SR 01-14-2020 7A
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 14, 2020
Agenda Item: 7.A
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, City Planning
Subject: Introduction for First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the Text of Santa
Monica Municipal Code Section 9.07.030 to Clarify Parcel Coverage
Limitations for Existing Structures with Additions in the R1 (Single-Unit
Residential) District
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance
amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.07.030 to clarify the R1
parcel coverage limitations for existing structures with new additions.
Executive Summary
On November 12, 2019 the City Council adopted amended R1 -related development
standards that became effective on January 1, 2020. R1 is the City’s zoning designation
for residential neighborhoods made up primarily of single-family homes. The amended
development standards included allowing additional parcel coverage up to a maximum
of 55% for certain existing one-story structures with additions and all existing two-story
structures with additions. However, a question arose regarding whether Council’s intent
was to allow the maximum 55% parcel coverage for all existing structures (whether one
or two stories) with additions (whether to the first and/or second story), with the purpose
of incentivizing the retention of existing homes.
Council then directed staff to begin the appropriate text amendment process to modify
the new R1 parcel coverage standard so as to allow for remodels and additions of all
existing homes a parcel coverage of no more than 55%, defined as the sum of the
ground floor parcel coverage and second story parcel coverage, with existing limitations
on sub-standard sized parcels. The proposed ordinance makes this clarification and
implements this direction.
2 of 6
Discussion
In response to numerous neighborhood groups and individual residents having
expressed concern about the size and scale of recently constructed Single -Unit
Dwellings (SUDs) within the City’s R1 districts, and after an extensive public outreach
process and Planning Commission recommendation, on November 12, 2019 the City
Council adopted an ordinance [Ordinance Number 2624 (CCS)] amending the City’s
Zoning Ordinance related to development standards in the R1 district .
The amended development standards include allowing a maximum 55% parcel
coverage for the following:
• Existing one-story structures less than 18 ft. in height with one-story additions
less than 18 ft. in height
• Existing two-story structures with additions
The development standards also allow a maximum parcel coverage equaling 2,750 sq.
ft. for parcels less than 5,000 sq. ft. in area.
However, a question arose regarding whether Council’s intent was for the amended
parcel coverage standard for existing structures to allow the maximum 55% parcel
coverage for all existing structures (whether one or two stories) with additions (whether
to the first and/or second story) in order to incentivize the retention of existing homes.
Clarification to the language of this standard in SMMC Section 9.07.030 is now
recommended to reflect Council’s intent.
On November 12, 2019, the City Council directed staff to begin the appropriate text
amendment process to modify the new R1 parcel coverage standard so as to allow for
remodels and additions of all existing homes a parcel coverage of no more than 55%,
defined as the sum of the ground floor parcel coverage and second story parcel
coverage, with existing limitations on sub-standard sized parcels.
On December 18, 2019, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution recommend ing
to the City Council that the Council make the proposed amendment to SMMC Section
9.07.030 clarifying the parcel coverage limitations for existing structures with new
additions.
The proposed amendments to SMMC Section 9.07.030 would clarify the followin g:
3 of 6
1. The maximum parcel coverage for existing structures (whether one or two
stories) with new additions (whether to the first and/or second story) shall be no
more than 55%;
2. Parcel coverage shall be the sum of ground floor parcel coverage and second
story parcel coverage; and
3. Parcel coverage limitations for existing structures with new additions on parcels
less than 5,000 square feet shall be 2,750 square feet, with no more than 1,375
square feet allowable on the second story.
These proposed amendments to Table 9.07.030 are illustrated below in strikethrough
and underline form.
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards—Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Maximum Parcel Coverage (% of Parcel Area)
One-story
structure less
than 18 ft. in
height
50%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,500 sq. ft. shall be
permitted.
Existing one-
story structure
less than 18 ft.
in height with
one-story
additions less
than 18 ft. in
height
55%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,750 sq. ft. shall be
permitted.
