City Council Minutes: //

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

MAY 3, 1988

A meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by
Mayor Conn at 6:35 p.m., on Tuesday, May 3, 1988, in the Council
Chambers, having been adjourned from April 26, 1988.

Roll Call: Present:
Mayor James P. Conn
Mayor Pro Tempore Herbert Katz
Councilmember David B. Finkel
Councilmember William H. Jennings
Councilmember Alan S. Katz
Councilmember Christine E. Reed
Councilmember Dennis Zane
(entered at 6:37 p.m.)

Also Present: City Manager John Jalili
Assistant City Attorney Joseph Lawrence
Deputy City Attorney Laurie Lieberman
Acting City Clerk Donna R. Betancourt

1. DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE: Presented was the matter of Council
direction to staff on the Draft Zoning ordinance.

[All page references are to the Fourth Draft of the Santa Monica
Zoning ordinance, dated November 1987.]

For Subchapter 10B, Home occupation Permits, Councilmember Reed moved
(p. 299) to amend this section to include provision for mail notice on
the application for a home occupation permit, within a 500 foot
radius, with an opportunity for those being noticed to comment back to
the Zoning Administrator, and that the home occupation permits have a
specific term, either two or three years, so there is a periodic
renewal required and renotification that would enable the review of
any changed circumstances. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz.
Discussion was held. With no objection from the second, the maker
amended the motion to change the notification radius to 100 feet.
Discussion was held. At the suggestion of staff, and with the
concurrence of the second, the maker amended the motion to refer the
matter to staff to come back with a proposal to improve the existing
process, stressing that the initial intent of the motion not be lost,
that there be some notice and some opportunity for people to comment.
The motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Finkel moved (pp. 300-301) to direct staff to look at
subsections 9110.3(b) and 9110.3(k) and make appropriate
recommendations to Council as to what standards for "benign" and
inobtrusive activity might be appropriate to permit. Second by
Councilmember Zane. During discussion, at the suggestion of
Councilmember Reed, the maker and second amended the motion to
delete reference to subsection 9110.3(b).

The motion failed bythe following vote:

Council vote: Affirmative: Councilmembers Finkel, A. Katz, Zane

Negative: Councilmembers Jennings, H. Katz,
Reed, Mayor Conn

Councilmember Reed moved (p. 300) under subsection 9110.3(g) that "reasonable courier
services" be defined as no more than twice a week. The motion died for lack of a second.

For Subchapter 10E, Variances, Councilmember Zane moved (p. 316) under Section 9113.4
to change the notification radius from 300 feet to 500 feet. Second by Councilmember
Finkel. With no objection from the second, the maker included in the motion that it be made
explicit that "all property owners and tenants" mean all commercial and residential
property owners as well as commercial and residential tenants. During discussion, the
maker amended the motion to withdraw the portion referring to 500 feet, leaving the radius
at 300 feet for notification for variances. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz.
Discussion was held. The amended motion was approved, Councilmember Jennings opposed.

For Subchapter 10F, Conditional Use Permits, councilmember Zane moved (p. 320) under
Section 9114.1 to add language spelling out the 500 foot radius for notification. Second by
Councilmember A. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved.

