor restaurant and retail space;
three building cultural /museum campus with open space; publicly accessible roof -top
observation deck. Project also includes retention and rehabilitation of two designated
City Landmark structures on site. A Community Meeting was held on March 21,
2013; the Architectural Review Board float -up discussion was held on August 5,
2013. Application filed 2/28/2013.
• 120 Colorado Avenue — Santa Monica Hotel Project by the Pier. Proposed
redevelopment of the existing Wyndham Hotel site with a new 211 -room hotel with
25 condominiums and ground floor restaurant and retail space. The project
proposes three buildings that increase in height from Ocean Avenue. The building
on Ocean Avenue is 63 feet (five floors), the middle building is 96 -107 feet (eight
floors), and the easterly most building is 174 -195 feet (15 floors). A Community
Meeting was held on September 26, 2013 and an Architectural Review Board float -
up discussion is scheduled for January 6, 2014. Application filed 6/6/2013.
• 1235 5th Street — Proposed five -story (60') mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of approximately 24,170 SF (1,360 SF commercial); 27 units (10 studios,
15 one - bedroom units and two two - bedroom units); and 24 subterranean parking
spaces. Application filed 10/8/2013.
® 315 Colorado Avenue — Santa Monica Place Cinemas. Proposed conversion of
44,247 SF of existing, vacant retail space on the third floor of Santa Monica Place
into a cinema with a maximum of 1,500 seats. A building height increase is proposed
to accommodate stadium -style seating. The proposal may include the addition of
several hundred square feet of new floor area. A Community Meeting is scheduled
for December 12, 2013. Application filed 10/15/2013.
PENDING APPLICATIONS FILED PRIOR TO DECEMBER 1, 2012
2009 Applications
• 1802 Santa Monica Boulevard — This project consists a 33,710- square -foot three -
story mixed -use building that would include an auto dealership, a restaurant, 26
residential units, and a four -level subterranean parking garage. The proposed auto
dealership would be located on the ground floor and consist of a retail showroom
and auto service department. Dealership vehicles would be stored within the
19
subterranean garage. The 1,390- square -foot restaurant with a 240- square -foot
outdoor seating area would also be on the ground level. The project's residential
units would be located on the 2nd and 3rd levels above the ground floor commercial
uses. Residential units would consist of 24 studio units and two 1- bedroom units,
consisting of 18,610 square feet. The building would be 35 feet in height (top of
parapet would be approximately 39 feet high). All parking would be contained on -site
and underground within a four -level subterranean parking garage. The subterranean
garage would provide a total of 130 parking spaces. A Community Meeting and
Planning Commission float -up discussion were held earlier this year and preparation
of the Draft EIR is in progress. Application filed 12/10/2009.
2010 Applications
• 1681 26`h Street — Bergamot Transit Village at the former Papermate site. Proposed
mixed -use project consisting of 471 residential rental units, 27 artist work/live units,
374,423 SF of creative office, and approximately 29,391 SF of neighborhood
commercial space. Proposal includes 1,930 subterranean parking spaces and 1,284
bicycle parking spaces. Planning Commission began its formal consideration of this
application on September 11, 2013; discussions continued on October 23, 2013 and
November 20, 2013. A fourth Planning Commission discussion has been scheduled
for December 4, 2013. Council hearings are anticipated to begin during the first
quarter of 2014. Application filed 5/20/2010.
2011 Applications
• 1318 4th Street — AMC Theater Project. 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 2012 and closed on November 26, 2012. Response to Comments and the
Final EIR are currently in preparation. Project proposal is currently on hold.
Application filed 1/7/2011.
• 1133 Ocean Avenue / 101 Wilshire Boulevard — Miramar Hotel Mixed -Use Project.
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 280 hotel rooms, new food and beverage facilities, spa,
banquet facilities, retail space, and condominiums. An open space area is planned
at the corner of Wilshire Boulevard and Ocean Avenue. Total project square footage
would be approximately 568,940 SF and would also include an affordable housing
component of up to 40 units on hotel -owned property located directly across from
the Hotel on Second Street. A community meeting was held in June 2011 followed
by Planning Commission float -up discussions on February 8 and 22, 2012 and a City
Council float -up discussion on April 24, 2012. An EIR Scoping Meeting was held on
May 16, 2013. Staff review of the project is underway and preparation of the Draft
EIR is also in progress. Application filed 4/28/2011.
20
• 1660 Lincoln Boulevard — A bookend to the project immediately to the north at 1650
Lincoln, this project proposes a six -story (59') approximately 42,461 SF mixed -use
development with 79 residential units (15 SRO - units, 44 one - bedroom, 15 two -
bedroom, five three - bedroom) and a two level subterranean garage with 79 parking
spaces and two motorcycle spaces. A community meeting was held for the project
on January 17, 2012. Application filed 6/16/2011.
• 1650 Lincoln Boulevard — Proposed approximately 45,344 SF six -story (60') mixed -
use project consisting of 86 apartment units (14 SRO - units, 57 one - bedroom, nine
two- bedroom, six three - bedroom), 84 automobile parking spaces, and 2 motorcycle
spaces. A Community Meeting was held for the project proposal on January 17,
2012. Application filed 8/30/2011.
• 3008 Santa Monica Boulevard — Located at the southeast corner of Santa Monica
Boulevard and Stanford Street, this project proposes a 28,553 SF 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. Application
filed 10/27/2011.
• 2848 Colorado Avenue — Roberts Center. The Council float up for this mixed use
development was completed in July 2011. The project proposes a total of 304,368
SF consisting of 231 residential units (113 studios, 86 one - bedroom units, 32 two -
bedroom units), 23,000 SF of neighborhood commercial space, and 37,000 SF of
creative office space. The Final EIR for the project has been released. Application
filed 11/30/2011.
2012 Applications
• 1415 5th Street — Located in the downtown on the east side of Fifth Street between
Broadway and Santa Monica Boulevard, this application proposes a six -story (74')
mixed -use residential /retail project consisting of 51,935 SF total (10,070 SF
commercial); 60 residential units; 159 parking spaces and 133 bicycle parking
spaces. A Community Meeting was held on August 1, 2013 and an ARB float -up
discussion was held on September 16, 2013. Application filed 4/17/2012.
• 1325 6th Street — Proposed seven -story mixed -use residential /retail project
consisting of 68,549 SF total (2,000 SF commercial); 100 residential units; and 166
parking spaces. The site is located on the east side of 6th Street adjacent to the
Santa Monica Main Library parking lot. A Community Meeting was held for this
project on August 30, 2012. Application filed 5/3/2012.
21
• 1437 -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. The
application was filed 6/7/2012 and was resubmitted in August 2013.