One-story
structure 18 ft.
or more in
height
45%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,250 sq. ft. shall be
permitted.
4 of 6
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards—Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Two-story
structure
45%
Parcel coverage shall be the sum
of ground floor parcel coverage
and second story parcel
coverage. and shall be no more
than
45%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,250 sq. ft. shall be
permitted with no more than
1,125 sq. ft. allowable on the
second story.
Existing two-
story structure
with addition
55%
For a two-story structure, parcel
Parcel coverage shall be the sum
of ground floor parcel coverage
and second story parcel
coverage. and shall be no more
than 55%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,750 sq. ft. shall be
permitted with no more than
1,375 sq. ft. allowable on the
second story.
Accessory
Dwelling Unit Exempt from parcel coverage See Section 9.31.300
The Planning Commission reviewed and endorsed the proposed redline changes as
drafted without any modifications
Environmental Analysis
The proposed interim ordinance is categorically exempt from the provisions of California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation
Guidelines (common sense exemption). Based on the evidence in the record, it can be
seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed interim ordinance may
have a significant effect on the environment. The recommended ordinance represents a
minor clarification to the parcel coverage standards for existing structures with additions
in the R1 district and do not substantively affect policy decisions made with the City
Council’s adoption of the prior R1 ordinance. Therefore, no further environmental review
under CEQA is required.
5 of 6
Text Amendment Findings
1. The proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance are consistent
with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plans in that the proposed
clarification related to maximum parcel coverage for existing structures with
additions in the R1 District will preserve and protect the existing character of the
City’s different residential single-unit neighborhoods by encouraging retention of
existing structures and do not substantively affect policy decisions made with the
City Council’s adoption of the General Plan or any applicable Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance are consisten t
with the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance to promote the growth of the City in an
orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, and general
welfare in that the proposed revised development standards will ensure that the
scale and design of new development and alterations to existing structures are
consistent with the scale, mass and character of the City’s existing residential
single-unit neighborhoods and otherwise maintain the existing policies, standards
and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance that promote the public health, safety
and welfare.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared By: Tony Kim, Principal Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. PCD - Ordinance - R1 Standards - Additions - First Reading 01.14.2020
6 of 6
B. Written Comments
C. PowerPoint Presentation
1
City Council Meeting: January 14, 2020 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA TO AMEND THE TEXT OF SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 9.07.030 TO CLARIFY PARCEL COVERAGE LIMITATIONS FOR EXISTING
STRUCTURES WITH ADDITIONS IN THE R1 (SINGLE-UNIT RESIDENTIAL)
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica has expressly declared that t he purpose of
the Single-Unit Residential District (the “R1 District”) is to provide for single -unit housing
on individual parcels at densities of one unit plus one attached or detached accessory
dwelling unit to suit the spectrum of individual lifestyles and space needs and ensure
continued availability of the range of housing opportunities necessary to meet the needs
of all segments of the community consistent with the General Plan and State law; and
WHEREAS, the City has expressly declared that the furth er purposes of the R1
District are to provide adequate light, air, privacy, and open space for each dwelling, and
to ensure that the scale and design of new development and alterations to existing
structures are consistent with the scale, mass, and character of the existing residential
neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, on February 13, 2018, the City Council adopted Interim Zoning
Ordinance Number 2569 (CCS) (“Interim Zoning Ordinance 2569”) amending portions of
Santa Monica Municipal Code section 9.07.030 to revise development standards for
2
maximum parcel coverage, maximum building height, and additional minimum stepbacks
for upper stories in the R1 District; and
WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of Interim Zoning Ordinance 2569, numerous
neighborhood groups and individual residents expressed concerns about the size and
scale of new single-unit dwellings being constructed within the City’s R1 Districts; and
WHEREAS, while this new construction generally complied with the development
standards for the R1 District in place at the time, they often doubled and even tripled the
dwelling’s square footage; and
WHEREAS, the resultant structures were out of character with the existing built
