O2060
f:\atty\muni\laws\barry\DRThresholdsEXTEN D2d-1.wpd
City Council Meeting 11-26-02 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2060 (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA EXTENDING THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
THRESHOLDS IN C3, C3C AND BSC DISTRICTS TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET AND
EXEMPTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS OF FIFTY UNITS OR LESS
FROM A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT OR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT CITYWIDE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS
SECTION 1 Findings and Purpose. The City Council finds and declares:
(a) A development review permit is intended to allow the construction of certain
projects for which the design and siting could result in an adverse impact on the
surrounding area such as development that is proposed to be built to a greater intensity
and building height than generally permitted in the area
(b) A development review permit allows for the review of the location, size, massing
and placement of a proposed structure on the site, particularly as the project relates to the
existing context of the area in which it is located The development review process is
designed to ensure that the development is compatible with and relates harmoniously with
the surrounding neighborhood.
1
(c) The City's Zoning Ordinance establishes by zoning district square footage
threshold criteria for development review permits based upon the floor area of a project.
(d) A project that requires a development review permit is subject to public review
by the Planning Commission, with appeal to the City Council, whereas a project below the
development permit review threshold can be administratively approved
(e) Presently, under the City's Zoning Ordinance, the City's development review
thresholds vary from 5,000 square feet in the C2 district along Montana Avenue to 30,000
square feet in the downtown zoning districts, the industrial zoning districts, the C5 Special
Office District, portions of the RVC Residential Visitor Commercial District and the C6
district along Wilshire Boulevard,
(f) However, the City presently has in place an interim ordinance which modified the
development review threshold in the RVC Residential Visitor, BCD, C2, C4, C5, C6, CM,
CP, M1 and LMSD Districts to 7,500 square feet with certain exceptions, including housing
projects with at least 15% of the units deed restricted as affordable to households with 80%
of median incomes and 10% of the units deed restricted as affordable to households with
60% of median incomes and housing projects with -100% of the units deed restricted to
households with 80% of median incomes.
<I) 1t,.~e._.."",,,,,,..;"4Ia.'8f"""''''.''''''
a~of (",.-IV~.-""" ~na'v, .....aoo..........iIjl
the City and approximately 500,000 people visit the City on weekends The downtown
business district is particularly dense and busy.
2
(h) Since the early 1990's, the City has promoted housing by creating substantial
incentives for developers to build such housing in the downtown area. These incentives
have particularly favored affordable housing.
(i) During recent years, the City has experienced an unprecedented economic
prosperity.
U) As a result of these two factors, and others, construction in the downtown has
boomed, far exceeding expectations. Indeed, there are currently approximately 800 new
housing units in various stages of completion in the downtown area, having obtained either
a certificate of occupancy, a building permit, or all necessary City approvals but a building
permit.
(k) Some of the housing developers have taken advantage of the opportunity to
build multiple, large, identical or nearly identical projects on adjacent lots or on lots in close
proximity pursuant to administrative approvals.
(I) These projects helped the City achieve its goal of promoting housing; and, today,
the downtown is home to many Santa Monica residents.
(m) However, the impact upon residents and businesses of the building boom in
general and the building of multiple identical or similar large projects on the same block has
been substantial and dire.
(n) Because such projects have, individually, been beneath the downtown review
threshold of 60,000 square feet, they have been subject to only administrative review.
(0) The current development review thresholds in the downtown area of the City is
too high since these thresholds have resulted in the administrative approval of projects that
3
create significant adverse impacts on adjacent uses. Yet, given the ministerial nature of
the approval process, the City was not able to mitigate or address these impacts.
(p) More specifically, these larger scale developments have created adverse noise,
traffic, parking, aesthetic, privacy, light and air, shade and shadow impacts on these
residential areas and adverse impacts upon pedestrian orientation, which are incompatible
with the existing scale and character of these neighborhoods.
(q) During the period of May 1997 through May 2002, thirty-three (33) administrative
approvals were issued both for new buildings and additions in the C3, C3C, and BSC
Districts of the City.
(r) The median new building project size equaled over twenty-eight thousand feet
with fourteen projects exceeding forty-eight thousand feet.
(s) Because of the high threshold for discretionary review, residential neighbors and
members of the business community have not had the opportunity to express particular
concerns relating to such issues as the location of loading docks, trash collection sites,
driveway access, and impacts upon light and shade - an opportunity they have in the
discretionary review process.
