ITEM 7-A
Council Mtg: April 28, 1992
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of a Condition of Approval of a Planning
Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit 91-015
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 50523 to allow the
construction of a two-story, five-unit residential
condominium project at 911 12th Street in the R2 (NW)
District.
Applicant: Richard Chang & Henry Wu
Appellant: Eileen Hecht, Applicants' representative
INTRODUCTION
This is an appeal of a Planning Commission condition of approval
requiring compliance with interim Ordinance 1577 (CSS)
(Proposition R). The City Council voted 5-2 to continue this
appeal for 60 to 90 days at the hearing of February 4, 1992 to
wait for the ordinance implementing Proposition R to be in place.
Ordinance 1615 (CCS) relating to the inclusionary housing program
was adopted on March 3, 1992 and became effective on March 24,
1992.
This report recommends that the City Council approve the
applicant's appeal to allow the project to be subject to the
provisions of Ordinance 1615 (CCS).
BACKGROUND
CUP 91-015 and VTTM 50523 were approved by the Planning
Commission on December 4, 1991 to allow the construction of a
two-story, five-unit residential condominium project (Attachment
B). The project was subject to the requirements of Ordinance
1577 (CCS) (an interim ordinance implementing Proposition R)
requiring a miniumum of 30% of the units to be provided as
inclusionary rental units on site. The applicants'
representative proposed at the Planning Commission hearing of
December 4, 1991 that Condition #43 (the inclusionary unit
condition) be revised "...to allow the developer to comply with
any subsequently adopted... (Proposition R) implementation
ordinance adopted prior to final map approval of the project."
(Attachment E). The Planning Commission, acting on the advice of
the City Attorney, did not incorporate such a condition.
Ordinance 1615 (CCS) adopted March 3, 1992 and effective as of
March 24, 1992, changes the options for compliance with the 30%
inclusionary unit requirement for all new dwelling units to be
constructed at one location by an applicant. The new ordinance
provides that for any application that has been filed but not
approved at the time the new ordinance became effective, the
applicant may elect to have the provisions of the new ordinance
[Section 9422 (b)] apply to his/her project (Attachment G).
Under Section 9132.4 (b), the conditions placed on the builder by
the Planning Commission, on appeal to the City Council, are not
considered effective unless and until approved by the City
Council.
Required Notification
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9131.5, notice of the City
Council meeting was mailed to all owners and residential and
commercial tenants of property located within a 500 foot radius
of the project at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to
the City Council meeting. A copy of the notice is contained in
Attachment H.
ANALYSIS
The application for CUP 91-015 and VTTM 50523 was filed on March
15, 1991. Ordinance 1577 (CCS) was adopted on March 26, 1991 and
was retroactive to projects filed on or after March 6, 1991. The
ordinance requires that two (2) of the proposed five total units
be deed restricted as affordable rental units for the project.
The project was continued at the applicant's request several
times from the initial Planning Commission hearing date of June
23, 1991. The applicant wanted to wait for a permanent ordinance
implementing Proposition R as they felt that they had not
received sufficient notice of the applicability of Ordinance 1577
(CCS) to their project (Attachment J, see letter dated 6/26/91).
In order to comply with the applicant's wishes, a ninety (90) day
extension of the subdivision processing deadline was sought by
the Planning Commission and granted by the applicant [Attachment
C, (see letter dated 10/10/91) & D]. The Planning Commission
approved the project on 12/4/91. The final deadline for
subdivision action was December 26, 1991 (Attachment C).
Ordinance 1615 (CCS), adopted on March 3, 1992, applies to
applications filed but not approved at the time the Ordinance
became effective, which applies to this case. The applicant may
elect to have the provisions of Ordinance 1615 (CCS) apply to the
project. As required by Proposition R, thirty percent (30%) of
the total number of new dwelling units to be constructed in any
project developed by an applicant at one location shall be
affordable to households of low- or moderate-income (Attachment
G). Ordinance 1615 provides for various means by which one can
comply with Proposition R including an in-lieu fee option for
qualifying projects.