environment; and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2018, the City Council adopted Interim Zoning Ordinance
Number 2572 (CCS) (“Interim Zoning Ordinance 2572”) to extend the interim
development standards adopted by Interim Zoning Ordinance 2569 until November 19,
2019 to allow the City to fully study and complete a public outreach process to develop
permanent revised standards, while preserving existing neighborhood scale and
character in the meantime; and
WHEREAS, following the adoption of Interim Zoning Ordinance 2572 (CCS), staff
engaged in a review process intended to reevaluate development standards in the R1
District to: address the size of new home construction in relation to the existing
neighborhood context and scale, incentivize the retention of existing homes , and make
development standards in the R1 District more user-friendly; and
WHEREAS, staff also engaged in a public outreach process that included seeking
input from of a technical working group consisting of architects, contractors, community
3
representatives and other design professionals with knowledge and experience working
on single-unit residential projects in the City; and
WHEREAS, staff further conducted three community open houses on May 18 and
21, 2019 to provide information and education to the pu blic as well as gather additional
public input; and
WHEREAS, on June 19, 2019, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution of
Intent, Resolution No. 19-013, declaring its intention to consider recommending to the
City Council that the City Council amend the test of the Zoning Ordinance related to
development standards in the R1 District; and
WHEREAS, on June 19, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a preliminary
discussion of the potential amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance related to
development standards in the R1 District; and
WHEREAS, on August 7, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a duly
noticed public hearing, and, after considering oral and written testimony regarding the
proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance , adopted Resolution No. 19-
015, making findings and recommendations to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2019, the City Council adopted Interim Zoning
Ordinance Number 2642 (CCS) extending IZO 2569 and 2572 to December 31, 2019 to
allow adequate time for notification of updated development standards that may be
adopted by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on October 22, the City Council conducted a duly-noticed public
hearing to consider the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, an d,
after considering oral and written testimony regarding the proposed amendments,
4
introduced for first reading an ordinance to amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance
related to development standards in the R1 District; and
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number
2624 (CCS) (“Ordinance 2624”) to amend the text of the City’s Zoning Ordinance related
to development standards in the R1 District; and
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, the City Council further voted to direct staff to
begin the appropriate text amendment process to modify Santa Monica Municipal Code
Section 9.07.030 as amended by Ordinance 2624, to clarify that the maximum parcel
coverage for all existing structures with additions shall be no more than 55%; and
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2019, the Planning Commission adopted a
Resolution of Intention, Resolution No. 19-016, declaring its intention to consider
recommending to the City Council to amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify
that: (i) the maximum parcel coverage for existing structures with additions shall be no
more than 55%; (ii) parcel coverage shall be the sum of ground floor parcel coverage and
second story parcel coverage; and (iii) parcel coverage limitations for existing structures
with additions on parcels less than 5,000 square feet shall be 2,750 square feet, with no
more than 1,375 square feet allowable on the second story; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
December 18, 2019, and, after considering oral and written testimony regarding the
proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance, made the following findings:
1. The proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance are
consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plans in that proposed
clarification related to maximum parcel coverage for existing structures with additions in
5
the R1 District will preserve and protect the existing character of the City’s different
residential single-unit neighborhoods by encouraging retention of existing structures and
do not substantively affect policy decisions made with the City Council’s adoption of the
General Plan or any applicable Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordin ance are
consistent with the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance to promote the growth of the City in
an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, and general
welfare in that the proposed revised development standards will ensure tha t the scale
and design of new development and alterations to existing structures are consistent with
the scale, mass and character of the City’s existing residential single -unit neighborhoods
and otherwise maintain the existing policies, standards and regu lations of the Zoning
Ordinance that promote the public health, safety and welfare .