(t) Consequently, because the downtown has become much more dense in recent
years and because it has become home to a large number of City residents, it is necessary
to lower the development review threshold to ensure that the quality of the area is
preserved for the benefit of residents, workers, and visitors alike. Reducing the
development review threshold to 7,500 square feet would allow thorough review of the
impacts of large projects and enable the public to participate in this review. Reducing the
development review threshold would also ensure that administrative approval is only
4
available to smaller scale developments which produce far fewer adverse impacts on
nearby residential neighborhoods. However, adoption of this ordinance would not prohibit
any uses currently authorized in the downtown.
(u) Indeed, reducing the development review threshold would not alter the City's
substantial commitment to promoting residential uses in non-residential zoning districts
which is manifest in City policy and law.
(v) Residential development in all of the City's commercial districts would still be
authorized. Thus, residential development could still occur in over 80% of the City's
acreage.
(w)Moreover, City policy provides substantial development incentives for residential
housing. For instance, in the BSC, C3, and C3C districts, any floor area devoted to
residential use is eligible to receive a FAR (Floor Area Ratio) discount of 50%. For
instance, a residential development located on two adjoining lots in portions of the C3C
district would be eligible to develop a 60,000 square foot project in contrast to a 30,000
square foot commercial project.
(x) Additionally, the City has eliminated the restriction on the number of stories that
can be built if the structure contains at least one floor of residential use and has increased
the maximum height of projects with a designated number of floors of residential use.
(y) The City's Affordable Housing Production Program housing fees are also
discounted for residential development in commercial areas.
(z) Additionally, in determining whether a development review permit is required for
new development, floor area devoted to residential uses is discounted by fifty percent
5
(50%). Thus, even with the proposed changes, residential development of up to 15,000
square feet could be approved administratively.
(aa) Further, this ordinance exempts projects that are one hundred percent
affordable to households with incomes of eighty percent of median income or less or
projects that contain a minimum of eighty percent of the floor area is devoted to multi-
family housing with twenty percent of the housing units affordable to households with
incomes of sixty percent of median income or ten percent of the housing units devoted to
households with incomes of fifty percent of median income or less. Such projects could
be administratively approved if the projects were less than 60,000 square feet. This
ordinance would also establish affordable rental housing projects with no more than 50
units as a permitted use in all districts in the City which already authorizes this use and
would eliminate the development review permit requirement for these projects.
(bb) The ordinance's exemptions for affordable housing projects and projects with
a significant percentage of their units affordable to low income tenants advances several
goals and policies of the City's Housing Element including, but not limited to, Housing
Element Policy 2.8 (Continue to provide development incentives and reduced planning fees
for development of affordable housing).
(cc) In preparing its 2000-2005 Housing Element, the City contracted with the policy,
financial, and management consulting firm of Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler ("HR&A").
HR&A undertook an extensive review and analysis of numerous governmental programs,
policies, and regulations to assess whether they operated as a constraint on housing
development. One of the regulations analyzed was Ordinance No. 1999 (CCS). However,
the C3, C3C, and BSC Districts contain different development standards and development
6
patterns than those districts covered by Ordinance No. 1999 (CCS) and previously
analyzed. Thus, although not generally required in conjunction with the adoption of an
ordinance, the City subsequently retained HR&A and voluntarily undertook a constraint
analysis on the proposed ordinance because of the City's strong municipal commitment
to fostering affordable housing. HR&A prepared an analysis of the impact that this
proposed ordinance would have on the financial return of multifamily project applicants for
the purpose of assessing whether this ordinance would constitute a "governmental
constraint" within the meaning of State Housing Element Law ("Constraint Analysis").
HR&A concluded that this ordinance would not constitute a constraint. More specifically,
HR&A concluded that this regulatory change would not operate as a constraint within the
meaning of State Housing Element law because it will not add costs to a project that are
so substantial that it would render an otherwise feasible project to become infeasible.
(dd) However, for the reasons detailed above, it is not appropriate that all housing
projects above 15,000 square feet continue to be approved without discretionary review
unless these projects constitute affordable housing projects or contain a significant portion
of affordable housing.
(ee) Given the circumstances described above, the Zoning Ordinance requires
review and revision as it pertains to the development review permit threshold in the C3,
C3C, and BSC districts.
(ff)~<'" ......",.......i....dmerf... ZOrtIng ~, it if
necessary, on an interim basis, to extend the modifications to the existing project design
and development standards in these districts establishing a 7,500 square foot threshold
for requiring a development review permit.
'7
(gg) In light of these concerns, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number
(CCS) on November 12, 2002 which modified the development review thresholds for the
BSC, C3, and C3C districts.
