The URL can be used to link to this page

SR 01-25-2022 7F City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 25, 2022 Agenda Item: 7.F 1 of 8 To: Mayor and City Council From: David Martin, Director, Administration Subject: Introduction and Adoption of an Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance to Extend Interim Zoning Regulations Established by Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 2633 and Extended by 2645 Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.39 and Section 9.40.20 to Increase Thresholds for Review of One Hundred Percent Affordable Housing Projects and Housing Projects Subject to the Housing Accountability Act by Administrative Approval Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council introduce and adopt an emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance to extend interim regulations authorizing 100% affordable housing projects and Tier 2 housing projects subject to the Housing Accountability Act to be reviewed through an Administrative Approval process. Summary The Housing Accountability Act (California Government Code Section 65589.5) (“HAA”) was enacted by the State Legislature in 1982 and prohibits cities from denying or placing conditions on housing development projects that comply with a city’s “objective” general plan, zoning, subdivision, and design review standards (e.g., height, floor-area- ratio (FAR), density), without personal discretion or subjective judgment on the part of City staff. The HAA defines “housing development project” as: (a) residential units only; (b) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage designated for residential use; and (c) transitional housing or supportive housing. The stated intent of the HAA is to ensure that local governments do not reject or make infeasible housing development projects that contribute to meeting their Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA is a state-mandated process that determines the amount of future housing growth each city 7.F Packet Pg. 330 2 of 8 and county must plan for in its Housing Element. For the 2021-2029 Housing Element cycle, Santa Monica’s RHNA is 8,895 units, of which 69% must be affordable housing units. Supporting housing production, particularly affordable housing, has long been a core policy focus for the City and is embedded in the City’s adopted land use plans including the 2010 Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE), 2013 Bergamot Area Plan (“Bergamot Plan”), and 2017 Downtown Community Plan (“Downtown Plan”). These plans have been implemented through the 2015 Zoning Ordinance Update and subsequent amendments. The most recently adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element was transmitted to California Department of Housing and Community Development on November 10, 2021 and is pending their review and comment as part of the certification process. Given the very limited discretion afforded to cities for qualifying projects under the HAA and the need to create better housing affordability in Santa Monica, on March 10, 2020, the City Council adopted an emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance (“IZO”) authorizing 100% affordable housing projects and Tier 21 housing projects compliant with the HAA, to be reviewed and approved without a public hearing through an Administrative Approval process. A public hearing by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) for design review is still required. The IZO was extended on August 25, 2020 and under current emergency orders, the IZO would expire on January 31, 2022. Staff proposes to extend and amend the interim zoning regulations until May 31, 2022. Extension of the IZO would sustain a streamlined process for 100% affordable and Tier 2 housing projects pending certification and implementation of the adopted Housing Element. Extension would also allow time for Council to make the IZO provisions permanent by amending review processes in the Zoning Ordinance for housing projects to be consistent with Program 1A of the adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element (By-Right 1 The Land Use and Circulation Element created a tiered land use system based on increments of height and floor area ratio (FAR). Tier 1 establishes a base height and FAR while Tier 2 establishes additional height and FAR that can be requested if community benefits are provided. 7.F Packet Pg. 331 3 of 8 Approvals for Housing Projects). The proposed termination date of the IZO is based on timing of the first phase of permanent zoning and land use plan changes necessary to implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element, which are scheduled to be brought forward to the Council on March 22, 2022. Further, with the establishment of generally applicable leasing regulations in Chapter 6.22, and in order to avoid potential inconsistencies with Chapter 6.22, staff proposes deletion of the requirement to record a deed restriction on the property establishing leasing restrictions as set forth in Section 9.39.020(A)(3)(c) of the IZO. With the economic challenges brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is even more need to ensure that affordable housing and housing production continues to be supported through a streamlined process. Within the context of California’s housing crisis, pending Housing Element certification and implementation, and the continued urgent need to produce affordable housing, this extension to May 31, 2022 is recommended in order to continue to support housing production until Council has the opportunity to evaluate long-term policy solutions this spring. Background Table 1: Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description July 6, 2010 (Attachment B) Adoption of Land Use and Circulation Element September 11, 2013 (Attachment C) Adoption of Bergamot Area Plan June 23, 2015 (Attachment D) Adoption of Zoning Ordinance Update July 25, 2017 (Attachment E) Adoption of Downtown Community Plan December 10, 2019 (Attachment F) Council study session on housing policy March 10, 2020 (Attachment G) Adoption of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance August 25, 2020 (Attachment H) Extension of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 7.F Packet Pg. 332 4 of 8 The Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) was adopted by City Council on July 6, 2010. The Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) set forth a land use system based on the premise that projects with increased height and FAR above the base would provide additional community benefits. This concept was then largely transferred to the Bergamot Plan, Downtown Plan, and zoning ordinance. The LUCE sets forth development parameters for each land use designation including establishing the review process for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 projects. As a result, the zoning ordinance and adopted plans (i.e. LUCE, Bergamot Plan, Downtown Plan) establish the conditions where a Planning Commission public hearing is required, specifically, height and FAR for Tier 2 projects and process thresholds based on project size. For example, the LUCE states that Tier 1 projects are ministerial up to the discretionary review threshold established in the zoning ordinance. Similarly, 100% affordable housing projects are identified as being only subject to administrative review if they do not exceed 50 units. While helpful in providing guidance for implementation, such process thresholds are already in the zoning ordinance and not necessary in the LUCE. As part of the implementation of the LUCE, the Bergamot Plan was adopted by City Council in September 2013. The Plan includes the same process thresholds as the LUCE. The Downtown Plan was adopted by City Council in July 2017 and amended on August 25, 2020 to include housing production incentives by way of allowing all Downtown Tier 2 housing projects to be exempt from Development Review Permit requirements, which would require review at a Planning Commission public hearing. The requirement for development agreements for Tier 3 housing projects over 90,000 sf was also eliminated in favor of requiring those projects be processed through a Development Review Permit process. Table 2: Downtown Application Thresholds Table Housing Project All Other Projects Administrative Approval* Tier 1 projects Less than 10,000 sf Tier 2 projects Development Review Permit** Tier 3 projects 10,000 – 30,000 sf Development Agreement N/A Greater than 30,000 sf 7.F Packet Pg. 333 5 of 8 *No public hearing required **Planning Commission public hearing required On December 10, 2019, Council held a study session regarding housing policy in light of State and Regional directives regarding housing production. Council directed staff to proceed with efforts to support housing production, particularly 100% affordable housing. The IZO was first introduced and adopted on March 10, 2020. The IZO was extended on August 25, 2020. Also on August 25, 2020, the Council introduced for first reading an ordinance to establish residential leasing regulations (SMMC Chapter 6.22), which were adopted on September 8, 2020 and subsequently amended on October 27, 2020, primarily to allow for certain exceptions and to expand the documentation that may be used to demonstrate primary residence. The residential leasing regulations are similar to the streamlining eligibility requirements in the IZO, except that the IZO requires Tier 2 housing projects with rental units to record a deed restriction imposing certain leasing requirements to ensure that the units in the project will be used to supply long-term housing to tenants who wish to make Santa Monica their primary residence. Further, due to the amendments to Chapter 6.22 adopted by Council on October 27, 2020, there are inconsistencies between the IZO and the residential leasing regulations. Discussion Based on consultation with both affordable and market-rate housing providers, the uncertainty presented by a discretionary process is a factor in whether to move forward with housing projects when factored with other project risks like land cost, construction costs, and lender requirements. Over the past five years, the City issued building permits for approximately 200 units/year, on average, for housing projects, of which approximately 20% are for affordable housing. With the adopted Housing Element requiring the City to demonstrate that building permits could potentially be issued for approximately 1,100 units/year between 2021 and 2029, of which 69% are to be for affordable housing, there is a need to establish parameters that maximize streamlining of the housing approval process. 