• 1112 -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
30,423 SF four -story, 32 -unit building (one one - bedroom and 31 two - bedroom). Two
of the 32 units would be affordable units. Subterranean parking would provide 70
parking spaces. A community meeting was held for this project on September 13,
2012 and an Architectural Review Board float -up discussion was held on July 1,
2013. Application filed 6/12/2012.
• 1601 Lincoln Boulevard — The former Norms Restaurant site located at the
southeast corner of Lincoln Boulevard and Colorado Avenue would be replaced with
a five story (57'), 79,786 SF total (10,687 SF commercial) C- shaped building,
containing 98 residential units (35 studios, 45 one - bedroom, 14 two- bedroom, four
three - bedroom); and 185 parking spaces. A total of 15 of the 89 units would be
affordable units. A community meeting was held on November 8, 2012 and the
Architectural Review Board held a float -up discussion about the proposal on July 15,
2013. Application filed 8/24/2012.
• 525 Colorado Avenue - Proposed eight -story (84') mixed -use project consisting of
41,145 SF total (3,004 SF commercial); 77 residential units (49 studios, 14 one -
bedroom units, 14 two- bedroom units); 125 mechanical parking spaces; and 18
bicycle parking spaces. Applicant is currently redesigning the project proposal.
Application filed 9/6/2012.
• 3032 Wilshire Boulevard — This project is on the site of an existing Bank of America
building. The five -story (60') 81,125 SF total (12,000 SF commercial) development
would provide 100 units (30 studios, 65 one - bedroom, five two - bedroom); 199
parking spaces and 132 bicycle parking spaces. A Community Meeting was held for
the project on September 19, 2013. Application filed 11/1/2012.
• 1530 Santa Monica Boulevard — This project, which was filed on November 29,
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. A Community Meeting was held on March 14, 2013. The project is currently
on hold by the applicant. Application filed 11/2912012.
• 1560 Lincoln Boulevard — The existing Denny's restaurant located on the northwest
corner of Lincoln Boulevard and Colorado Avenue would be replaced with a five -
story 103,000 SF total (13,680 SF commercial) mixed -use development. The
project would contain 100 residential units (90 two - bedroom and 10 three - bedroom)
22
and 13,680 square feet of ground floor retail space. Twenty of the 100 units would
be affordable units. 416 parking spaces and 248 bicycle parking spaces are also
proposed. A Community Meeting for the project proposal was held on August 8,
2013 and an Architectural Review Board float -up was held on September 16, 2013.
Application filed 12/1/2012.
® 3402 Pico Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail at former Grammy site
2121 Cloverfield Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail at Pico /Cloverfield
• 3025 Olympic Boulevard — Paseo Nebraska Project — Mixed -use residential /retail
® 2919 Wilshire Boulevard — Mixed -use residential /retail at Jerry's Liquor site
• 14255 th Street — Mixed -use residential /retail
23
F -119 ffNaa,i=10r� �
December 2013
24
c
4-J
t
CQU
CV/)
W§MU
NEW
0 RIM,
c
W�
UV)
(Un
U
c
0-4
ONE! SO
z I
I-& Tell . On-
MORI
Z�
OWN.
Tom
10-
PWQ
N U CL
41
Ln D
-0 >' 41
73 sa
c —C)
mootnu-
*4 Cj
0 C) 0
JIM=
M,
��Vm-
ONE
MEN%
I'd
0 0 -�j
to c- -C
C)
()
0
TO c: N, As W
4� Go va U1 0- 1 U tug
E2, 1, W . , Un ca) aj C:
E -3 :L' a) c -6
(t) > E
X C "
4�
41
Ln +1 U L,) C>
0 U
U, 40�
c:
a) -r.
on to
0
" " x 0 -C U
0-0 (1) U rX 3: S
N -a
WOU
' E
0
3:
o
QJ
0
4-;
0
0
"Obn
0
0
oi
w
m
Ln
E32
/
/
/$.s
X
>
E
4�
V)
Q)
Q)
c
0
-0
(u
e
1
Q)
/_%
0
VI
0
u
4�1
Lo
4�
u
0
a
u
=3
4-
0
in
F
x
r -
0
0-0
a)
u
CL
ATTACHMENT "C"
25
F: \atty \mu ni \laws \alan\LUCE \I nteri mOrdAmd 12.17.13
City Council Meeting: 12 -17 -13 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA EXTENDING INTERIM ORDINANCE NUMBER 2439 (CCS), WHICH
ESTABLISHED INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES PENDING
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LUCE, INCLUDING MODIFICATIONS ADDRESSING
ORDINANCE APPLICABILITY, CM DISTRICT NON - CONFORMING USES, SHARED
PARKING AND FAR CALCULATIONS IN THE DOWNTOWN, EXEMPTIONS FOR
CITY PROJECTS, PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE PERMITTED NUMBER OF
RESTAURANTS IN THE CM DISTRICT, THE REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PUBLIC
PARKING SPACES WITHIN PUBLIC PARKING STRUCTURES IN BSC -2 AND C3 -C
ZONING DISTRICTS, AUTHORIZED EXISTING NONCONFORMING AUTOMOBILE
DEALERSHIP USES AND MINOR EXPANSIONS THERETO IN RESIDENTIAL AND
"A" OFF - STREET PARKING OVERLAY ZONES, MODIFIED THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR MINISTERIAL PROCESSING OF 100 % AFFORDABLE HOUSING OF 50 OR
FEWER UNITS, MODIFIED FLOOR AREA RATIO CALCULATIONS IN THE
DOWNTOWN DISTRICT FOR OUTDOOR DINING, PROVIDED AN INTERIM USE
PERMIT APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE BERGAMOT PLANNING AREA AND
CLARIFIED THAT THE BERGAMOT AREA PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
TIER 1 PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZED USES SUPERSEDE THE REQUIREMENT OF
THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO THE EXTENT OF ANY INCONSISTENCY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. The Council finds and declares:
(a) The City adopted a new Land Use and Circulation Element of the General
Plan of the City of Santa Monica ( "LUCE ") on July 6, 2010 but has not yet adopted
1
amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance reflecting the LUCE's policies, goals and
standards.
(b) The adoption of the LUCE was the culmination of a multi -year planning
process that commenced in 2004.
(c) The LUCE encompasses the community's vision of the City's future and is
designed to maintain the City's character, protect the City's neighborhoods, manage its
transportation systems, and encourage additional housing in a sustainable manner that
ensures a high quality of life for the City's residents.
(d) The LUCE implements the community's core values through its focus on
community character and neighborhood conservation, future trip reduction, vibrant and
walkable villages, integrated land use and transportation, local land uses and housing,
jobs tied to housing and transit, promotion of social and fiscal health and diversity,
sustainability, community benefits, open space, and implementation, phasing and
monitoring.
(e) The LUCE goals and policies are predicated on the integration of land use
and transportation including a focus on the type of land uses, the location of land uses,
the quality of projects, the amount of developmental change, and the pace of this
change.
(f) The LUCE was prepared with the general purpose of guiding and
accomplishing coordinated and harmonious development of the City which, in
accordance with existing and future needs, best promotes the public health, safety, and
general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the process of development.
2
(g) The LUCE substantially revises the City's land use policies, goals, and
standards.
(h) The City's planning and zoning regulations are presently under
comprehensive review and revision in order to ensure that such regulations are
consistent with the General Plan as amended and consistent with the public health,
safety, and welfare. This comprehensive revision of the City's Zoning Ordinance is a
substantial project which is crucial to the community's long -term welfare as reflected in
the goals, policies, and standards of the LUCE. Major elements of the comprehensive
revision of the Zoning Ordinance are currently under public review and discussion at the
Planning Commission and scheduled for review and adoption by City Council during the
second quarter of 2014.
(i) Certain critical areas of conflict between the LUCE and the existing Zoning
Ordinance have been identified by the City's Planning and Community Development
Department as it has reviewed pending applications subsequent to the adoption of the
LUCE.