(hh) As described above, there exists a current and immediate threat to the public
health, safety, or welfare should the interim ordinance not be adopted and should
development inconsistent with the contemplated revisions to the developments standards
be allowed to occur. Approval of additional development inconsistent with the proposed
interim standards would result in a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare.
Therefore, the City Council finds that the public health, safety and general welfare require
that the modifications to the development review thresholds be continued on an interim
basis. Consequently, this ordinance extends the provisions of Ordinance No. _ (CCS)
up to and including June 26, 2004. During this interim period, the following standards for
the BSC, C3, and C3C districts on an interim basis.
(ii) This interim ordinance is consistent with the City's General Plan, including its
Housing Element. It does not constitute and is not intended to be an amendment to the
City's Housing Element.
SECTION 2. Interim Zoning.
Except as provided in Sections 3 and 4 of this Ordinance:
(a) No development or permit shall be approved pursuant to Chapter 1 of Article IX
of the Santa Monica Municipal Code for land in the C3 District, unless the following findings
are made: The project complies with existing C3 District property development
standards except, a development review permit is required for any development of more
8
than seven thousand five hundred square feet of floor area. Square footage devoted to
residential use shall be reduced by fifty percent when calculating whether a development
review permit is required.
(b) No development or permit shall be approved pursuant to Chapter 1 of Article IX
of the Santa Monica Municipal Code for land in the C3C District unless the following
findings are made: The project complies with existing C3C District property development
standards except, a development review permit is required for any development of more
than seven thousand five hundred square feet of floor area. Square footage devoted to
residential use shall be reduced by fifty percent when calculating whether a development
review permit is required.
(c) No development or permit shall be approved pursuant to Chapter 1 of Article IX
of the Santa Monica Municipal Code for land in the BSC District unless the following
findings are made: The project complies with existing BSC District property development
standards except, a development review permit is required for any development of more
than seven thousand five hundred square feet of floor area. Square footage devoted to
residential use shall be reduced by fifty percent when calculating whether a development
review permit is required
SECTION 3. The following projects shall be exempt from this ordinance:
(a) Projects that contain a minimum of eighty percent (80%) of floor area devoted
to multi-family residential use provided that at least twenty percent (20%) of the housing
units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the City for occupancy
by households with incomes of sixty percent (60%) of median income or less or at least ten
9
percent (10%) of the housing units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement
approved by the City for occupancy by households with incomes of fifty percent (50%) of
median income or less. The required percentage of affordable housing units shall not
apply to the 25% State density bonus units if so provided in the project.
(b) Affordable housing projects in which one hundred percent (1 00%) 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.
(c) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this Section, projects in the C3C and BSC
Districts which are required by the City's Zoning Ordinance to devote more than twenty
percent (20%) of floor area to pedestrian oriented uses shall also be exempt if these
projects contain the maximum percentage of multi-family residential use authorized by the
Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 4. Affordable Rental Housing Projects with no more than fifty units shall
be considered a permitted use, shall not require a development review permit, and shall
not be subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.28.040 (v) and (w). All
other property development standards and architectural review requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance in the district in which the parcel is located shall apply. For purposes of this
Section, an affordable rental housing project shall be defined as rental housing in which
100% of the dwelling 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, An affordable rental housing project may also include non-residential
uses, as long as such uses constitute neighborhood-serving goods, services, or retail uses
10
that do not exceed fifteen percent of the floor area of the total project and these
neighborhood-serving goods, services or retail uses are designated as permitted uses in
the Zoning Ordinance in the district in which the parcel is located. This Section 4 shall not
apply in the LMSD, the DP, the BP, and the R-MH districts.
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect eighteen months
from its effective date, after June 26, 2004, unless prior to that date, after a public hearing,
noticed pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050, or any
successor ordinance thereto, the City Council, by majority vote, extends this interim
ordinance.
SECTION 6. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, appendices
thereto, or any interim ordinance 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 7. 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 itwould 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.
11
Adopted and approved this 26" ~ay of November, 2002.
State of California )
County of Los Angeles) ss
City of Santa Monica )
I, Maria M. Stewart, City Clerk of the City of Santa Monica, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 2060 (CCS) had it's introduction on November 12, 2002, and
was adopted at the Santa Monica City Council meeting held on November 26,2002, by
the following vote:
Ayes: Council members O'Connor, Bloom, Genser, Mayor Pro Tem
McKeown, Mayor Feinstein
Noes: Council members: Holbrook, Katz
Abstain: Council members: None
Absent: Council members: None