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission further made a recommendation to adopt
the proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2020, the City Council conducted a duly noticed
hearing to consider the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, and
desires to adopt the proposed amendments to the text of the City’s Zoning Ordinance as
set forth below.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Based upon the oral and written testimony presented to the City
Council at the public hearing on January 14, 2020 regarding the proposed changes to the
text of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council hereby makes the following findings:
6
1. The proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance are
consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan s in that the proposed
clarification related to maximum parcel coverage for existing structures with additions in
the R1 District will preserve and protect the existing character of the City’s different
residential single-unit neighborhoods by encouraging retention of existing structures and
do not substantively affect policy decisions made with the City Council’s adoption of the
General Plan or any applicable Specific Plans.
2. The proposed amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance are
consistent with the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance to promote the growth of the City in
an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, and general
welfare in that the proposed revised development standards will ensure that the sca le
and design of new development and alterations to existing structures are consistent with
the scale, mass and character of the City’s existing residential single -unit neighborhoods
and otherwise maintain the existing policies, standards and regulations o f the Zoning
Ordinance that promote the public health, safety and welfare .
SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.07.030 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Section 9.07.030 Development Standards
Table 9.07.030 prescribes the development standards for the Single -Unit
Residential (R1) District. Additional regulations, including incentives for the retention of
existing homes, are denoted with Section numbe rs throughout the table. Specific R1
District design review criteria is located directly following the table.
7
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Parcel and Density Standards
Minimum Parcel Area
(sq. ft.) 5,000
Maximum Parcel
Area
(sq. ft.)
See Section 9.21.030(B)
Minimum Parcel
Width (ft.) 50 For parcels bounded by the
centerlines of First Court Alley,
Seventh Street, Montana Place
North Alley, and Adelaide Drive,
the minimum parcel width is 100
ft. and the minimum parcel depth
is 175 ft.
Minimum Parcel
Depth (ft.) 100
Maximum Residential
Density
1 unit per parcel plus 1
Accessory Dwelling Unit subject
to Section 9.31.300
A duplex may be permitted with
an MUP as provided in Table
9.07.020.
Maximum Parcel Coverage (% of Parcel Area)
One-story
structure less than
18 ft. in height
50%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,500 sq. ft. shall be
permitted.
Existing one-story
structure less than
18 ft. in height
with one-story
additions less than
18 ft. in height
55%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,750 sq. ft. shall be
permitted.
One-story
structure 18 ft. or
more in height
45%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,250 sq. ft. shall be
permitted.
8
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Two-story
structure
45%
Parcel coverage shall be the sum
of ground floor parcel coverage
and second story parcel
coverage. and shall be no more
than
45%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,250 sq. ft. shall be
permitted with no more than
1,125 sq. ft. allowable on the
second story.
Existing two-story
structure with
addition
55%
For a two-story structure, parcel
Parcel coverage shall be the sum
of ground floor parcel coverage
and second story parcel
coverage. and shall be no more
than
55%
For parcels less than 5,000 sq.
ft., a maximum parcel coverage
equaling 2,750 sq. ft. shall be
permitted with no more than
1,375 sq. ft. allowable on the
second story.
Accessory
Dwelling Unit Exempt from parcel coverage See Section 9.31.300
Building Form and Location
Maximum Number of
Stories 2
Maximum Building Height (ft.)
Parcels up to
20,000 sq. ft. in
area
28 ft.
with no wall height above 23 ft.
Parcels greater
than 20,000 sq. ft.
in area and with a
front parcel line at
least 200 ft.
in length
• 28 ft. for flat roof
• 32 ft. for pitched roof
Projections into
Height Limits See Section 9.21.060, Height Projections
9
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Minimum Setbacks (ft.)
Front Per Official Districting Map or 20
ft. if not specified
Side - One-story
structure less than
18 ft. in height
10% of parcel width or 3.5 ft.,
whichever is greater, but no
more than 15 ft. required
Side - Aggregate
of both sides for a
two-story structure
or one-story
structure 18 ft. or
more in height
30% of parcel width, but no more
than 45 ft. required and each
side shall be at least 10% of the
parcel width or 3.5 ft., whichever
is greater
The aggregate side setback
requirement does not apply to the
following:
• New structures on parcels
that are 45 ft. or less in
parcel width
• Additions to existing
structures on parcels that
are less than 50 ft. in width
• Structures on parcels less
than 5,000 sq. ft.