(j) Zoning Ordinance Part 9.04.20.28 establishes the applicability and
procedures for issuance of administrative approvals which provide for the ministerial
administrative review and assessment of proposed developments subject to explicit
standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance.
(k) The administrative approval process is premised on the assumption that the
explicit standards in the Zoning Ordinance have been adopted to ensure that a
completed project is in harmony with existing or potential development in the area and
is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan.
3
(1) However, this premise underlying the administrative approval process is no
longer applicable given the significant ways in which the LUCE differs from the prior
Land Use and Circulation elements including, but not limited to, the direct linkage
between land use and transportation policies and programs and the establishment of
new development policies and standards which ensure that quality development
contributes to the character of the City.
(m) Additionally, the LUCE establishes a base height for each land use as a
baseline. Proposed development which seeks additional height above the base is
subject to discretionary review and must meet additional requirements consistent with
the community's broader social, environmental, and circulation goals. This approach is
defined in three tiers.
(n) Under the LUCE, Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects must provide community benefits
for the City and the neighborhood. More specifically, a developer seeking to develop a
Tier 2 or Tier 3 project must include certain preferred uses, beneficial project design
features, and provide critical amenities or meet other development standards that
address the community's core needs —it's social, cultural, physical, transportation and
environmental goals.
(o) The LUCE identifies five priority categories of community benefits —new
affordable and workforce housing, GHG emission and congestion reduction, physical
improvements to create connections and open space, social and cultural facilities, and
historic preservation.
(p) The existing Zoning Ordinance does not currently incorporate this tier
structure or establish a mechanism to prioritize and necessitate that projects participate
2
in the community benefit tier structure, which is the basis by which much of the LUCE
vision, goals, and policies will be achieved.
(q) Additionally, the LUCE establishes 17 distinct land use designations. One of
these land use designations is the Downtown Core. The purpose of this designation is
to maintain and enhance the downtown area as the heart of the City and as a thriving,
mixed use urban environment. Unlike the other land use designations, the LUCE does
not establish new height and FAR development parameters, but instead provides that
the height and FAR along with other development standards shall be determined
through a specific plan process.
(r) At the time the initial interim ordinance was adopted, there were
approximately 700,000 square feet of administrative and development review projects,
not including development agreements, pending planning review. Of the 700,000
square feet, approximately 500,000 square feet was located within the Downtown Core.
Approximately half of the projects in the Downtown Core were Administrative Approvals
that did not require public review and need only comply with objective standards in the
existing Zoning Ordinance. Within the Downtown, bringing forward approximately
200,000 square feet of new development outside of the development agreement
process before the completion of the Downtown Specific Plan meant that nearly a
quarter of the growth anticipated in the Downtown could be constructed inconsistent
with the yet to be adopted Specific Plan. The Downtown Specific Plan will include a
circulation framework that will address the integration of Expo light rail into the
Downtown system, freeway access, direct parking structure access, and congestion;
establishing the foundation for future land use and transportation decisions. If these
5
Administrative Approvals had proceeded in a piecemeal fashion without these
components, it would have undermined the community vision set forth in the Downtown
District goals and policies, as well as the Downtown Specific Plan process underway
and would have detrimentally affected the City's ability to implement LUCE goals and
policies, particularly with respect to: providing open spaces, trip reduction, coordinating
with adjacent sites, congestion management, and achieving community goals through
community benefits and quality urban design.
(s) Additionally, transit - oriented districts in the City's transitioning industrial areas
are not reflected in the current zoning ordinance, which allows uses that would now be
considered undesirable and inconsistent with the LUCE.
(t) Pending completion of the comprehensive update to the Zoning Ordinance, it
is essential that development be consistent with the General Plan so that the goals and
values of the community, as reflected in the LUCE, are not significantly undercut.
Adjusting the development standards as provided in this Ordinance will ensure that the
quality of life, the environment, the ability to move around the City, and the efficacy of
the ongoing planning process are preserved.
(u) Adoption of this ordinance would not prohibit any development, but would
instead provide an alternate process by which development is reviewed and approved
so as to ensure consistency with and appropriate implementation of the LUCE.
(v) Adoption of this ordinance would also not materially alter the City's
substantial incentives for residential or mixed use development in non - residential zoning
districts. These incentives would be preserved in local law and policy. For example,
residential development in all of the City's commercial districts would remain authorized.
Thus, residential development could still occur in over 80% of the City.
(w) After the adoption of the initial interim ordinance, issues were raised relating
to the processing of projects that were in the pipeline prior to the effective date of the
initial interim ordinance which, require the City to expeditiously consider and adjust the
applicability provisions of the interim ordinance to ensure fairness to project applicants
while preserving the City's ability to effectuate the goals and policies of the LUCE.
(x) After the interim ordinance was extended on April 26, 2011, it became
apparent that allowing two restaurants per block on the east side of Main Street north of
Ocean Park Boulevard will promote the general welfare by encouraging additional
investment in that neighborhood and strengthening the connection between Main Street
and the Civic Center.
(y) As detailed above and in the LUCE, the City's downtown is a thriving, mixed -
use urban environment for people to live, work, be entertained, and be culturally
enriched.
(z) This area has the greatest concentration of activity in the City, anchored by
the core commercial district, including the Third Street Promenade and Santa Monica
Place.
(aa) The City's publically owned parking structures in the BSC -2 and C3 -C zone
districts are essential to a vibrant, economically viable downtown area, providing
parking for the offices, restaurants, theaters, and residences.
7
(bb) The vast majority of the City's residents regularly visit downtown and use its
parking resources.
(cc) The importance of the City's publically -owned parking infrastructure in the
City's downtown is reflected in the numerous studies and reports over the past dozen
years, including but not limited to the 2000 Downtown Parking Management Program,
the 2002 Downtown Parking Task Force strategic plan, the 2006 Downtown Parking
Program, and the 2009 Walker Parking Study.
(dd) These centrally located parking structures enable their users to park once
and then walk to multiple destinations.
(ee) This "Park Once" philosophy contributes to the Downtown's pedestrian
character and is a major underpinning of its success.
(ff) These parking structures are also operated in a manner to meet the City's
LUCE, transportation and economic goals.
(gg) The LUCE calls for a parking management approach which utilizes a
shared pool of parking resources creating a true shared parking district.
(hh) Given these fundamental goals, it is essential that these parking structures
be protected as precious resources to ensure that adequate parking is available and
that easy access is provided to the core of the Downtown thereby promoting its vitality.
(ii) The City has spent millions of dollars retrofitting and maintaining many of
these structures.
0
(jj) In April 26, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in
California Redevelopment Association v. Ana Matosantos, affirming AB 1X26 which
provides for the dissolution of redevelopment agencies.
(kk) In AB 1X26, the State legislature incorporated provisions that purport to
require properties formerly owned by the City's Redevelopment Agency to be sold so
that the proceeds can be transferred to the County auditor - controller for distribution to
taxing entities as property tax proceeds.
(II) In such event, to ensure replacement parking essential for the economic
viability of the City's downtown, there is a need for a development standard that
requires an owner to first obtain a final permit for a project providing replacement public
parking within the same district before an owner may remove, redevelop or convert a
parking structure in a manner that results in the removal of public parking spaces.