For Subchapter 10G, site Plan Review Permit, Councilmember Jennings moved (p. 326) to
add that if the height or FAR goes over the as-of-right standard, the developer must establish
to the City's satisfaction that the increased FAR or height will not result in more traffic
generation than what would be generated by the FAR and height allowed as of right, and that
some amount of usable open public space be provided in the project in order to go over
the basic allowed amount. Second by Councilmember Zane. Discussion was held.
Councilmember Zane moved a substitute motion to direct staff to develop standards which
require that for the purpose of granting a site review permit so as to provide extra height and
extra density above the established standard, that an affirmative finding needs to be made that
some significant public objective would be achieved, and that no excessive burdens would be
created, with staff to bring back to Council language and a procedure to reflect this, and
some criteria by which the decisionmakers can evaluate it, inclusive of the criteria set forth
in Mr. Jennings' motion, including in the motion that in the context of the Interim Zoning
Ordinance, no site review processes should be applied, and that by the time the Zoning
comes back for final adoption, the aforementioned criteria and procedure should be
developed for any future site review approvals. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz.
During discussion, with the concurrence of the second, the maker amended the motion to
limit it to the substance of the change, with the question of what happens in the interim to be
the subject of a separate motion. The amended motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Reed moved to direct staff not to hold the Zoning
ordinance for the competition of the work that is necessary to
address the previous motion, and that further, they be directed at
such time as they bring the Zoning Ordinance back to Council, to also
bring whatever document or ordinance is necessary to hold the site
plan review process in abeyance until such time as the staff work is
completed, but in no event longer than six months after the adoption
of the full Zoning Ordinance. Second by Councilmember Zane.
Discussion was held. Referencing the earlier discussion with respect
to site review permits -having to do with developing of standards to
include affirmative findings of some significant public objective,
Councilmember Zane-moved a substitute motion that that site review
permit is the standard to be applied when a developer wishes to
exceed the as-of-right height and density standard, and it is not to
apply in the instances where it is simply above the two-lot standard.
Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The chair clarified that the
process outlined in the Fourth Draft of the Zoning Ordinance would
stay in place for those projects that surpassed the threshold, but
that site review of projects above the by-rights standard would be
held in abeyance. Discussion was held. Councilmember Zane moved a
substitute motion that the prior adopted motion shall apply only to
those site review permits triggered by projects proposing to exceed
the as-of-right height and FAR standard, and both in the interim and
until the standard comes back to Council, no proposals for site
review above the as-of-right height limit and FAR limit will be
processed. Second by Councilmember Finkel. Councilmember A. Katz
moved an amendment to limit the unavailability of site plan review-
permits to when the FAR is exceeded but not the height. The amendment
was accepted by the maker and second and incorporated into the
motion. The maker clarified that this motion states that no site
review permits for excess FAR would be granted in the interim period
and those site review permits which are granted are limited to those
that are between the two-lot standard and the as-of-right FAR, and
further, that the only restriction is on variations from FAR. The
motion, as amended, was approved, Councilmember A. Katz opposed.

Councilmember Zane moved (p. 326) to increase the notification radius
from 300 feet to 500 feet, and clearly spell that out in Section
9115.3. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The motion was clarified to
apply only in those cases between the two-lot and the as-of-right FAR
standards, and the increased height. The motion was unanimously
approved.

For Subchapter 10H, Amendments of Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning
ordinance, Councilmember Zane moved (p. 330) under subsection
9120.2(a)(3) to include specific notice of the same sort that would
apply in the case of a site review permit. Second by Councilmember A.
Katz. During discussion, the second was withdrawn. Councilmember Zane
moved to direct staff to develop language to address the concern
regarding notification whenever a text amendment results in a change
for a specific parcel. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The motion
was unanimously approved.

Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz moved (p. 333) to add a subsection under
Section 9120.6 that for interim ordinances, there be a variance
procedure in the interim zoning ordinance. Second by Councilmember
Reed. The motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Zane moved (p. 333) under Section 9120.7 that the
vested rights standard be drafted to reflect applicable state law and
judicial precedent, whereby projects are vested upon the basis of
having made substantial expenditures in reliance upon final
approvals, not upon the final approval itself. Second by
Councilmember Finkel. Discussion was held. Councilmember Reed moved
to delete Section 9120.7, thereby not providing a -general standard
but giving Council the discretion to adopt individual vesting
standards particular to each circumstance. Second by Councilmember A.
Katz. The maker and second accepted the motion as a friendly
amendment to the main motion. The motion, as amended, was unanimously
approved.

For Subchapter 10L, General and Specific Plans, Councilmember Reed
moved (p. 340) to add a subsection under Section 9121.13 to allow for
the private initiation of a Specific Plan, and have staff advise Council as
to whether a minimum size in number of lots or acres for a Specific
Plan area should be included. Second by Councilmember Finkel.
Discussion was held. The maker amended the motion, to take into
consideration the recommendations of staff, that the language be
drafted to allow the individual property owners to request
consideration before the Planning Commission, and let the Commission
decide whether or not the request merits formal consideration. Second
by Councilmember Zane. The motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Zane moved (p. 341) under Section 9121.17 to capitalize
"Specific Plan" in line 3. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The
motion was unanimously approved.

For Subchapter 10K, Hearing Procedures, Councilmember Zane moved (p.
349) under subsection 9131.5(a) that the language regarding the
hearing notification radius be made consistent with prior motions. Second by
Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved.

For Subchapter 10L, Appeals, Councilmember Zane moved that the policy
of the City should be that any Planning Commissioner or Councilmember may
appeal to the Council. Upon determination that this provision is
included in the Draft, the motion was withdrawn.

For Subchapter 10M, Enforcement, Councilmember Reed moved (p. 357)
that the prior authorization of the City Council and the intent thereto to
include citation authority for the Zoning Administrator be
appropriately incorporated into Section 9150.5. Second by Mayor Pro
Tempore H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved.