Rear 15 ft. from rear parcel line
10
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Additional Minimum Stepbacks for Upper Stories
Front Upper-Story
Stepback
The sum of all stepback areas
shall be at least 1% of total
parcel area and comply with the
following:
• Each stepback area shall
have a minimum depth of
3% of total parcel depth
and shall be measured
from the required front
setback.
• Any stepback area
exceeding 6% of total
parcel depth from the
required front setback
shall not be included in
calculating compliance
with this standard.
• Any stepback area used
to comply with a side
upper-story stepback
requirement shall not be
included in calculating
compliance with this
standard.
• This standard shall apply
to the total front building
elevation.
11
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Side Upper-Story
Stepbacks
The sum of all stepback areas
shall be at least 1% of total
parcel area and comply with the
following:
• Each stepback areas shall
have a minimum depth of
20% of total parcel width
and shall be measured from
the side parcel line.
• Any stepback area with a
depth exceeding 25% of
total parcel width from the
side parcel line shall not be
included in calculating
compliance with this
standard.
• Any stepback area used to
comply with a front upper-
story stepback requirement
shall not be included in
calculating compliance with
this standard.
• This standard shall apply to
each total side building
elevation.
12
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Sides—All portions
of buildings
exceeding 23 ft. in
height
• No portion of a building
other than a permitted
projection shall intersect a
plane commencing at 23 ft.
in height at the minimum
side setback that extends
at an angle of 45-degrees
from the vertical toward the
interior of the site.
• The 23 ft. height
measurement shall be
taken from the same
reference grade as
determined for the subject
site pursuant to
Section 9.04.050.
Upper-Story Outdoor Space
Maximum Size of
Individual Balcony,
Terrace, Deck,
First-Story Roof
Deck, or Similar
Outdoor Space
3% of parcel area or 300 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Individual balconies, terraces,
decks, first-story roof decks, or
similar outdoor spaces larger
than 100 sq. ft. located in the rear
half of the parcel shall be set
back a minimum distance of 20%
of the parcel width from the side
parcel lines.
Maximum Size of
Roof Deck above
Second Story
3% of parcel area or 300 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Maximum of 1 per parcel with a 7
ft. minimum setback from edges
of building
Openness and Use of Setbacks
Maximum Front Setback Paving (% of required front setback area)
Parcels 25 ft. or
more in width 50%
Parcels less than
25 ft. in width 60%
Building Projections
into Setbacks See Section 9.21.110, Projections into Required Setbacks
13
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Excavation for Lightwells, Stairwells, and Access to Subterranean Garages and
Basements
Basements and
Subterranean
Garages
No basement or subterranean
garage shall extend into any
setback area, except for any
basement or garage located
beneath an accessory building
which is otherwise permitted
within a setback area, if such
basement, semi-subterranean, or
subterranean garage is located
at least 5 ft. from any parcel line.
Lightwells and
Stairwells
• Side and rear setbacks may
be utilized for lightwells or
stairways to below-grade
areas.
• Excavated areas shall be set
back a minimum of 10% of the
parcel width from any parcel
line measured to the interior
wall surface of these
excavated areas.
• For parcels where the
aggregate side setback is not
required, up to a total of 50 sq.
ft. within the side and rear
setbacks may be utilized for
lightwells or stairways to below-
grade areas.
• Retaining walls shall not be
included in calculations for
these excavated areas.
Excavation for
Access
Excavation in the front setback
area for a driveway, stairway,
doorway, or other such element
for access purposes shall be no
deeper than 3 ft. below existing
grade.