(mm) On April 11, 2006, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance Number
2179 (CCS), after lengthy public outreach, environmental review, and hearings,
modifying auto dealership standards in various commercial and residential zoning
districts in the City to better balance the need for auto dealerships to expand and
develop a more urban format within a context of limited land availability and close
proximity to sensitive residential uses. This Ordinance was extended several times, but
expired August 8, 2010.
(nn) Consistent with LUCE goals and policies, it has and continues to be
contemplated that the provisions of the auto dealership interim ordinance would be
included in the Zoning Ordinance Update that is currently under preparation.
(oo) More specifically, Goal E8 of the LUCE states: "Allow for the expansion and
improved performance of automobile dealers in Santa Monica, recognizing their
contribution to the local economy and the revenue base of the General Fund." Further,
LUCE Policy E8.3 states: "Allow automobile dealers to reasonably expand in their
current locations and otherwise respond to likely global changes in the automobile
industry as long as their redevelopment is in the urban auto dealership format and
incorporates mitigations to reduce any negative impacts on the surrounding residential
and nonresidential uses. The expansion may occur on existing parcels used for
automobile dealerships and on adjacent or proximate parcels."
(pp) Auto dealerships are important to the economic vitality of the City, and
readopting, with modification, certain of the auto dealership interim ordinance provisions
would encourage the retention of these dealerships by enabling these dealerships to
expand and modernize their operations in order to remain competitive in the industry
while ensuring that changes or improvements made on existing automobile dealer lots
are sensitive to and in keeping with the character of adjacent residential areas.
(qq) The dissolution of the City's Redevelopment Agency and the associated
loss of the City's primary funding source for affordable housing have significantly
impacted the City's ability to produce housing for the lowest household income
categories. Historically, the City's Housing Division invested approximately $15 million
of Housing Trust Funds annually to finance affordable housing through loans and grants
to non - profit housing developers. With the dissolution of redevelopment, the majority of
the Housing Trust Funds' dollars, as well as the City's ability to leverage these monies
with outside funding has been eliminated.
10
(rr) The LUCE identifies the production of affordable housing as one of the City's
highest priorities and many of the LUCE policies are targeted at the production of
affordable housing. For instance, LUCE Policy H1.2 provides that the City should
"maintain programs to require and encourage the production of affordable housing for
very low -, low- and moderate income households," "seek additional opportunities to
increase the percentage of affordable housing as a component of for -sale and qualifying
rental residential and mixed -use housing projects," and "incentivize affordable housing
projects." LUCE Policy H1.3 provides that the City should "incentivize the creation of
new affordable housing opportunities."
(ss) The City is in the process of updating its Housing Element. The City's
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) includes four hundred twenty -eight (428)
very low income housing units and two hundred sixty -three (263) low income housing
units.
(tt) The loss of redevelopment monies and the City's future affordable housing
goals as reflected in the RHNA necessitates that the City strengthen its incentives for
the production of housing which provide a greater mix in housing affordability levels and
address the City's need for low, very low and extremely low affordable housing units.
The proposed revision to the standards for the ministerial processing of 100%
affordable housing projects of 50 or fewer units directly addresses this effort.
(uu) Encouraging ground floor outdoor dining is an important goal expressed in
the LUCE. Excluding such dining from the calculation of floor area ratio can help
incentivize this use and create opportunities for adaptive reuse in existing structures
that would not presently be possible. Such ground floor outdoor dining does not
11
contribute to a building's mass and density, and therefore its exclusion from FAR is
appropriate. However, ground floor outdoor dining would still be considered floor area
so that its potential impacts on such areas as parking and traffic would still be
calculated.
(vv) The Bergamot Area Plan has been adopted to provide both the goals and
policies of the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element for that geographic area
and to provide area - specific development standards that will apply to create a new
transit - oriented neighborhood in proximity to the Exposition Line Bergamot Station. The
Plan's provisions are comprehensive, and in order to ensure the intended outcomes, the
Bergamot Area Plan requires that all projects be consistent with its policies, guidelines,
and development standards. In order to ensure proper implementation of the Plan as
intended, amendment of the Interim Zoning Ordinance is necessary so that in cases of
conflict between the Bergamot Area Plan and Zoning Ordinance pertaining to any
development standard for a Tier 1 project or any authorized use, the Bergamot Area
Plan shall control. In addition, while the Bergamot Area Plan requires a Minor Use
Permit for certain uses within the Plan area, the Minor Use Permit, a proposed
innovation in future revisions to the Zoning Ordinance update, has not yet been
established as a process. Amendment of the Interim Zoning Ordinance is necessary to
establish an interim process by which staff can process requests for those uses that
require a Minor Use Permit under the Bergamot Area Plan.
(ww) In light of the above - detailed concerns, on February 8, 2011, the City
Council adopted Interim Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) establishing interim
development procedures pending implementation of the LUCE through a revised Zoning
12
Ordinance; on April 26, 2011, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2356(CCS)
extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS); on February 28, 2012, the
City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2394 (CCS), further extending and amending
Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS), on August 28, 2012, the City Council adopted
Ordinance Number 2407 (CCS) additionally extending and amending Ordinance
Number 2345 (CCS), on February 26, 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance
Number 2417 (CCS) amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) to address ministerial
processing of 100% affordable housing projects of 50 or fewer units, on June 25, 2013,
City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2428 (CCS), further extending and amending
Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) to exempt ground floor outdoor dining on private
property from a Floor Area Ratio Calculation in the Downtown District, and on
September 24, 2013, City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2439 (CCS), clarifying
that the Bergamot Area Plan standards apply when provisions are in conflict with the
current Zoning Ordinance and establishing a Use Permit process in lieu of the Minor
Use Permit identified in the Bergamot Area Plan until adoption of the Zoning Ordinance.
(xx) Pending completion of the City's review of its planning and zoning
regulations, it is necessary on an interim basis to modify the Zoning Ordinance as set
forth in Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of this Ordinance.
(yy) As detailed above and in the January 25, 2011, April 26, 2011, February 14,
2012, August 14, 2012, February 12, 2013, June 11, 2013, September 24, 2013, and
December 17, 2013 City Council staff reports, there continues to exist a current and
immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare should the interim zoning
ordinance and necessary amendments not be adopted and development of projects
13
inconsistent with the LUCE be allowed to proceed through the issuance of
Administrative Approvals or Development Review Permits which are not consistent with
the explicit standards of the LUCE or with the tier structure and the provision of
community benefits.
SECTION 2. Interim Zoning Regulations
Notwithstanding any provision of the City's Zoning Ordinance to the contrary, the
issuance or extension of permits for either a new development project or for the
expansion of an existing development project that exceeds 7500 square feet
( "development project ") that does not comply with the interim zoning standards set forth
in Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, or Section 6 of this Ordinance is hereby prohibited
and no zoning permits or approvals, subdivision maps, building permits, or other land
use permit shall be approved, issued, or extended for a development project in
contravention of Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, or Section 6, during the pendency of
this Ordinance or any extension thereof.
SECTION 3. Interim Zoning.
(a) Administrative Approvals. No development project shall be approved
pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.28.020 [Administrative
Approvals] unless all of the following findings are made:
(1) The proposed development does not require discretionary review or approval
as established in the Zoning Ordinance, the LUCE, or this Interim Ordinance.