7.F Packet Pg. 334 6 of 8 At the time of adoption of the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) and Bergamot Plan as implemented through the 2015 Zoning Ordinance Update, the City Council required projects that exceed certain height and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) thresholds to be reviewed by the Planning Commission at public hearings. Streamlining the approval process for 100% affordable housing projects, and projects subject to the HAA, over which the City has very limited discretion under State law, should encourage housing production in a way that aligns with the intent of the City’s tiered land use system. Process Thresholds for 100% Affordable Housing Projects Except for the Downtown Plan area, the existing Zoning Ordinance requires 100% affordable housing projects over 50 units to be reviewed through a Development Review Permit process. These projects are typically code compliant and would produce much needed affordable housing units and thus, a discretionary review process has little or no added value. In addition, affordable housing projects within one half mile of a major transit stop are afforded additional development potential and concessions through recent changes to the State density bonus law. With challenges in available funding, 100% affordable housing projects are turning to financing sources such as tax credits, which establish a strict schedule for obtaining entitlements and building permits. These financing tools and State bonuses will be more effective in producing affordable housing if paired with streamlined local processes to ensure that these units are brought to the market as quickly as possible. The following chart shows a timeline comparison between the existing review procedures and the IZO procedures for review of 100% affordable housing: 7.F Packet Pg. 335 7 of 8 Process Thresholds for Housing Projects Subject to the Housing Accountability Act The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) severely restricts a local jurisdiction’s discretionary review of housing projects that meet objective general plan, zoning and subdivision standards and criteria, including, design review standards, in effect at the time the project application is deemed complete. Specifically, the HAA prohibits the City from denying a housing project, or placing conditions on a housing project that would have the effect of reducing the project’s density, unless the City determines that the project would have a specific, adverse effect on public health and safety. As a result, cities are afforded narrow jurisdiction over housing projects that are protected by the HAA, raising questions regarding the utility of public hearings for housing projects if the City essentially has no ability to disapprove or unduly condition housing projects. In accordance with the HAA, the interim zoning regulations that staff proposes to extend seek to provide a streamlined administrative process for Tier 2 housing projects that meet all objective general plan, zoning, and subdivisions standards and criteria in effect at the time the project application is deemed complete. In accordance with SMMC Chapter 6.22, housing projects with rental units are required to ensure that units are used to supply long-term housing to tenants who wish to make Santa Monica their primary residence. The residential leasing regulations established in Chapter 6.22 are similar but are not identical to the rental unit requirements in the interim zoning regulations. The only distinction between the Chapter 6.22 residential lease regulations and Section 9.39.020(A)(3)(c) of the IZO is that Chapter 6.22 does not require that a deed restriction be recorded against a property. However, the provisions of Chapter 6.22 would be applicable to any future rental units such that the deed restriction is no longer necessary and the duplicative leasing provisions in the IZO can be deleted. Environmental Analysis The proposed extension of the Urgency Interim Zoning Ordinance establishing application process thresholds for 100% affordable housing projects and Tier 2 housing 7.F Packet Pg. 336 8 of 8 projects compliant with the Housing Accountability Act are categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 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 changes may have a significant effect on the environment. The recommended amendments represent procedural changes in how projects are reviewed and do not substantively affect the policy decisions with respect to development standards or land use regulations made with the City Council’s adoption of the 2015 Zoning Ordinance Update. Therefore, no further environmental review under CEQA is required. Financial Impacts and Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Prepared By: Jing Yeo, Planning Manager Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 B. July 6, 2010 City Council Meeting (Web Link) C. September 10, 2013 City Council Meeting (Web Link) D. June 23, 2015 City Council Meeting (Web Link) E. July 25, 2017 City Council Meeting (Web Link) F. December 10, 2019 City Council Meeting (Web Link) G. March 10, 2020 City Council Meeting (Web Link) H. August 25, 2020 City Council Meeting (Web Link) I. Written Comments J. PowerPoint Presentation 7.F Packet Pg. 337 1 City Council Meeting: January 25, 2022 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _____ (CCS) (City Council Series) AN EMERGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA TO EXTEND INTERIM ZONING REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED BY EMERGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE 2633 AND AMENDED AND EXTENDED BY EMERGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE 2645 AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.39 AND SECTION 9.40.020 TO INCREASE THRESHOLDS FOR REVIEW OF ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS AND HOUSING PROJECTS SUBJECT TO THE HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT BY ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL WHEREAS, the State is experiencing a housing supply crisis, with housing demand far outstripping supply; and WHEREAS, in 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita; and WHEREAS, housing crisis has particularly exacerbated the need for affordable homes at prices below market rates; and WHEREAS, the housing crisis has resulted in increased poverty and homelessness, especially first-time homelessness, forced lower income residents into crowded and unsafe housing in urban areas, and forced families into lower cost new housing at the urban-rural interface with longer commute times and a higher exposure to fire hazard; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 2 WHEREAS, California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over the next 7 years; and WHEREAS, the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) for the 6th Cycle Housing Element is an allocation of approximately 8,800 units, of which 69% would be affordable housing; and WHEREAS, on July 6, 2010, the City Council adopted the Land Use and Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan (“LUCE”) which designates the proposed general distribution, location and extent of land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, the LUCE was adopted after an extensive planning process, and addresses neighborhood conservation and enhancement; integrated land use and transportation; proactive congestion management; complete neighborhoods with increased open space; community benefits; quality urban character and form; preservation of historic resources; and growth management; and WHEREAS, the LUCE differs from prior Land Use and Circulation elements, in part, by establishing a direct link 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; and WHEREAS, the LUCE establishes a base height for each land use as a baseline, and proposed development which seeks additional height above the base height is subject to discretionary review and must meet additional