Vehicle Accommodation
Parking • See Sections 9.28.070, Location of Parking
• Section 9.28.120, Parking Design and Development Standards
Driveways
• On parcels less than 100 ft. in width, no more than one driveway
permitted
• See Section 9.28.120, Parking Design and Development
Standards
14
Table 9.07.030: Development Standards —Single-Unit Residential District
Standard R1 Additional Regulations
Incentives for Retention of Existing Homes
Building Additions Section 9.21.170, Building Additions Extending into Minimum Side
Setbacks
Modifications to
Development
Standards
Chapter 9.43 Modification and Waivers
Architectural Review
Architectural Review See Section 9.07.030(A)
Additional Standards
Accessory Buildings
and Structures Section 9.21.020, Accessory Buildings and Structures
Accessory Dwelling
Units Section 9.31.300, Accessory Dwelling Units
Basements Section 9.52.020.0230, Basement Definition
Fences, Walls, and
Hedges Section 9.21.050, Fences, Walls, and Hedges
Home Occupation Section 9.31.160, Home Occupation
Landscaping Chapter 9.26, Landscaping
Lighting Section 9.21.080, Lighting
Off-Street Parking Chapter 9.28, Parking, Loading, and Circulation
Private Tennis Courts Section 9.31.250, Private Tennis Courts
Projections from
Buildings into
Minimum Setbacks
Section 9.21.110, Projections from Buildings into Minimum
Setbacks
Projections into
Height Limits Section 9.21.060, Height Projections
Refuse and
Recycling Screening
and Enclosure
Section 9.21.130, Resource Recovery and Recycling Standards
Solar Energy
Systems Section 9.21.150, Solar Energy Systems
15
A. Architectural Review .
1. Proposed development in the R1 Single-Unit District shall not be subject to
architectural review if it conforms to the development standards set forth
above except as follows:
a. The Architectural Review Board shall review any proposed duplex
pursuant to Section 9.55.140.
b.
i. The Architectural Review Board shall review proposed
development that is located on a parcel with a grade differential
of 12.5 feet or more between the front and rear parcel lines,
and associated with the following:
(a) new residential building; or
(b) a 50 percent or greater square foot addition to an
existing dwelling unit.
ii. A proposed structure may be approved if its size, mass, and
placement are found to be compatible with improvements in
the immediate neighborhood.
2. The Architectural Review Board shall review and may approve proposed
development that does not conform to the development standards set forth
above as follows:
a. The Architectural Review Board shall review any proposed addition
of 500 square feet or less that is regarded as a third story that is
16
located on a parcel with a grade differential of 12.5 or more between
the front and rear parcel lines. The Architectural Review Board may
approve such an addition if the following findings of fact are made
i. the street frontage and overall massing are compatible with
the existing scale and neighborhood context;
ii. the addition does not enlarge the first-story of the existing
residence such that a nonconforming condition is expanded;
and
iii. the properties in the immediate neighborhood will not be
substantially impacted.
b.
i. The Architectural Review Board shall review the following:
(a) Any proposed new structure on a parcel that is more
than 45 feet in width that does not comply with the
minimum aggregate side setback but that is set back a
minimum of 10% of parcel width on each side;
(b) Any proposed addition to an existing structure on a
parcel 50 feet or more that does not comply with the
minimum aggregate side setback but that is set back a
minimum of 10% of parcel width on each side ;
(c) Any proposed two-story structure that does not
conform to the standard set forth above for additional
minimum stepbacks for upper stories;
17
(d) Any proposed structure that does not conform to the
standards for subterranean garages and basements
set forth in Table 9.07.030, Chapter 9.28 (Parking), and
Section 9.52.020.230 of this Code;
(e) Any proposed individual upper story balcony, terrace,
deck, first-story roof deck, or similar outdoor space that
does not conform to the standard set forth above;
(f) Any proposed structure with garage doors that face the
public street, are located within the front half of the
parcel, and (i) are not set back from the primary façade
facing the public street a minimum of 5 feet or (ii) are
more than 16 feet in width; or
(g) Any proposed structure that includes a first-story porch
or second-story balcony that (a) is open on at least
three sides, (b) has a height of no more than 14 feet,
including parapets and railings, (c) projects into the
minimum front setback and (d) exceeds 50 percent of
the front building width as measured at the front
façade.