Appeal Issues
The applicant is appealing the condition of approval relating to
Ordinance 1577 (CCS) implementing Proposition R on an interim
basis (Attachment A). Planning Commission condition of approval
#43 requires that one low and one moderate-income rental unit be
provided and maintained on site through subsequent sales of the
property (Attachment B & C). This condition satisfies the
minimum 30% inclusionary rental unit requirement of Ordinance
1577 (CCS) (Proposition R) (Attachment G).
Under Ordinance 1615 (CCS), the applicant may have the option to
pay an in-lieu fee for any required low income rental unit based
on an "inclusionary unit base price" as set by City Council
Resolution [Section 9246 (c) (see Attachment G)]. The applicant
may elect to comply with the provisions of Ordinance 1615 (CCS)
as it has not received final approval at the time the ordinance
became effective, since the appeal of the Commissioners action
was pending.
The applicant is also requesting that the $1,630.00 CUP
processing fee be waived if the appeal is denied and the
application be returned to the Planning Commission for
modification in order to utilize the provisions of the
Proposition R permanent implementing ordinance (Attachment A).
Since the applicant may elect to comply with the provisions of
Ordinance 1615 (CCS), if the appeal is approved, a new
application and processing fee would not be required.
CONCLUSION
The applicant may elect to comply with the provisions of
Ordinance 1615 (CCS) (Proposition R), as the project has not
received final approval. Development requirements of the
ordinance also provide an in-lieu fee option for qualifying
projects. Thus, the permanent Proposition R ordinance would
provide the applicant/appellant with the options they are
requesting.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any
budget or fiscal impact.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the Council approve the
appeal to allow the applicant to elect to comply with the
provisions of Ordinance 1615 (CCS) and approve CUP 91-015 and
VTTM 50523 with the following amended condition #43 as follows:
43. The developer shall covenant and agree with the City of
Santa Monica to the specific terms, conditions and
restrictions upon the possession, use and enjoyment of the
subject property, which terms, conditions and restrictions
shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's
Office as a part of the deed of the property to ensure
that two affordable units are provided and maintained over
time and through subsequent sales of the property. An
inclusionary requirement of at least thirty percent of the
total number of units, excluding any density bonus units
under State Government Code Section 65915, shall be
permanently affordable to and occupied by low and moderate
income households of which at least fifty percent
(50%)shall be affordable to households not exceeding sixty
percent of the (HUD) Los Angeles County median income,
with the balance of the inclusionary units affordable to
households with incomes not exceeding 100% of the (HUD)
Los Angeles County median income, expending not over 30%
of monthly income on housing costs, as specified by the
Housing Division of the Department of Community and
Economic Development. Such restrictions shall be
effective for the lifetime of the project.
This agreement shall be executed and recorded prior to
approval of the Final Map. Such agreement shall specify
1) responsibilities of the developer for making the
unit(s) available to eligible tenants and 2)
responsibilities of the City of Santa Monica to prepare
application forms for potential tenants, establish
critieria for qualifications, and monitor compliance with
the provisions of the agreement.
Owner shall provide the City Planning Division with a
conformed copy of the recorded agreement prior to approval
of the Final Map.
This provision is intended to satisfy the inclusionary
housing requirements of the Housing Element of the General
Plan of the City of Santa Monica. The developer shall
have the option to satisfy the obligations created by this
Agreement by demonstrating to the Director of Planning
compliance with either Ordinance 1577 (CCS) or Ordinance
1615 (CCS), providing implementation standards for this
program.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Appeal form dated 12/20/91.
B. Statement of Official Action dated 12/4/91.
C. Staff Memorandum to Planning Commission dated 12/4/91.
D. Letter from Staff to Richard Chang & Henry Wu dated
10/1/91.
E. Letter from Eileen Hecht to the Planning Commission dated
12/4/91.
F. Interim Ordinance #1577 (CCS) adopted 3/26/91.
G. Ordinance #1615 (CCS) adopted 3/3/92.
H. Notice of Development Proposal for Hearing by the City
Council on 1/28/92.
I. Letter from Eileen Hecht to Staff dated 2/6/92.
J. Letter from Eileen Hecht to Paul Berlant dated 6/26/91.
Prepared by: D. Kenyon Webster, Planning Manager
Susan White, Assistant Planner
Planning Division
Land Use and Transportation Management Department
NOTE: Attachments are not available on PEN, but may be obtained
from the City Clerk's office.