requirements consistent with the community’s broader social, environmental, and circulation goals – an approach defined in three tiers; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 3 WHEREAS, the LUCE provides certain bonuses, concessions and incentives for one hundred percent affordable housing projects, including a provision that allows for ministerial approval for projects of up to 50 units in size; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2013, the City Council adopted the Bergamot Area Plan (“BAP”), which provides policies and standards to transition 142.5 acres of former industrial lands into an arts-focused, transit-oriented, mixed use, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood anchored by the Bergamot Exposition Light Rail Station; and WHEREAS, the BAP envisions creating the City’s most sustainable neighborhood—one that both conserves the authentic, industrial character that has fostered a creative community in the area and removes barriers to housing, local restaurants and services to take full advantage of the arrival of the Exposition Light Rail; and WHEREAS, the BAP encourages and creates opportunities to develop appropriate housing for all members of the community, with a target of at least 30% of housing affordable to people earning between 30% and 180% of the area median income; and WHEREAS, the BAP sets forth certain thresholds for processing development projects, including housing projects, in the plan area; and WHEREAS, on July 25, 2017, the City Council adopted the Downtown Community Plan (“DCP”) which sets forth the City’s vision of the Downtown as a high quality, mixed- use district offering opportunities for housing for people across the income spectrum, jobs, arts and culture, local serving retail, and community and visitor gathering places; and WHEREAS, in the DCP, Downtown housing projects are encouraged to support a strong and economically diverse residential neighborhood component; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 4 WHEREAS, the DCP supports that encouragement by differentiating between housing projects and commercial projects and provides for various incentives for housing projects, including streamlined processing by allowing for ministerial review of all one hundred percent affordable housing projects and any other housing project up to 75,000 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance implements the process thresholds for review of housing projects consistent with the LUCE, BAP, and DCP by requiring projects subject to ministerial review to be reviewed by the Administrative Approval process and projects that exceed ministerial review process thresholds to be reviewed by the Development Review Permit process; and WHEREAS, a RHNA allocation of 8,880 units with 69% affordability in the 6th Cycle Housing Element will require the City to permit approximately 1,000 housing units a year between 2021 and 2029, 700 of which each year are required to be affordable housing; and WHEREAS, 100% affordable housing projects, with challenges in available funding, are turning to financing sources such as tax credits, which establish a strict schedule for obtaining entitlements and building permits which are more easily met with a ministerial, rather than discretionary, review process; and WHEREAS, the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5 (the “HAA”), places strict limitations on the City’s discretion to deny, reduce the density of, or place conditions on a housing project that complies with objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards in effect at the time the application is determined complete; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 5 WHEREAS, requiring discretionary review for housing projects that comply with objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards in effect at the time the application is determined complete, adds time and expense to housing production without providing any meaningful benefit to the community; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2019, the City Council conducted a study session on housing policy in part to discuss options for increasing housing production throughout the City with a particular emphasis on incentivizing one hundred percent affordable housing projects, and considered whether increasing the thresholds for ministerial review of certain housing projects would further stimulate housing production; and WHEREAS, on February 5, 2020, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution of Intention, Resolution Number 20-002 (PCS), declaring its intention to consider recommending to the City Council that the City Council amend the text of the LUCE, the BAP, and the DCP to increase the thresholds for ministerial review of one hundred percent affordable housing projects and housing projects subject to the HAA; and WHEREAS, on February 19, 2020, 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 LUCE, BAP, and DCP, adopted a Resolution of Recommendation, Resolution Number 20-005 (PCS) recommending to the City Council that the City Council adopt the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and, after considering all oral and written testimony, adopted Resolutions Numbers 11237 (CCS), 7.F.a Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 6 11238 (CCS), and 11239 (CCS) to amend the LUCE, BAP, and DCP to increase the thresholds for ministerial review of one hundred percent affordable housing projects and housing projects subject to the HAA; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the City Council adopted emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2633 (CCS) (“Interim Zoning Ordinance 2633”), which immediately permitted one hundred percent affordable housing projects and housing projects subject to the HAA that do not exceed Tier 2 maximums to be processed by Administrative Approval rather than a Development Review Permit under certain conditions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.46.090(C), Interim Zoning Ordinance 2633 was set expire sixty days after its effective date, or on May 9, 2020; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the City Manager, in his role as the Director of Emergency Services, (“Director of Emergency Services”) proclaimed the existence of a local emergency pursuant to Chapter 2.16 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to ensure the availability of mutual aid and an effective the City’s response to the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) and this local emergency was restated on March 14, 2020, through a revised declaration of local emergency to ensure compliance with all digital signature requirements (the “Executive Order”); and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a Revised Fourth Supplement to the Executive Order (the “Revised Fourth Supplement”) which, in part, extended all Interim Zoning Ordinances in effect during the term of the Order; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 7 WHEREAS, on August 25, 2020, the City Council adopted emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2645 (CCS), which extended the interim zoning regulations adopted by Interim Zoning Ordinance 2633 (the “interim zoning regulations”) to December 31, 2021; and WHEREAS, Interim Zoning Ordinance 2645 also amended the interim zoning regulations to accord with the ordinance the City Council introduced for first reading on August 25, 2020 to add Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.22: Residential Leasing Requirements, and provide more certainty for landlords and tenants, amended the interim zoning regulations to require that all leases be made to tenants who will use and occupy the rental housing unit as the tenants’ “primary residence” rather than “domicile” as that term is defined by Elections Code Section 349(b) and that all leases be in writing and provide for a minimum initial term of one year; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2650 (CCS), adopting Chapter 6.22, Residential Leasing Requirements (“Chapter 6.22”), which requires that all residential housing units must be leased to natural persons, tenants leasing residential housing units must use and occupy the residential housing unit as the tenant’s primary residence, all residential housing units must be leased for an initial lease term of at least one year, and all residential housing units must be delivered unfurnished; and WHEREAS, on October 27, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2655 (CCS), which amended Chapter 6.22 to: expand options to demonstrate proof of primary residence to ensure undocumented students have access to rental housing; exempt certain leases of owner-occupied single- and multiple-unit dwellings, and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 8 accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units located on parcels with owner-occupied single-unit dwellings, and leases that provide for temporary relocation housing for tenants who are subject to temporary relocation under Santa Monica Municipal Code Sections 4.36.100 or 8.100.030 from the residential leasing requirements; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.22.130, the Director of the Community Development Department has promulgated administrative regulations, which were most recently updated on January 