`GI
(2) The proposed development conforms precisely to the development
standards contained in both the Zoning Ordinance and in the LUCE for the zoning
district and land use designation in which the development is located.
(3) In the case of any inconsistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the
LUCE pertaining to any objective development standard or permitted use, the proposed
development conforms to the more restrictive development standard and is a permitted
use authorized by the LUCE.
(4) Additionally, notwithstanding subsection (c) of this Section, any pending
Administrative Approval application filed on or before March 11, 2011 for a housing
development project must meet the following Transportation Demand Management
requirements:
(i) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the property owner shall prepare,
implement, and maintain a Transportation Demand Management plan, to the
satisfaction of the City, including physical, operating and leasing conditions that will be
reasonably likely to result in attainment of a 1.50 a.m. and p.m. AVR among employees
at the development within three years and continued achievement and maintenance of
the AVR targets thereafter. The following measures shall be included in the developer's
(A) Transportation Information: Developer (and its successors and assignees)
shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City, bulletin boards, display cases, or kiosks,
displaying transportation information located where the greatest number of residents
and employees are likely to see them. This information shall also be provided annually
ii
and upon signing of any lease, to residents and commercial tenants. Information shall
include, but is not limited to, the following:
® Current maps, routes, fare information, and schedules for public transit
routes serving the site.
® Telephone numbers and website links for referrals on transportation
information including numbers for the regional ridesharing agency and
local transit operators.
® , Ridesharing promotional material supplied by commuter - oriented
organizations.
■ Bicycle route and facility information, including regional /local bicycle maps
and bicycle safety information.
® A list of facilities available for carpoolers, vanpoolers,, bicyclists, transit
riders, and pedestrians at the site.
® Walking maps and information about local services, restaurants, movie
theaters, and recreational activities within walking distance of the project.
(B) Motorcycle Parking: Developer (and its successors and assignees) shall
provide two motorcycle parking spaces allocated in the commercial subterranean
parking level, if commercial parking is provided on -site.
(C) Bicycle Parking: Developer (or successors and assignees) shall provide
and maintain long -term, secure bicycle parking, such as a locked room or cage, for
commercial tenant employees at a rate of one space for each 5,000 sq. ft. of
commercial area, with a minimum of two spaces in City- approved locations. Long -term
it.
secure bicycle parking for the residential component shall be one space per bedroom
and shall be provided in an enclosed, secure space (e.g. bike room, bike lockers).
Short -term bicycle parking for the residential component shall be 0.2 spaces /unit with a
minimum of 4 spaces.
(D) Bicycle, Vanpool, and Carpool Parking Spaces: Developer (or successors
and assignees) shall provide parking space in accordance with SMMC 9.04.10.08.050.
Preferential parking within the parking garage shall be provided for project employees
who carpool or vanpool to work. The charge for such parking spaces will be at a
reduced rate.
(E) Showers: A minimum of one women's and one men's shower and locker
facility shall be provided for employees of commercial uses on site who bicycle or use
another active means, powered by human propulsion, of getting to work or who exercise
during the day.
(F) Unbundling of Parking Spaces: If the City adopts an ordinance or other
legal mechanism which authorizes the unbundling of parking, the Applicant (or
Applicant's successors and assigns) shall in all leases it executes as landlord of
residential units within the Project provide residential tenants with the option of leasing
parking space(s) separately from the residential unit. Any parking spaces not leased by
project residential tenants may be leased to any lessee on a month to month basis,
whether or not the lessee otherwise occupies or works at the project, provided project
residential tenants are given first priority to lease such spaces.
(G) Transportation Management Organization: Developer shall agree to
participate in a Transportation Management Organization serving its area and require
17
same of its tenants. If the City adopts a requirement that a Transportation Management
Organization be formed for the project's geographic area, property owner and tenants
shall participate in any specific strategies that may be implemented, including but not
limited to, support for transit use, shared parking, car sharing opportunity, and
pedestrian and bicycle improvements.
(b) Tier 2 and Tier 3 Development Projects. Notwithstanding the development
standards specified in the Zoning Ordinance, no development project which would
constitute a Tier 2 or Tier 3 project as established pursuant to LUCE Chapter 2.1 shall
be approved except City projects or projects developed pursuant to a development
agreement adopted pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.48. City
projects are defined as City public works projects and City community facilities (e.g.
libraries, public parking structures, recycling centers, and community centers), not
including public /private partnerships, and City projects shall be deemed to meet the
community benefit requirements of Tier 2 and Tier 3 development projects.
(c) Downtown Core. Notwithstanding the development standards specified in
the Zoning Ordinance, no development project in the Downtown Core as delineated in
the Land Use Designation Map approved by the City Council on July 6, 2010 shall
exceed 32 feet in height except City projects or projects developed pursuant to a
development agreement adopted pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter
9.48. However, development projects located entirely within the BSC1 Zoning District
shall not be subject to these interim standards provided that the development project is
less than the height and floor area of the existing building.
m
(d) 100% Affordable Housing Projects. Notwithstanding subsection (b) and (c)
of this Section, affordable housing projects with 50 units or less will continue to be
processed ministerially if a minimum of twenty -five percent (25 %) of the housing units
are deed - restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the City for occupancy
by households with income of sixty percent (60 %) of Area Median Income or less and
the remainder of the housing units are deed - restricted or restricted by an agreement
approved by the City for occupancy by households with incomes of eighty percent
(80 %) of median income or less. Such affordable housing projects may also include
non - residential uses, as long as such uses do not exceed a maximum percentage of
33% of the total floor area.
Notwithstanding Section 7, affordable housing projects with 50 units or less
which are being developed pursuant to a settlement agreement with the City or which
received their Administrative Approval prior to January 8, 2013 shall continue to be
processed in accordance with Ordinance Number 2407 (CCS).
(e) Shared Parking. The following administrative process, is hereby established
authorizing property owners and tenants to request shared parking in the Downtown
Core, except for projects that are processed through a development agreement. A
shared parking permit is intended to permit the owners of parking facilities to rent or
lease underutilized parking that is available in their facility to nearby residents, workers
or businesses while reserving sufficient parking supply needed for on -site uses.
(1) Permit Required.
A shared parking permit, approved by the Planning Director, or his /her designee,
shall be required and shall be issued prior to the commencement of a shared parking
19
use of any private parking facility that is otherwise limited to on -site users. The
Planning Director, or his /her designee, may establish additional conditions to further the
intent of this subsection (e) and ensure that parking spaces needed.for the primary on-
site uses will be available during the hours needed for their use. A public hearing shall
not be required for issuance of a shared parking permit.
(2) Application.
Application for a shared parking permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with
the requirements contained in Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.20.
(3) Findings.
The Planning Director, or his /her designee, or Planning Commission on appeal,
may approve a shared parking permit application, in whole or in part, with or without
conditions, only when all of the following findings are made in an affirmative manner:
(i) The operation of the requested shared parking permit at the location
proposed and within the time period specified will not adversely impact the primary use
of the parking facility for its intended on -site users, or otherwise endanger the public
health, safety, or general welfare.
(ii) The shared parking permit sets forth the maximum number of shared
parking spaces that are being approved for use by off -site users that will be available
during peak and off -peak parking demand periods so as to ensure that a sufficient
number of spaces will be provided to meet the greater parking demand of the
anticipated users.