ii. The Architectural Review Board may approve a design
modification set forth in this subsection if the following findings
of fact are made:
18
(a) There are special circumstances or exceptional
characteristics applicable to the property involved,
including size, shape, topography, surroundings, or
location of the existing improvements or mature
landscaping on the site;
(b) Granting the design modification will not be detrimental
or injurious to the property or to improvements in the
general vicinity and district in which the property is
located;
(c) Granting the design modification will not impair the
integrity and character of surrounding context, or
impact the light, air, open space, or privacy of adjacent
properties;
(d) If the design modification includes a modification or
addition to a building on the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory, the modification or addition is compatible
with the building’s historic architectural character, does
not result in the removal of historic building features,
and is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior
Standards for Rehabilitation; and
(e) The design modifications comply with the criteria set
forth in Section 9.55.140.
19
SECTION 3. Any provision of the 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.
SECTION 4. 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 5. 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 from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
LANE DILG
City Attorney
1
Vernice Hankins
From:zinajosephs@aol.com
Sent:Tuesday, January 14, 2020 11:34 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:zinajosephs@aol.com
Subject:FOSP: City Council 1/14/20 item 7-A -- Amendment to updated R1 standards
EXTERNAL
January 13, 2020
To: Mayor McKeown and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 1/14/20 agenda item 7-A: First reading of an amendment to the updated R1 standards.
1. The maximum parcel coverage for existing structures (whether one or two stories) with
new additions (whether to the first and/or second story) shall be no more than 55%;
2. Parcel coverage shall be the sum of ground floor parcel coverage and second story parcel coverage; and
3. Parcel coverage limitations for existing structures with new additions on parcels less than 5,000 square feet
shall be 2,750 square feet, with no more than 1,375 square feet allowable on the second story.
The FOSP Board strongly supports the proposed ordinance allowing up to 55% lot coverage for additions to
existing homes (compared to 50% for new 1-story homes, and 45% for new 2-story homes) as an incentive to
home owners to remodel rather than tear down and replace existing homes.
Below is our letter of support for the updated R1 standards adopted earlier by the City Council, including a
summary of the questionnaire we submitted to everyone on the FOSP group email list.
***********************************************************************
November 4, 2019
To: City Council
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 11/5/19 item 7-A -- 2nd reading of ordinance to update R1 development standards
The FOSP Board is grateful to the City Council for approving the 1st reading of the text amendment on October
22nd and urges the Council to confirm the language of the text amendment at the time of the 2nd reading on
November 5th.
7. ORDINANCES
A. Second Reading of Ordinance to Amend the Text of the City's Zoning Ordinance Related to
Development Standards in the R1 (Single Unit Residential) District
Recommended Action
Item 7.A
01/14/2020
1 of 4 Item 7.A
01/14/2020
2
Staff recommends that City Council consider and confirm the language of this Ordinance.
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Offprevented automatic download of this pictufrom the Internet.document
Staff Report Printout
Background:
Online questionnaire:
In the Fall of 2017, three neighborhood associations (NOMA, Friends of Sunset Park, and Northeast Neighbors)
worked together to develop a method to measure the concerns of residents about the building of new homes in
R –1 (single family home) neighborhoods in Santa Monica.
The questionnaire was emailed to all Sunset Park residents on the FOSP group email list.
554 residents from the three neighborhoods responded to an anonymous questionnaire between September 15
and November, 2017. (242 of the responses were from Sunset Park residents.)
Question 1. I think the new construction is too large in proportion to the neighboring homes. 73%
agreed.
Question 2. I think the new construction is too tall in proportion to the neighboring homes. 66%
agreed.
Question 4. I think the new construction may intrude on neighbor’s access to sunlight. 75% agreed.
Question 5. I think the new construction may interfere with sea breezes. 60% agreed.