29, 2021, related to noticing procedures and requirements and to further clarify applicability of Chapter 6.22; and WHEREAS, on October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted the 6th Cycle (2021- 2029) Housing Element, which, pursuant to Program 1A, requires the City to make permanent amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to implement the interim zoning regulations, with revisions, no later than March 21, 2022, and extend the interim zoning regulations pending full implementation of Program 1A; and WHEREAS, on October 29, 2021, the Director of Emergency Services issued a Forty-First Supplement to the Executive Order to extend certain provisions of the Executive Order, including Section 6 of the Revised Fourth Supplement extending all Interim Zoning Ordinances, through January 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to extend until the permanent changes are made in accordance with Program 1A of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, and to remove the deed restriction obligations to avoid inconsistency with the provisions of Chapter 6.22; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 9 WHEREAS, there exists an immediate and continuing threat to the public health, safety and welfare due to the State’s ongoing and unprecedented housing crisis, which has resulted in the City’s anticipated RHNA allocation; and WHEREAS, extending the streamlined process created by the interim zoning regulations will support the City’s urgent need to produce housing and the City’s efforts to create a long-term housing strategy through the 6th Cycle Housing Element; and WHEREAS, adoption of this emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance is necessary to preserve public peace, health, safety and welfare as it will remove barriers to production of housing, particularly one hundred percent affordable housing projects. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Applicability. The interim regulations set forth in Section 2 shall apply to any project for which a planning entitlement application is received after the effective date of this Ordinance. SECTION 2. Interim Zoning Regulations. Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.39 and Section 9.40.020 shall be revised as follows: Chapter 9.39 Administrative Approval 9.39.010 Purpose Administrative Approval is intended to allow for the approval of projects which conform to the standards established for the Zoning District and do not require discretionary review or approval by the Director, Planning Commission, or City Council. Administrative Approval provides for an administrative review and assessment of the proposed development project in light of explicit standards contained in the Chapter which 7.F.a Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 10 have been designed to ensure that the completed project will be in harmony with existing or potential development in the surrounding area, consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 9.39.020 Applicability A. Except as provided in subsection (B), an Administrative Approval shall be required prior to issuance of any Building Permit for the development for: 1. Any project of more than 1,000 square feet of floor area for all new construction and new additions to existing buildings located in Residential and Nonresidential Districts not otherwise subject to Zoning Conformance Review or discretionary review; 2. 100% Affordable Housing Projects; and 3. Any project that: a. Meets the definition of “housing development project” under the Housing Accountability Act, Government Code Section 65589.5, (“Housing Accountability Act”), and that, consistent with the Housing Accountability Act, complies with all applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the project application is deemed complete; and b. Does not exceed Tier 2 maximums.; and c. For projects with rental units, the applicant agrees, prior to issuance of a building permit, to record a deed restriction against the property ensuring each of the following: 7.F.a Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 11 i. All leases shall be made only to a tenant who is a natural person, or to tenants who are natural persons. ii. All leases shall be made only to a tenant or tenants who, regardless of the term of occupancy, will use and occupy the rental unit as the tenants’ primary residence. For purposes of this paragraph, “primary residence” means the usual place of return for housing of a tenant, as documented by at least two of the following: motor vehicle registration, driver’s license, California state identification card, voter registration, income tax return, or utility bill. A tenant can have only one primary residence. iii. All leases shall be in writing and provide for a minimum initial term of one (1) year; and iv. All units shall be leased as unfurnished units. B. No Administrative Approval shall be required for: 1. New construction and new additions to existing buildings located in the Multi-Unit Residential Districts, Ocean Park Neighborhood Districts; or 2. For any new single-unit dwellings or additions thereto in any zoning district. 9.39.030 Application Application for an Administrative Approval shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in 9.37.020, Application Forms and Fees. 7.F.a Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 12 9.39.040 Procedures A. For projects eligible for an Administrative Approval under 9.39.020(A)(2) or (3), an applicant shall conduct a community meeting to receive community input on the proposal, which meeting shall be conducted prior to submitting an application and with noticing and reporting on the community meeting as required in guidelines adopted by the Director. B. Upon receipt in proper form of an Administrative Approval Application, a meeting with the Architectural Review Board shall be set to receive a recommendation on the design of the proposal, which shall be conducted prior to the Director’s determination. 9.39.050 Review and Decision A. The Director shall issue an Administrative Approval if the proposed development conforms precisely to applicable development standards, and does not require discretionary review or approval as outlined in this Chapter. B. The Director shall deny the Administrative Approval only if the development is not in compliance with the applicable development standards as outlined in this Chapter. C. The Director shall prepare a written decision which shall contain the findings of fact upon which such decision is based. D. Within 14 calendar days after the decision is made: 1. A copy of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application; and 7.F.a Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 13 2. For 100% affordable housing projects, and housing projects subject to Administrative Approval under Subsection 9.39.020(B)(3), a copy of the written decision and project plans shall be posted on the City’s website. 9.39.060 Term, Extension, and Revocation The term of permit, exercise of rights, extension, and revocation for Administrative Approvals shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 9.37, Common Procedures. Chapter 9.40 Development Review Permit 9.40.020 Applicability A. Except as provided in subsection (B), a Development Review Permit approved by the Planning Commission shall be required prior to issuance of any building permit for the development for: 1. Any project that exceeds Tier 1 maximum limits; 2. All new construction and new additions to existing buildings of more than 10,000 square feet of floor area located in Residential Districts or more than 7,500 square feet of floor area in Neighborhood Commercial and Oceanfront Districts; 3. All new construction and new additions to existing buildings of more than 15,000 square feet of floor area located in Nonresidential Districts not specified in subsection (A)(2); 4. Notwithstanding subsection (A)(3) above, all new construction of more than 30,000 square feet of floor area of a development project containing no 7.F.a Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 14 more than 15% of commercial floor area located in Nonresidential Districts not specified in subsection (A)(2); 5. Notwithstanding subsections (A)(2)—(4) above and until the adopting of a Pico Neighborhood Plan, all new construction and new additions to existing buildings of more than 7,500 square feet of floor area located in the Pico Neighborhood Area. B. The following types of projects are exempt from Development Permit Review requirements: 1. Single-unit dwellings; 2. 100% Affordable Housing Projects; and 3. Any project that: a. Meets the definition of “housing development project” under the Housing Accountability Act, Government Code Section 65589.5, (“Housing Accountability Act”) and that, consistent with the Housing Accountability Act, complies with all applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the project application is deemed complete; and b. Does not exceed Tier 2 maximums.; and c. For projects with rental units, the applicant agrees, prior to issuance of a building permit, to record a deed restriction against the property ensuring each of the following: 7.F.a Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 15 i. All leases shall be made only to a tenant who is a natural person, or to tenants who are natural persons. ii. All leases shall be made only to a tenant or tenants who, regardless of the term of occupancy, will use and occupy the rental unit as the tenants’ primary residence. For purposes of this paragraph, “primary residence” shall mean the usual place of return for housing of a tenant, as documented by at least two of the following: motor vehicle registration, driver’s license, California state identification card, voter registration, income tax return, or utility bill. A tenant can have only one primary residence. iii. All leases shall be in writing and provide for a minimum initial term of one (1) year; and iv. All units shall be leased as unfurnished units. SECTION 3. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or any appendix 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 7.F.a Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 16 declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 5. This Ordinance is declared to be an emergency measure necessary for preserving the public peace, health, safety or welfare, adopted pursuant to the provisions of Section 615 of the Santa Monica City Charter. As set forth in the findings above and in the March 10, 2020, August 25, 2020 and January 25, 2022 staff reports, this Ordinance is necessary for preserving the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. As an emergency measure, this Ordinance will be effective immediately upon adoption. SECTION 6. 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 immediately upon adoption. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall be of no further force or as of May 31, 2022, unless it is otherwise extended pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.46.090(C). APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ JOSEPH LAWRENCE Interim City Attorney 7.F.a Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Housing Process Thresholds 2d IZO Extension 01.25.2022 [Revision 1] (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for 1 Vernice Hankins From:Daniel Galamba <galambadb@hotmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 20, 2022 12:56 PM To:Daniel Galamba; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Oscar de la Torre Subject:January 25, 2022 City Council Meeting Item 7.F.-Please Oppose Proposed Extension of and Amendment to Interim Zoning Regulations Establishing Increased Thresholds for Administrative Review EXTERNAL Dear City Council, Please oppose this Proposed Extension of and Amendment to Interim Zoning Regulations Establishing Increased Thresholds for Administrative Review. With this proposed extension these projects would have no public hearing except one presented by the developer that really is just a waste of time and a check‐the‐box exercise. I've attended these developer meetings before and all the developer does is just state what they are going to do and then they really just ignore or minimize the concerns of residents. These projects affect the area and residents greatly and they should go through the full City public hearing process and not just be swept under the rug by Administrative Review that I understand can not be appealed. Also I understand that the proposed project at Lincoln and Ocean Park Blvds would only go through Administrative Review even though they involve five story buildings. This is completely unacceptable and cuts your constituents out of the decision making process. The City Council should represent the interests of residents, not developers using Administrative Review to silence the legitimate interests of residents. Thank you. Sincerely, Dr Daniel Galamba Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins From:Elizabeth Van Denburgh <emvandenburgh@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, January 24, 2022 4:09 PM To:Sue Himmelrich; KRISTIN MCCOWAN; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; christine.para@santamonica.gov; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems Cc:Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Anuj Gupta Subject:City Cnl. 1/25/22 -- Item 7F - Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Board urges the City Council to REMOVE TIER 2 PROJECTS from this IZO which has them approved via an AA and RETURNS THEMTO THE PRIOR DR process EXTERNAL Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members, The Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) urges the City Council to remove TIER 2 projects from this IZO, which has them approved by the Administrative Approval (AA) process and return them to the DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DR) approval process. The Administrative Approval (AA) process only requires that these Tier 2 projects be approved by the Planning Department staff, with no public hearings at either the Planning Commission or City Council and CANNOT BE APPEALED. The DR process includes hearings before the Planning Commission and possible appeal to the City Council, if the projects seem to be inconsistent with the LUCE or Zoning Ordinances. A clear example of why TIER 2 projects should be removed from the IZO as an Administrative Approval process is the "Lincoln Center" project at Lincoln and Ocean Park Blvd. The proposed project consists of:  Ten buildings on the property of up to five stories with heights of 55 to 65 feet  521 apartments with 90% being market rate and only 10% being affordable; certainly not in support of what residents wanted to see with the passage of Proposition R in 1990 (Prop. R mandated that 30% of newly constructed multifamily housing be affordable to low- and moderate- income households)  Of the calculated 468 market rate units, it appears that 410 are studio and 1 bedroom apartments.  36,000 square feet of retail, including a smaller grocery store. Gelson is currently 42,000 square feet  880 vehicle parking spaces, with only 200 now and 816 bicycle parking spaces o Currently Lincoln Boulevard has about 50,000 daily car trips o As part of the Vision Zero effort, a study of the most "lethal" intersections was conducted and the Lincoln/Ocean Park intersection was 2nd on that list with two fatalities and one severe injury. Why would the city as part of Vision Zero, general car/pedestrian/cyclist safety and traffic impact on neighborhoods (Sunset and Ocean Park) and Lincoln Blvd. (main artery into/out of city including to LAX) not mandate a traffic study?  The Administrative Approval application form says nothing about notifying the neighborhood organization about the required "community meeting" which has to be held before the application is Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 2 submitted. The LUCE states that "Preserve Existing Neighborhoods. The highest priority of the community was the preservation of the existing character and scale of Santa Monica’s neighborhoods." How can this be done if the neighborhoods are not included? Finally, the 2010 LUCE states the following: Current Challenges: Over the last 25 years, since the adoption of the 1984 LUCE, unanticipated issues have resulted, including:  Increased traffic congestion  Commercial buildings that do not transition well to adjacent residential neighborhoods  The loss of existing affordable and workforce housing in multi-family neighborhoods  Infill residential buildings which are out of scale with their existing neighborhoods  Architectural design that does not contribute to the City’s rich urban character  The lack of green space, open space and landscaped boulevards AND HOW THE LUCE IMPLEMENTS THE COMMUNITY’s CORE VALUES  Preserves the scale and character of all residential neighborhoods, the Beach and Oceanfront District, and neighborhood commercial areas such as Main Street and Montana Avenue.  Incentivizes the production of new housing opportunities and local-serving uses, in place of regional- serving commercial growth, in a small number of areas linked to transit.  Encourages complete neighborhoods with shopping, services, and gathering places within walking distance of new and existing housing.  Integrates traffic management and land use though a target of No Net New Evening Peak Period Vehicle Trips.  Seeks new opportunities to enhance and create green spaces including: improvements to pedestrian and bicycle connections, freeway capping, beach greening, and ground floor open spaces as parts of new development.  Creates a diverse economic base that supports the fiscal health of the City, ensuring a high-quality of public services.  Requires community benefits such as open space, historic preservation, arts, and affordable and workforce housing for development above the ministerial base height.  Provides for a greater community role in determining the physical nature and urban form of the City to ensure that Santa Monica maintains its unique “beach town” culture.  Provides tools, including financial incentives, to preserve historic buildings.  Phases development over the twenty-year length of the plan, keeping change in sync with transportation improvements.  