20
(iii) Additional requirements, restrictions or agreements, as deemed necessary
by the Planning Director, or his /her designee, are included as a requirement(s) of the
shared parking permit to ensure that parking spaces needed for the primary on -site
uses will be available during the hours needed for their use.
The Planning Director, or his /her designee shall prepare a written decision
which shall contain the findings of fact upon which such decision is based and all
required conditions, if approved. The decision shall be mailed to the applicant and to
property owners and residents of parcels adjacent to the parcel for which the Shared
Parking Permit is requested. Copies of the decision shall also be provided to the
Planning Commission.
(4) Term of Permit.
A shared parking permit shall be valid for a one -year period from the date of
issuance unless a different period is set by the Planning Director, or his /her designee, or
the Planning Commission on appeal, as a condition of granting the shared parking
permit. The permit shall renew automatically for additional one -year periods unless the
permit is modified or revoked in accordance with subsection (6) of this Section.
(5) Monitoring.
The permit holder shall grant City staff access to the parking facility for the
purpose of verifying parking availability prior to issuing the permit as well as to allow
random monitoring after the permit is issued.
(6) Modification or Revocation.
21
The City may modify or revoke an approved shared parking permit in accordance
with the following procedures:
(i) If the Planning Director designee receives evidence that the conditions of
the permit have not been met, or the permit granted is being or has recently been
exercised contrary to the terms of the approval or in violation of a specific statute,
ordinance, law, or regulation, the Planning Director designee shall serve notice of these
violations, either in person or by registered mail, on the owner of the property and on
the permit holder and shall provide the permit holder with a reasonable opportunity to
cure the violation(s).
(ii) If the permit holder or property owner has not responded to the notice
within 10 days or the Planning Director designee determines that the permit holder has
failed to cure the violation, the Planning Director designee may refer the matter to the
Zoning Administrator for a revocation hearing. Notice of hearing shall be published
once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City and shall be served either in
person or by registered mail on the owner of the property and on the permit holder at
least ten days prior to such hearing. The notice of hearing shall contain a statement of
the specific reasons for revocation.
(iii) After the hearing, a shared parking permit may be revoked by the Zoning
Administrator or by the Planning Commission on appeal or review if any one of the
following findings is made:
fraud
(A) That the Shared Parking Permit was obtained by misrepresentation or
22
(B) That the conditions of the permit have not been met, or the permit granted
is being or has recently been exercised contrary to the terms of the approval or in
violation of a specific statute, ordinance, law, or regulation.
A written determination of modification or revocation of the shared parking permit shall
be mailed to the property owner and the permit holder within ten days of such
determination.
(7) Appeals.
Any person may appeal the approval, conditions of approval, denial, modification
or revocation of a shared parking permit to the Planning Commission if filed within
fourteen consecutive calendar days of the date the decision is made in the manner
provided in Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.24, Sections 9.04.20.24.020 through
9.04.20.24.040.
(f) Floor Area Ratio Calculations in the Downtown Core. In the Downtown Core,
below -grade floor area shall not be included when calculating a project's floor area ratio
(FAR). However, such below -grade floor area shall be counted as floor area for all
other purposes.
(g) Floor Area Ratio Calculations in the Downtown District. In the Downtown
District, as defined in the LUCE, ground floor outdoor dining in buildings on private
property shall not be included when calculating a project's floor area ratio (FAR)
provided the dining area has no more than a 42 inch high barrier surrounding the dining
area and is visible from the public right of way. However, such ground floor outdoor
dining shall be counted as floor area for all other purposes.
P93
(h) Non - conforming Uses in CM District. An existing use in the CM District shall
be considered no longer existing if that use is changed to another type of use or if for a
period of one year such use has not been in regular operation. Regular operation shall
be considered being open for business to the general public during such use's
customary business hours.
(i) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9.04.08.28.070 of the Zoning Code,
two restaurants per block shall be allowed on the east side of Main Street north of
Ocean Park Boulevard and south of Pico Boulevard.
(j) No removal, redevelopment or conversion of a parking structure in BSC -2 and
C3 -C zone districts, publically owned as of February 14, 2012, which results in the loss
of parking spaces above the ground floor shall be permitted unless the final permit to
commence construction for a project providing the one -to -one replacement of this
parking has been issued in the same zoning district and this replacement parking will be
offered to the public at rates comparable to the most recent rates offered to the public
for the removed parking spaces.
(k) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(3), within the Bergamot Area Plan
boundaries, in the case of any inconsistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the
Bergamot Area Plan pertaining to any development standard for a Tier 1 project or any
authorized use, the provisions in the Bergamot Area Plan shall control and be applied.
Until the adoption of a revised Zoning Ordinance which includes a process for the
issuance of Minor Use Permits (MUP), an application for any land use for which
Bergamot Area Plan Table 5.02 (Land Use Regulations) requires an MUP shall be
processed as a Use Permit, subject to the provisions of SMMC Section 9.04.20.11.
24
SECTION 4. Automobile Dealerships in Residential and "A" Off - Street
Parking Overlay Zones:
Lots designated ( "A ") Off - Street Parking Overlay District, Low Density Multiple-
Family Residential District (R2), or Medium Density Multiple Family Residential District
(R3) that are contiguous to and were used legally in conjunction with an automobile
dealership in operation on August 14, 2012, which automobile dealership uses have not
subsequently been abandoned ( "Qualifying Lots "), may be developed as an automobile
storage structure or parking structure provided these uses are operated in conjunction
with an automobile dealership on the associated and adjacent commercial lot and the
development is undertaken pursuant to subsections (a) through (1) of this Section. The
expansion of automobile dealership support areas shall be authorized if undertaken
pursuant to subsection (m) of this Section:
(a) Maximum Parcel Coverage: 50% of residential parcel area.
(b) Maximum Building Height:
(1) R2 Zone: 23 feet, excluding four feet of the required parapet.
(2) R3 Zone: 28 feet, excluding four feet of the required parapet.
(c) Setbacks:
public street.
(1) A minimum 20 foot setback from the property line adjacent to a
(2) A minimum 15 foot setback shall be provided from the property line
opposite the street facing property line. Where an alley is present, this distance may be
measured from the alley centerline.
25
(3) Except when subsection (c)(2) of this Section applies, a minimum 8
foot setback shall be provided between any above grade structure and a property line
that is shared with an adjacent residential property that is not used as part of an
automobile dealership.
(d) Inventory Storage on Surface Lots. A qualifying lot may be used for
surface inventory storage only if the following conditions are met:
(1) Any displaced required parking shall be relocated to another off-
street location that is:
(A) Located within 750 feet of the qualifying lot, or
(B) Located within 300 feet of a public transit line that connects
the off - street location with the dealership and the dealership provides free bus passes to
its employees, or
(C) Serviced by a dealership - provided shuttle between the off-
street location and the qualifying lot which has been approved by the City's Director of
Planning.
(2) The displaced parking shall be returned to the qualifying lot if the
criteria of subsection (d)(1) are no longer met.
(e) Prohibited Uses. No portion of a residentially zoned parcel may be used
for auto repair work, rental car use, automobile washing, outdoor display of vehicles,
commercial signage, storage tanks, inventory storage on surface lots (except as
provided in subsection (d) of this Section), or any other use not specifically identified in
this Section 4.