This concluded direction on changes on a page-by-page basis; the
following directions are to sections throughout the document.

Councilmember Reed moved (p. 295), regarding subsection 9 08 0. 4 (c)
to direct staff to gather information and advise Council who will
be put out of business in five years on vehicle storage lots and
vehicle sales lots. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. Discussion
was held. The motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Reed moved (p. 160) to add "hedges" into the language
of Section 9040.8, thereby reading, "Any fence, wall, hedge, or
flagpole shall comply .... 11 Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz.
Discussion was held. With the consent of the second, the maker
amended the motion to include authorization to include an appropriate
definition for hedges, and clarifying that this does not include
trees, but linear, densely planted hedges acting as fences. The
motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Zane moved in the C3C Zone (the Downtown Core District)
to adopt a policy of counting residential at 50 percent of its FAR on
all parcels in that zone, to encourage housing in the mixed-use
projects in the Downtown Zone. Second by Councilmember Finkel.
Discussion was held. With no objection from the second, the maker
included in the motion Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz's suggestion that
staff be directed to evaluate whether any modifications in parking
standards should be required as a consequence of this action.
Councilmember Reed moved an
amendment to restrict the housing provision to above the second
floor. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember A. Katz
moved an amendment to limit residential uses to the second floor and
above. Upon advisement that this requirement is already included, the
motion was withdrawn. The motion was approved, Councilmember Reed
opposed.

Councilmember Finkel moved to direct staff to explore ways and means
of encouraging affordable housing in the C3C Zone and make
appropriate recommendations to Council. Second by Councilmember Zane.
The motion was unanimously approved.

Referencing City Attorney Memorandum Opinion Number 88-2, dated March
8, 1988, which states that in the opinion of the City Attorney's office,
pursuant to current state law (Section 65852.2 of 'the Government
Code), the prohibition of second units within single-family
residential zoned areas is unlawful, Councilmember Finkel moved (p.
41) under subsection 9010.5(b) to instruct staff to come back with
recommendations for substitute language which
would come as close as possible to conforming to the spirit and
purpose which Council sought to achieve, and at the same time, doing
it in a fashion which is legal. Second by Councilmember A. Katz. The
maker modified the motion to incorporate Councilmember A. Katz's
suggestion that this not be limited to modifications to this section
but may be made a performance standard that affects several sections.
Discussion was held. Councilmember Jennings moved a substitute motion
to direct staff to prepare the necessary findings, as best they can,
to support the exclusion of second dwelling units in the R1 areas,
and to bring those findings to Council for inclusion in the Zoning
Ordinance when it is considered in July. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore
H. Katz. The motion was unanimously approved.

Referencing City Attorney Memorandum of Opinion Number 87-54, dated
December 31, 1987, regarding proposed Zoning Ordinance provisions
regulating child care, Councilmember Finkel moved that all sections
of the proposed ordinance referred to in the City Attorney's analysis
(p. 4 of the opinion) be amended so as to bring them into conformity
to the proposed language and the proposed changes set forth in the
opinion (thereby conforming to state-law). Second by Councilmember A.
Katz. Councilmember A. Katz clarified that in a number of sections,
the City Attorney noted that the section as it currently exists is
not inconsistent with state law, and in those cases, no change would
be made.

Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment to strike from the main
motion references to subsections 9050.3(c) and 9050.3(d). Second by
Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. During discussion, the maker and second
modified the motion to adopt the proposals made in the City Attorney
Opinion, except to the extent that Council directions to staff that
have been voted on since the opinion was written are contrary to the
Opinion, the subsequent directions to staff govern. The motion was
approved, Councilmember Finkel opposed.

.Councilmember Finkel requested that the record reflect the reason for
his no vote is that the effect of this may well be to make it
impossible or impracticable for us to have the very child care centers
and facilities that we want to have because of the economic
considerations, and he does not think that overriding factor is
outweighed by the concerns expressed about noise, and he believes it
is self-defeating.

Councilmember Reed moved an amendment (referencing p. 8 of the City
Attorney Opinion)to have the same minimum notice provisions that are
required of home occupation permits, thereby adopting Option (3)
outlined under Section 9050.3(m) of the Opinion, with notice
provision within a 100 foot radius, with performance standards.
Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was approved,
Councilmembers Finkel and Zane opposed.

Councilmember Finkel requested that the record reflect the reason for
his no vote is that this motion, just as the past motion, is designed
to try to cut the guts out from under the very set of regulations
which were created to make it possible to have child care centers.
The effect of this motion will be to inflame neighboors to make
protests, to stir up the argument and debate, and that is going
operate counter to the goal Council is trying to achieve.

Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment under Section 9050.3(d), as
amended previously, that "solid wall" be changed to "solid fence."
Second by Councilmember Finkel. The motion was unanimously approved.

Councilmember Jennings moved an amendment (p. 256 of the Draft Zoning
ordinance) under subsection 9055.3(b) to leave the language as
adopted by Council in the page-by-page direction on outdoor play
areas and fences and walls. The notion was withdrawn when it was
determined this direction was not necessary.

Councilmember Jennings moved an amendment to delete the reference in
the City Attorney Opinion to on-site parking for child day care
centers. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was
unanimously approved.

Councilmember Zane moved an amendment (p. 9 of 'City Attorney Opinion
and pp. 256-257 of the Draft referring to subsection 9055.3(b)) to
add a section on outdoor play areas, adjust the numbering, and make
the section consistent with what Council has adopted for Large Family
Day Care Homes. The motion was withdrawn when it was determined this
direction was not necessary.

Councilmember A. Katz moved an amendment to forbid having more than
one facility within 1,000 linear feet, as opposed to a 1,000 foot
radius (subsection 9050.3(l). Second by Councilmember Finkel.
Discussion was held. The motion was approved, Councilmember Reed
opposed.

The main motion on the child care policy,

approved, Councilmember Reed opposed.
as amended, was

Councilmember Reed requested that the record reflect that she did not
agree with the Memorandum of the City Attorney in certain specific
instances, and wasn't given an opportunity to completely review it
against each section of the Zoning Code.

Councilmember Reed moved to put Fifth Street back into the Downtown
Core (C3C) for the same height and FAR standards, noting that, based
on Council's prior action, the site review portion will not be taking
effect immediately. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion was
approved, Councilmember Finkel opposed.

Councilmember Finkel requested that the record reflect his no vote is
based on the fact that he believes that Fifth Street is the present
savior of Fourth Street.

Regarding the interim and proposed R-1 zoning ordinances,
Councilmember Reed moved to reword the requirement for Front Yard
Setback (Section 2(e) of Ordinance No. 1424(CCS) sec.2(e) and
subsection 9010.6(e) of the Draft) to read, "...25 percent of
allowable building width' must be set back an additional five feet."
Second by Councilmember A. Katz. Discussion was held. The motion was
amended to direct staff to look at the three points raised in the
April 19, 1988, letter from Koning, Eizenberg (those on allowable
building width, side yard formula, and the existing tradeoffs to side
yards in the rear two-thirds of the lot to allow for greater
flexibility for plantings and to save existing trees) and return with
staff recommendations. Second by Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz. The motion
was unanimously approved.

Mayor Pro Tempore H. Katz moved to treat the 'A' lots in the same
manner as the 'R' lots (Council direction on April 19, 1988),
with the exception of intensity, allowing the intensity to
increase by some number, to allow remodeling at approximately 25
to 30 percent (without losing the 'A' lot), with staff to return
with recommendations regarding intensity. Second by
Councilmember A. Katz. During discusion, the maker clarified the
intent of the motion to be to allow 'A' lots to stay, in
perpetuity, if the use does not change I ; if there is development
in some form, either a partial or total rebuild, the 'A' lot
would be lost and all parking would have to be provided
on-site. With no objection from the second, the maker amended the motion
to allow expansion by subterranean parking in the 'A' lot, with a
landscaped surface, allowing ingress and egress only on the
existing commercial property. It was further clarified that the
'A' lot is not to be counted as part of the parcel for the
purpose of calculating the FAR. Discussion was held.
Councilmember Jennings moved a substitute motion to direct staff
to incorporate appropriate requirements or incentives, whichever
works best, for underground parking for the 'A' lots upon
redevelopment, substantial remodel, or expansion of the adjacent
commercial property, with the surface of the 'A' lots being
appropriately landscaped as open space, with the entrance and
egress to the parking solely through the commercially zoned lot,
and with the 'A' lot not being used for thepurposes of
calculating the FAR. Second by Councilmember Reed. During
discussion, the motion was amended to replace "substantial
remodel" with "50 percent remodel." The motion, as amended, was
unanimously approved.

The main motion, to approve the Draft Zoning Ordinance, as amended by
Council actions on March 5, March 8, April 5, April 19, and May 3,
1988, was approved by the following vote:

Council vote: unanimously approved 7-0

ADJOURNMENT: At 11:30 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.

ATTEST:

Donna R. Betancourt
Acting City Clerk

APPROVED:

James P. Conn
Mayor

May 3, 1988