Ties long-term programs and policies to the Sustainable City Plan to reduce GHG emissions, per capita carbon footprint, and overall impact on the environment. We urge the city to return to the neighborhood focus and balanced aspect of the LUCE and allow community input and options for our city. Thank-you Board of Directors Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins From:zinajosephs@aol.com Sent:Monday, January 24, 2022 9:12 PM To:councilmtgitems; councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; David White; Susan Cline; Anuj Gupta; David Martin Cc:zinajosephs@aol.com Subject:City Council 1/25/22 item 7-F -- OPPOSE extending the IZO EXTERNAL January 24, 2022 To: Mayor Himmelrich and City Council members From: Zina Josephs, on behalf of the Friends of Sunset Park Board of Directors RE: 1/25/22 agenda item 7-F -- Extending the IZO for Administrative Approval We support Administrative Approval only for 100% affordable housing projects. The FOSP Board approved the letter below over the weekend, under the impression that the proposed "Lincoln Center" project at the Gelson's site was considered a "Tier 2" project. Today, we received the results of a public records request -- the preliminary application for Administrative Approval for the Gelson's project. To our surprise and dismay, we discovered that this gigantic project supposedly qualifies for "Tier 1" -- All of this somehow fits within the Tier 1 category: Total square footage: 874, 385 sq ft Number of buildings: 10 Height: up to 5-stories/65 feet Number of apartments: 521 (90% market-rate, 10% affordable) Parking: 880 vehicle parking spaces (up from about 200) Based upon this preliminary application, the FOSP Board now opposes Administrative Approval for both Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects. That leaves 100% affordable projects. They have not required Planning Commission hearings in the past, but if continuing that requires extension of a modified IZO, we would not oppose that, as long as they're still required to hold 2 community meetings AND notify the city-recognized neighborhood organization for the area where the project is located. Unfortunately, the Administrative Approval application form requires only 1 community meeting and says nothing about notifying neighborhood organizations -- a transparency failure. And if the Gelson's developers are allowed to get away with submitting their application after only one community meeting, in which only 100 people (including the development team) were allowed to participate, it will make a complete this sham of this "public process." Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 2 Thank you for your consideration. ************************************************************************** Agenda: https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com//Citizens/detail_meeting.aspx?ID=1289 January 23, 2022 To: Mayor Himmelrich and City Council From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park RE: 1/23/22 agenda item 7-F: Staff recommends that the City Council introduce and adopt an emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance to extend interim regulations authorizing 100% affordable housing projects and Tier 2 housing projects subject to the Housing Accountability Act to be reviewed through an Administrative Approval process. The FOSP Board urges the Council to remove Tier 2 projects from this Interim Zoning Ordinance and return them to the prior Development Review approval process, which would include hearings before the Planning Commission and possible appeal to the City Council, if the projects seem to be inconsistent with the LUCE or the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed “Lincoln Center” project on the Gelson’s site at the intersection of Lincoln Blvd. and Ocean Park Blvd. supposedly qualifies as a “Tier 2” project. The developer’s Demolition Permit will be automatically approved on January 25, when the 75-day waiting period ends. The developer is applying for “Administrative Approval,” which means that the project could be approved by Planning Department staff, with no public hearings at either Planning Commission or City Council. In addition, Administrative Approvals cannot be appealed. The proposed project consists of: -10 buildings -- up to 5-stories, with heights of 55 to 65 feet -521 apartments (90% market-rate, 10% affordable) -The market-rate units will include about 410 studio and 1-bedroom apartments. -36,000 sq ft of retail, including a smaller grocery store (Gelson’s is now 42,000 sq ft) -880 vehicle parking spaces (only about 200 now) and 816 bicycle parking spaces Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 3 Despite the fact the Lincoln Blvd. has about 50,000 daily car trips, and the intersection has been the scene of many traffic accidents, no traffic study is required before Administrative Approval. In addition, the Administrative Approval application form says nothing about notifying the neighborhood organization about the required “Community Meeting” which has to be held before the application is submitted. With the January 11 community meeting for the “Lincoln Center” project, only 100 people, including the development team, were allowed into the Zoom meeting. All of these factors combine to make a sham of public process. Again, the FOSP Board urges the Council to remove Tier 2 projects from this Interim Zoning Ordinance and return them to the prior Development Review approval process, which would include hearings before the Planning Commission and possible appeal to the City Council, if the projects seem to be inconsistent with the LUCE or the Zoning Ordinance. Thank you for your consideration. Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins From:lmarreola <lmarreola@roadrunner.com> Sent:Tuesday, January 25, 2022 12:04 PM To:councilmtgitems Subject:1-25 -22 meeting Agenda Item 7-F EXTERNAL We agree with Friends of Sunset Park'sBoard position on Item 7‐F tonight. And it s letter to you from Zina Josephs. Carol and Larry Arreola Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins From:Noma Boardmember <nomaboard@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, January 25, 2022 12:57 PM To:Sue Himmelrich; chistine.parra@santamonica.gov; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; Kristin McCowan; councilmtgitems; David Martin; David White; Jing Yeo Subject:Subject: Agenda Item 7-F EXTERNAL To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Agenda item 7-F: Staff recommends that the City Council introduce and adopt an emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance to extend interim regulations authorizing 100% affordable housing projects and Tier 2 housing projects subject to the Housing Accountability Act to be reviewed through an Administrative Approval process. The NOMA Board urges the Council to remove Tier 2 projects from this Interim Zoning Ordinance and return them to the prior Development Review approval process, which would include hearings before the Planning Commission and possible appeal to the City Council, if the projects are inconsistent with the LUCE or the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed “Lincoln Center” project on the Gelson’s site at the intersection of Lincoln Blvd. and Ocean Park Blvd. is being proposed as a “Tier 2” project. The developer is gapplying for “Administrative Approval,” which means that the project could be approved by Planning Department staff, with no public hearings at either Planning Commission or City Council. In addition, Administrative Approvals cannot be appealed. The proposed project consists of: -10 buildings on one site -- up to 5-stories, with heights of 55 to 65 feet -521 apartments (90% market-rate, only 10% affordable) -The market-rate units will include about 410 studio and 1-bedroom apartments. -36,000 sq ft of retail, including a smaller grocery store (Gelson’s is now 42,000 sq ft) -880 vehicle parking spaces (only about 200 now) and 816 bicycle parking spaces Despite the fact the Lincoln Blvd. has about 50,000 daily car trips, and the intersection has been the scene of many traffic accidents, no traffic study is required before Administrative Approval. In addition, the Administrative Approval application form says nothing about notifying the neighborhood organization about the required “Community Meeting” which has to be held before the application is submitted. For the January 11 community meeting for the “Lincoln Center” project, only 100 people, including the development team, were allowed into the Zoom meeting. This process has not been democratic. Democracy demands that those affected by decisions that impact their community, have some input into those decisions. Plans for a huge, neighborhood changing project like this one should not be made in back rooms attended only by those who have a financial interests in the project. Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 2 Residents’ voices must be heard. Without community input this project makes a mockery of public process. The NOMA Board urges the Council to remove Tier 2 projects from this Interim Zoning Ordinance and return them to the prior Development Review approval process, which would include hearings before the Planning Commission and possible appeal to the City Council, if the projects seem to be inconsistent with the LUCE or the Zoning Ordinance. Thank you for your consideration. smnoma.org NOMAboard@gmail.com Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins From:Tricia Crane <1triciacrane@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, January 25, 2022 1:36 PM To:councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; david.white@santamonic.gov; Santa Monica City Manager's Office Subject:Support for Letter submitted by Wilmont Board - Agenda Item 7F - REMOVE TIER 2 PROJECTS from this IZO EXTERNAL To: City Council From: The Board of Northeast Neighbors Re; Agenda Item 7.F Jan. 25, 2022 Mayor Himmelrich and City Council, The Board of Northeast Neighbors supports the letter submitted by Wilmont concerning Agenda Item 7F. Tricia Crane Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members, The Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) urges the City Council to remove TIER 2 projects from this IZO, which has them approved by the Administrative Approval (AA) process and return them to the DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DR) approval process. The Administrative Approval (AA) process only requires that these Tier 2 projects be approved by the Planning Department staff, with no public hearings at either the Planning Commission or City Council and CANNOT BE APPEALED. The DR process includes hearings before the Planning Commission and possible appeal to the City Council, if the projects seem to be inconsistent with the LUCE or Zoning Ordinances. A clear example of why TIER 2 projects should be removed from the IZO as an Administrative Approval process is the "Lincoln Center" project at Lincoln and Ocean Park Blvd. The proposed project consists of:  Ten buildings on the property of up to five stories with heights of 55 to 65 feet  521 apartments with 90% being market rate and only 10% being affordable; certainly not in support of what residents wanted to see with the passage of Proposition R in 1990 (Prop. R mandated that 30% of newly constructed multifamily housing be affordable to low- and moderate- income households)  Of the calculated 468 market rate units, it appears that 410 are studio and 1 bedroom apartments.  36,000 square feet of retail, including a smaller grocery store. Gelson is currently 42,000 square feet  880 vehicle parking spaces, with only 200 now and 816 bicycle parking spaces o Currently Lincoln Boulevard has about 50,000 daily car trips o As part of the Vision Zero effort, a study of the most "lethal" intersections was conducted and the Lincoln/Ocean Park intersection was 2nd on that list with two fatalities and one severe injury. Why would the city as part of Vision Zero, general car/pedestrian/cyclist safety and traffic impact on neighborhoods (Sunset and Ocean Park) and Lincoln Blvd. (main artery into/out of city including to LAX) not mandate a traffic study?  The Administrative Approval application form says nothing about notifying the neighborhood organization about the required "community meeting" which has to be held before the application is submitted. The LUCE states that "Preserve Existing Neighborhoods. The highest priority of the community was the preservation of the existing character and scale of Santa Monica’s neighborhoods." How can this be done if the neighborhoods are not included? Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) 2 Finally, the 2010 LUCE states the following: Current Challenges: Over the last 25 years, since the adoption of the 1984 LUCE, unanticipated issues have resulted, including:  Increased traffic congestion  Commercial buildings that do not transition well to adjacent residential neighborhoods  The loss of existing affordable and workforce housing in multi-family neighborhoods  Infill residential buildings which are out of scale with their existing neighborhoods  Architectural design that does not contribute to the City’s rich urban character  The lack of green space, open space and landscaped boulevards AND HOW THE LUCE IMPLEMENTS THE COMMUNITY’s CORE VALUES  Preserves the scale and character of all residential neighborhoods, the Beach and Oceanfront District, and neighborhood commercial areas such as Main Street and Montana Avenue.  Incentivizes the production of new housing opportunities and local-serving uses, in place of regional-serving commercial growth, in a small number of areas linked to transit.  Encourages complete neighborhoods with shopping, services, and gathering places within walking distance of new and existing housing.  Integrates traffic management and land use though a target of No Net New Evening Peak Period Vehicle Trips.  Seeks new opportunities to enhance and create green spaces including: improvements to pedestrian and bicycle connections, freeway capping, beach greening, and ground floor open spaces as parts of new development.  Creates a diverse economic base that supports the fiscal health of the City, ensuring a high-quality of public services.  Requires community benefits such as open space, historic preservation, arts, and affordable and workforce housing for development above the ministerial base height.  Provides for a greater community role in determining the physical nature and urban form of the City to ensure that Santa Monica maintains its unique “beach town” culture.  Provides tools, including financial incentives, to preserve historic buildings.  Phases development over the twenty-year length of the plan, keeping change in sync with transportation improvements.  Ties long-term programs and policies to the Sustainable City Plan to reduce GHG emissions, per capita carbon footprint, and overall impact on the environment. We urge the city to return to the neighborhood focus and balanced aspect of the LUCE and allow community input and options for our city. Thank-you Board of Directors Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) (310) 451-3669 January 25, 2022 VIA E-MAIL Santa Monica City Council 1685 Main Street, Room 102 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Re: Agenda Item 7-F Emergency Extension of IZO for Processing Affordable and Code-Compliant Housing Applications Our File No. 639.67 Dear Councilmembers: This letter is submitted on behalf of the Santa Monica Housing Council. We are writing in support of the introduction and adoption of the emergency interim zoning ordinance to extend interim zoning regulations established by emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2633, as previously extended by Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2645. The extension is called for by Program 1A of the recently adopted Housing Element. Collectively, these Interim Zoning Ordinances (“IZOs”) authorize 100% affordable and zoning compliant housing projects protected by the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”) (Gov’t Code § 65589.5) to be reviewed through a streamlined Administrative Approval (“AA”) process. As we all know, the State and the region are experiencing a severe housing supply crisis, even further exacerbated by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Given the severity of the crisis, the City has both a moral and legal obligation to use every tool at its disposal to remove barriers to housing production. For the 2021-2029 Housing Element cycle (Sixth Cycle), Santa Monica’s RHNA is 8,895 units. Meeting this obligation requires the City to issue building permits for an average of approximately 1,000 housing units a year between 2021 and 2029. Over the past five years, for comparison, the City issued building permits for an average of only approximately 200 units per year. Pursuant to State law, the HAA prohibits cities from denying or reducing the density of housing applications that comply with objective general plan and zoning kutcher@hlkklaw.com Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Santa Monica City Council January 25, 2022 Page 2 standards unless the City determines that the project would have a quantifiable, specific, adverse effect on public health and safety. (Gov’t Code § 65589.5(j).) The intent of the HAA is to ensure that local governments do not reject or reduce the size of housing applications that comply with objective zoning standards. The time delay and cost resulting from the discretionary review process has historically been a significant housing production barrier in Santa Monica. Given the very limited discretion afforded to cities for code-compliant housing applications under the HAA, and in an responsible effort to spur housing production, on March 10, 2020, the City Council adopted the IZO authorizing 100% affordable and code-compliant housing projects to be reviewed and approved through a streamlined AA process. As a result, strictly code-compliant housing projects proposed in the City now receive a more predictable and expedient review, as compared to the burdensome, time consuming and costly discretionary Development Review Permit (“DRP”) process. Previously extended on August 25, 2020, the IZO would expire on January 31, 2022, under current emergency orders. In adopting and subsequently extending the IZO, the City recognized it is meaningless and counterproductive to subject HAA-protected housing applications to public hearings and processing delays in light of the City’s clear obligation under State law to approve those code-compliant housing applications. Without local discretion or the authority to deny or reduce a code-compliant housing application’s density, the City wisely dispensed with the DRP’s hollow and pointless--yet cumbersome and time consuming--review process. The Sixth Cycle Housing Element was adopted by the Santa Monica City Council on a 5-2 vote on October 12, 2021, setting forth an eight-year housing strategy to achieve Santa Monica’s total RHNA allocation of 8,895 units. A key component of this strategy is Program 1A (titled “By-Right Approvals for Housing Projects”), which requires the City to make permanent amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to implement the IZO no later than March 31, 2022. Program 1A also unambiguously states: “The City shall extend interim zoning amendments for process thresholds pending the full implementation of this program.” (Emphasis added.) The City transmitted the adopted Sixth Cycle Housing Element – leading with Program 1A – to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) on November 10, 2021. The document is currently pending legal review and comment as part of HCD’s certification process. (Gov’t Code § 65585(h).) Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Santa Monica City Council January 25, 2022 Page 3 Policy benefits of streamlined processing aside, at this point, the City has legally committed itself to extending the IZO pursuant to Program 1A of the Housing Element. Reneging on a fundamental production program before the Sixth Cycle Housing Element is even certified would render the 6th Cycle Housing Element legally vulnerable. Watering down the IZO by exempting larger projects, as some have suggested, would only undermine the Housing Element’s clear commitment to production and shake the State’s faith in Santa Monica’s commitment to truly meeting its RHNA obligation. We cannot think of a worse message to communicate to HCD during its legal review of the Housing Element than reversing course on quite literally the document’s very first housing production goal. Therefore, we urge the City Council to adopt the staff recommendation and extend the IZO through May 31, 2022, at which point the changes should become permanent as required by Housing Element Program 1A. Extending the streamlined process in place under the existing IZO will support the City’s urgent need to facilitate the production of housing and demonstrate commitment to 6th Cycle Housing Element’s long-term housing production strategy. Very truly yours, Kenneth L. Kutcher KLK:sna cc: David White Joe Lawrence Alan Seltzer Heidi von Tongeln David Martin Jing Yeo SMHC Board of Directors Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 Item 7.F 01/25/22 7.F.i Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Written Comments (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds for Housing Projects (20 mins)) Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance (IZO) Process Thresholds for Housing Projects City Council Meeting January 25, 2022 7.F.j Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Purpose Amend and Extend Interim Regulations allowing housing projects without public hearing through May 31, 2022: 1.100% Affordable Housing Projects 2.Tier 2 Housing Projects subject to the Housing Accountability Act 3.Residential Leasing Requirements: delete deed restriction requirement Extending the Existing IZO would: Sustain the current Streamline Review Process for certain housing projects pending certification & implementation of adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element Allow Adequate Time for Council to Amend the Housing Review Process in the ZO consistent with Program 1A of the Adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element (By-right approvals for housing projects) 7.F.j Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Background | Housing Accountability Act (HAA) Severely Restricts Discretionary Review of code-compliant Housing Projects •Prohibits Ability to Deny or Reduce Density of a code-compliant Housing Project •Denial requires finding that Project results in Specific Adverse Effect on Public Safety/Welfare HAA defines “housing project” as: 1)Residential units only 2)Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage designated for residential use 3)Transitional housing or supportive housing 7.F.j Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Background | Santa Monica Housing Policy •Core Policy Focus: Support for Housing Production •100% Affordable Housing Projects and Market-Rate Housing •Housing Production is Embedded in City’s Adopted Land use Plans: •2010 Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) •2013 Bergamot Area Plan (BAP) •2017 Downtown Community Plan (DCP) •Implemented through the 2015 Zoning Ordinance Update •October 2021 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 7.F.j Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Background | Santa Monica Housing Policy 2010 Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) •Established Tiered Land Use System •Housing Incentives •Housing projects with 100% residential above ground floor received Increased Height & FAR compared to all other projects •Established Review Process for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 projects •Established by-right process for Tier 1 •Established public hearing requirement for Tier 2 •100% Affordable Housing Projects: Administrative Review of projects 50 units or less What is a Tier? The LUCE created a tiered land use system based on increments of height and floor area ratio (FAR). •Tier 1 establishes a base height and FAR •Tier 2 establishes additional height and FAR that can be requested if community benefits are provided 7.F.j Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Background | Santa Monica Housing Policy 2017 Downtown Community Plan (DCP) •Housing-focused specific plan providing incentives for housing instead of commercial projects •Streamlined process for housing projects up to 75,000 sf (regardless of Tier) –no public hearing •Public hearing for larger projects •More height and floor area ratio for housing projects •Amended August 2020 –added additional housing production incentives •Tier 3 housing projects –Eliminated Development Agreement requirements for Tier 3 projects over 90,000 sf and replaced with Development Review Permit (public hearing required) 7.F.j Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Background | Prior City Council Actions •December 10, 2019 -Council Study Session on Housing Policy •In response to State and Regional directives to increase housing production •Council Direction: staff to proceed with efforts supporting housing production, particularly 100% affordable housing projects. •March 10, 2020 -Council Adoption: Permit Streamlining Emergency IZO •100% Affordable Housing Projects •Tier 2 Housing Projects [compliant with HAA] •August 25, 2020 -IZO Extended •Separate Item Adopted: Residential Leasing Regulations [SMMC Chapter 6.22] •January 31, 2022 -IZO Expires 7.F.j Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Applicability & Requirements of IZO •Applies to: •100% Affordable Housing Projects •Tier 2 code compliant housing projects •Tenants must be natural persons •Unit must be tenants’ primary residence •Leases must be minimum 1 year term •Units shall be unfurnished •Requirements •Community meeting prior to submitting application for Administrative Approval •Preliminary review by ARB prior to approval of project •Formal design review by ARB still required 7.F.j Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Streamlined Review of 100% Affordable Housing Projects Existing ZO: 100% Affordable Housing Projects over 50 units require public hearing (except in DCP) Streamlined Review necessary to support Housing Providers with meeting lending deadlines/developing Affordable Housing projects 7.F.j Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Streamlined Review of Housing Projects State Housing Crisis | COVID-19 Pandemic •Discretionary Process presents risk & uncertainty for housing developers •Housing Accountability Act affords narrow jurisdiction over housing projects protected by HAA •Raises questions regarding purpose of public hearings if City has essentially no ability to disapprove project 7.F.j Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Streamlined Review of Housing Projects Adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element (pending certification) •Housing Element RHNA allocation of 8,895 units •Housing Projects in SM (past 5 years): 200 units/year (20% affordable) •2021-2029 Housing Element projected need: 1,100 units/year (69% affordable) •Housing Element Program 1A –By-Right Approval of Housing Projects Extending IZO would provide streamlined review process to support housing production necessary to meet 2021-2029 Housing Element targets 7.F.j Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Amend IZO for Consistency with Residential Leasing Regulations •Chapter 6.22 -Residential Leasing Requirements enacted in October 2020 •Ensures units are for long-term resident use •IZO leasing requirements pre-dated Chapter 6.22 Remove IZO Deed Restriction requirement: •No longer necessary now that Residential Leasing Requirements are now established in Chapter 6.22 that would serve purpose of deed restriction 7.F.j Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds Recommendation Introduction & Adoption of Emergency IZO Extend Interim Regulations authorizing 100% affordable housing projects and Tier 2 housing projects subject to the Housing Accountability Act to be review through an Administrative Process 7.F.j Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4808 : Extend IZO Related to Process Thresholds