M
(f) Rooftop Parking: Rooftop parking is permitted subject to the special
standards set forth in Section 5.
(g) Exemption from additional multi - family development standards: Except as
set forth or modified herein, the property development standards of Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.06.060 and Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9.04.08.06.070 shall not apply in order to accommodate the specific structural and
design requirements of parking and automobile storage structures.
(h) Approval Process: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Development
Review (DR) Permit shall be required for the development of any parking structure or
automobile storage lot. The CUP shall be subject to the standards set forth in Section
6. The DR Permit shall be subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.14.
(i) ARB Review: All new construction, new additions to existing buildings and
any other exterior improvements that require issuance of a building permit shall be
subject to architectural review pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 9.32 of this
Chapter.
(j) Design Standards. Parking structures constructed under these provisions
shall be subject to the design standards set forth in Section 5.
(k) Use to revert to residential: Structures constructed under these provisions
on residential parcels. without an "A" Off - street Parking Overlay designation shall be
permitted to remain only when operated in conjunction with an automobile dealership on
the adjacent commercial lot. If the automobile dealership use is abandoned, the parking
27
structure shall be removed or incorporated into a residential project on the residential
parcel(s) within 3 years.
(1) Housing Impact Fee: Parking structures and automobile storage lots
constructed on parcels designated as Low Density Multiple - Family Residential (R2) and
Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R3), without an "A" Off - Street Parking
Overlay designation, may be subject to an Affordable Housing Fee established by
resolution of the City Council to mitigate the impact of the loss of the potential
development of affordable housing on these sites.
(m) A floor area expansion of existing automobile dealerships in the
Residential and A Off - Street Parking Overlay Zones that is less than 750 square feet
shall be permitted by -right provided that:
1) The expanded floor area is utilized for an ancillary support function,
including, but not limited to, customer waiting area, offices, vehicle parts storage or
vehicle parts display;
2) The height of the expansion shall be no more than 1 story and shall
not exceed 23 feet;
3) None of the expanded area is utilized for auto repair activities,
including but not limited to service bays, body work, oil change and lubrication, or radio,
stereo, or phone installation;
4) The square footage expansion may maintain the existing building
lines adjacent to public rights of way, subject to Architectural Review Board approval.
SECTION 5. Special Standards for Parking Structures and Automobile Storage
Lots Associated with Automobile Dealerships.
Parking structures and automobile storage lots associated with an automobile
dealership shall comply with the following special project design standards:
(a) Design Standards:
(1) Except for emergency -only pedestrian exists required by the Building
Officer, parking structure walls facing property lines that are adjacent to a residential
use shall be solid and decorative subject to the approval of the ARB. Openings may be
permitted adjacent to a public street or commercially zoned property.
(2) Non -skid or other similar surface treatment on both floors and ramps
of the parking structure shall be required to prevent tire squeals. This material shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning and Community
Development.
(3) Light sources shall be designed to contain direct and diffuse lighting
and glare on the subject property.
(4) Rooftop parking on parcels that directly abut or are separated by an
alley from a residential district is only permitted if the parking structure provides a 6 foot
parapet on the side of the parking structure closest to the residential district. This
parapet shall be solid and have a surface density of 4 pounds per square foot.
(5) In order to minimize noise and air impacts, exhaust vents and other
mechanical equipment associated with a parking structure shall be located as far from
29
residential uses as feasible consistent with the Chapter 8 of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code.
(6) Floor area dedicated to employee and customer parking and vehicle
storage shall not apply to refuse and recycling requirements in Santa Monica Municipal
Code Section 9.04.10.02.150 and Section 9.04.10.02.151 unless otherwise required by
the Director of Environmental and Public Works Management or his /her designee in
order to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
(7) Parking structures developed in lots designated Parking ( "A ") Overlay,
Low Density Multiple - Family Residential (R2), or Medium Density Multiple Family
Residential (R3) shall also comply with the following additional requirements:
(A) Ingress and egress shall be from the adjacent commercial lot. The Planning
Commission may approve an alternative access plan that minimizes impacts to adjacent
residential uses if it determines that access from the commercial lot is precluded by
existing commercial development.
(B) At least 10% of the parking spaces within a structure shall be maintained and
designated for employee parking only, unless the Planning Commission determines
based on an employee parking demand analysis that sufficient parking is otherwise
provided either on -site or at an acceptable off -site location.
(C) If the structure is developed in conjunction with development on adjacent
commercial lots, the project shall be designed so that building mass increases toward
the commercial street and architectural elements that are permitted to exceed height
limits are located away from adjacent residential uses to the greatest extent feasible.
(D) Notwithstanding Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.170, a
four foot unexcavated area shall be provided along the entire length of a property line
shared by an automobile dealership and an adjacent residentially zoned property. Fifty
percent of the required yard area adjacent to a public street shall remain unexcavated.
(E) Notwithstanding Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.170, a
landscaped buffer of minimum five -foot width shall be required along the property line
adjacent to a residential use. The buffer shall include a hedge to be maintained up to
12 feet in height where adjacent to a residential side yard and 42 inches in height where
adjacent to a residential front yard. The Planning Commission may reduce or waive any
part of this requirement if such reduction or waiver is consistent with the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
(F) At least fifty percent of the required yard area set forth in subsection (c)(1) of
Section 4 adjacent to a public street shall be landscaped pursuant to the provisions of
Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.04. Fifty percent of the unexcavated area
within this required yard shall be landscaped.
SECTION 6. Performance Standards Permit and Conditional Use Permit
Requirements: Automobile dealerships, automobile storage lots, and parking structures
subject to a performance standards permit or a conditional use permit shall comply with
the following standards:
(a) Parking and Vehicle Storage. On -site employee and customer parking
shall be provided at no charge. Employee and inventory parking may be provided as
tandem and shall not be subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.26.
31
Except as otherwise provided in this Section, parking shall comply with Santa Monica
Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.08.
Areas designated for employee and customer parking shall not be used for
vehicle storage or display. Non -skid or other treatment shall be applied to the surface of
the parking structure utilized by vehicles to avoid tire squeals.
(b) Landscaping. Screening of outdoor display and non - display areas shall
comply with the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.04. A
minimum two -foot landscape and decorative curb strip, where feasible, shall be
provided along the street frontage perimeter of all outdoor vehicle display areas.
Landscape materials shall be designed to provide an opaque visual buffer at least
twelve inches in height. Applicable setback requirements shall be expanded as
necessary to require a minimum five -foot landscaped area adjacent to any abutting
residential property not used as part of the dealership operation.
Final design treatment shall be subject to review and approval by the
Architectural Review Board. All surface parking areas not used for vehicle display shall
be subject to the parking lot screening requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code
Part 9.04.10.04.
(c) Lighting. All lighting shall comply with Santa Monica Municipal Code
Sections 9.04.10.02.270 and 9.04.10.02.280.
(d) Loading and Unloading of Vehicles. Loading and unloading of vehicles is
permitted only in accordance with this subsection. The dealership operator shall be
responsible and liable for any activities of a common carrier, operator, or other person
32
controlling such loading or unloading activities to the extent any such activities violate
the provisions of this subsection (d).