Question 6. I think the new construction may result in a loss of the adjoining property’s privacy due to
the new construction’s height, balconies, and decks. 80% agreed.
Question 7. The loss of trees and greenscape from new construction concerns me. 77% agreed.
Question 8. The reduction in front-and side-yard setbacks from porches and over hangs concerns
me. 76% agreed.
FOSP member comments: Some of the written comments on FOSP membership forms echo these concerns:
Big box houses; Corporate housing in Sunset Park; Density; Developer spec houses! Development that
seems driven by ideology more than by reality; Development of McMansions everywhere; Excessive
lot coverage; Huge houses being built; Increasing amount of excess height & footprint in housing
construction; Keeping housing affordable for “normal” people, not investors, flippers, foreign investors
with no intention of living here; Land use / large houses; Losing old homes to
McMansions; McMansion homes; McMansions; McMansions and loss of character; McMansions in
our neighborhood built on spec; Mega mansions; Mini-mansions going in; Overbuild on lots;
Overbuilding; Oversized houses and buildings; Oversized mega-mansions encroaching;Sameness of
homes; Unbridled residential and commercial development;Two-story tract homes in Sunset Park; Ugly
box-shaped flat-roof new homes; Ugly giant home rebuilds!
Item 7.A
01/14/2020
2 of 4 Item 7.A
01/14/2020
3
Lot coverage calculations:
6,000 sq ft lot 7,500 sq ft lot 9,000 sq ft lot
61% -- Current ordinance 3,660 sq ft house --- 4,575 sq ft house ---- 5,490 sq ft house
50% – IZO 3,000 sq ft house ---- 3,750 sq ft house ---- 4,500 sq ft house
3,850 w/ 850sf ADU 4,600 w/ 850sf ADU 5,350 w/ 850sf ADU
4,000 w/ 1,000sf ADU 4,750 w/ 1,000sf ADU 5,500 w/ 1,000sf ADU
45% lot coverage 2,700 sq ft house ---- 3,375 sq ft house ---- 4,050 sq ft house
3,550 w/ 850sf ADU 4,225 w/ 850sf ADU 4,900 w/ 850sf
ADU 3,700 w/ 1,000sf ADU 4,375 w/ 1,000sf ADU 5,050 w/ 1,000sf ADU
The addition of a 500 sq ft "Jr. ADU" would further reduce "green space" on these residential parcels.
Item 7.A
01/14/2020
3 of 4 Item 7.A
01/14/2020
Mayor McKeKeown and Council Members
The NOMA Board is in support of item 7.A on tonight's Agenda. It is a part of the R1 fix for the
McMansionization of our neighborhoods across the city. We are hopeful that this portion of the
Ordinance will help current home owners update their homes.
It was disturbing to receive the following in a publication put our by Pence Hathorn and Silver
yesterday. I would like to quote from John Hathorn's column “Size Matters Again”.
Because ADUs can be built abutting the house, there is talk among homeowners and architects of
designing houses with commonwall ADUs so that once the city inspectors have signed off on the
completed project, the home-owner might open the connecting walls and incorporate the ADU into the
house thus recapturing the “lost” footage and shhh, adding illegal square footage to the house! A clever
architect or designere should not have much trouble designing such a plan.” p 12 SANTA MONICA
DIRT
This type of activity is not acceptable and I would hope that the Council could consider this as an
illegal action.
The NOMA Board
Nancy Coleman, Chair
Danilo Bach, Vice Chair
Jeff Brecht, Secretary
Victor Fresco, Treasuer
Derek Devermont
Phillis Dudick
Ann Greenspan
Jeff Gordon
Todd James
Evelyn Lachenauer
Steve Lissik
Sonya Sultan
Jim Williams
Item 7.A
01/14/2020
4 of 4 Item 7.A
01/14/2020
R1 Deve lopment
Standards Update
CITY PLANNING
To ny Kim &
Ross Fehrman
January 14, 2020