(1) Loading and unloading of vehicles is limited to the hours of eight
a.m. to five p.m. Monday through Saturday. Loading and unloading of vehicles is
prohibited on Sunday and legal holidays.
(2) Vehicle off - loading shall not be permitted in the public right of way
or residential area and shall occur on site or off -site. The applicant shall prepare and
submit to the Transportation Management Division for approval a plan that complies
with all requirements of this subsection (d) to be included in a form prepared by
Transportation Management Division.
(e) Storage of Vehicles. No automobile dealership owner, operator, or
employee, for any period of time on any public street or alley, shall park or store
vehicles for sale, to be repaired, that have been repaired, or that are part of an
automobile rental operation associated with the dealership.
(f) Repair of Vehicles. The repair and service facility portion of an automobile
dealership shall comply with the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9.04.14.050.
(g) Queuing of Vehicles. An adequate on -site queuing area for service
customers shall be provided. On -site driveways may be used for queuing but may not
interfere with access to required parking spaces. Required parking spaces may not
double as queuing spaces.
33
(h) Test Driving. Test driving shall not be done on residential streets or alleys.
For the purposes of this subsection, streets which are designated by the City as major
collector streets shall be permissible areas for test driving. Each dealership operator
shall have an affirmative obligation to inform all its personnel of this requirement and to
ensure compliance with it. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Transportation
Management Division for approval a plan that complies with all requirements of this
subsection (h) to be included in a form prepared by Transportation Management
Division.
Existing dealerships shall submit plans to the Transportation Management
Division for approval that satisfy the requirements of this subsection if such plans are
not already on file.
(i) Control of Alley Traffic. Notwithstanding the prohibition of alley use for test
driving, each dealership operator shall present to the Transportation Management
Division, at the same time of the filing of an application for a permit for a new dealership
or substantial remodeling, plans for slowing traffic flow in alleys adjacent to their uses,
with the objective of minimizing dangers to pedestrians and neighboring vehicle
operations, and of minimizing noise and other environmental incursions into the
neighborhood. Such plans shall be designed to limit the maximum speed to fifteen miles
per hour and may include measures such as speed bumps or dips, one -way traffic
patterns, increased signage, parking and loading prohibitions and similar measures.
Q) Circulation. The location of entries and exits from automobile dealerships,
automobile centers, and automobile storage lots shall be located as far away from
adjacent residential properties as is reasonably feasible and shall be directed to
34
commercial streets and away from residential areas by means of signage and design.
The interior circulation system between levels shall be internal to the building and shall
not require use of public ways or of externally visible or uncovered ramps, driveways or
parking areas. No arrangement shall be permitted which requires vehicles to back into
an alley or other public way. Compliance with this subsection Q) shall be subject to
review by the Transportation Management Division.
(k) Noise Control.
(1) There shall be no outdoor loudspeakers. Interior loudspeakers shall
produce no more than forty -five dba at a boundary abutting or adjacent to a residential
parcel, under normal operating conditions (e.g., with windows open if they are likely to
be opened).
(2) All noise generating equipment exposed to the exterior shall be
muffled with sound absorbing materials to minimize noise impacts on adjacent
properties and shall not be operated before eight a.m. or after six p.m. if reasonably
likely to cause annoyance to abutting or adjacent residences and shall at all times be in
compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance.
(3) Rooftop storage areas shall be screened with landscaping and /or
noise absorbing materials to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties.
(1) Toxic Storage and Disposal.
(1) Gasoline storage tanks shall be constructed and maintained under
the same conditions and standards that apply for service stations.
35
(2) There shall be full compliance with the terms and conditions of all
applicable federal, state, and local laws relating to the storage and disposal of toxic
chemicals and hazardous wastes.
(m) Air Quality.
(1) Use of brake washers shall be required in service stalls or areas
which perform service on brakes employing asbestos or other materials known to be
harmful when dispersed in the air.
(2) All mechanical ventilating equipment shall be directed to top story
exhaust vents which face away from abutting or adjacent residential properties.
(3) Exhaust systems shall be equipped with appropriate and
reasonably available control technology to minimize or eliminate noxious pollutants
which would otherwise be emitted.
(n) Hours of Operation. Unless otherwise approved by the Planning
Commission, if the dealership is within one hundred feet of a residential district,
operation of the dealership shall be prohibited between the hours of ten p.m. and seven
a. m.
(o) Vehicle Stacking Equipment: Vehicle- stacking equipment shall be
permitted within parking structures and on surface lots for employee parking and vehicle
storage when screened with an eight -foot high solid masonry wall. The wall shall be set
back from the property line at least two feet so that a landscaped buffer of up to two feet
in width can be provided. Parking spaces in lifts shall not be applicable in calculating a
dealership's parking requirement. If the structure is located in an R2, R3 or A lot, the
36
spaces provided on lifts shall not be included in the base used for calculating the
required 10% provision of employee parking spaces. In addition, these spaces shall
not count toward fulfilling the 10% employee parking requirement. Vertical spaces
above employee parking shall be used for employee parking; spaces above inventory
shall be used for inventory. The Planning Commission may reduce the wall height
requirement to a minimum of six feet and may reduce or waive the landscaped setback
area if such reduction or waiver is consistent with the public health, safety, and general
welfare. All facilities shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance.
(p) Accessory Automobile Rental Agency Requirements. The following
special standards shall apply to accessory automobile rental agencies located within
automobile dealerships:
(1) No more than ten percent of the total interior floor area of the
automobile repair or automobile painting facility or a maximum of seven hundred fifty
square feet, whichever is less, shall be devoted to the accessory automobile rental
agency operation;
(2) The accessory automobile rental agency shall only operate during
the hours of operation of the automobile repair or automobile painting facility;
(3) Vehicles may only be rented to customers of the automobile repair
or automobile painting facility;
(4) No exterior signage shall be permitted for the accessory automobile
rental agency; and
37
(5) The accessory automobile rental agency shall not be advertised or
marketed as an independent automobile rental agency.
(q) Plan Verification. All dealerships shall submit a letter annually in June
affirming their continued use of their test - driving, vehicle off - loading, and alley traffic
control plans. Any changes to approved plans shall require approval of the
Transportation Management Division.
SECTION 7. Applicability.
Except for subsections (e) through (k) of Section 3 which shall be
applicable to existing and future development, this Ordinance shall apply to any
development project which has not received its discretionary planning entitlements (e.g.,
development review permit, variance, architectural review permit, conditional use
permit) or has not filed any requested extension to these planning entitlements as of
March 11, 2011 unless the development project has otherwise obtained a vested right
to proceed. Discretionary project applications that were filed prior to the effective date
of Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) and which are subject to its provisions and any
extension thereto shall automatically be converted to a development agreement with
fees already paid to be applied towards the development agreement deposit.
SECTION 8. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or
appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of
such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent
necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
0
SECTION 9. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of
this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of
any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would
have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause,
or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion
of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 10. This Ordinance shall be of no further force or effect after
May 31, 2014, unless prior to that date, after a public hearing, noticed pursuant to Santa
Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050, the City Council, by majority vote,
extends this interim ordinance.
SECTION 11. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the
passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once
in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become
effective 30 days after its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
W
Reference:
Attachments Filed with Original
Staff Report 12/17/2013 -7A
Legislative File 400 -04