ITEM 8-A
COUNCIL MEETING: September 15, 1992 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt an Emergency Ordinance
Prohibiting Game Arcades and Establishing Limitations
on the Number of Alcohol and Food Serving
Establishments in Specified Portions of the C3 and C3C
Districts on an Interim Basis, and Approve in Concept
the Draft Bayside District Specific Plan, Authorize
Staff to Begin Preparation of an Environmental Impact
Report, Direct the Planning Commission to Initiate a
Resolution of Intention to Amend the Zoning Ordinance
in Order to Create a Bayside Zoning District.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council conceptually approve
the draft Bayside District Specific Plan with the revisions as
recommended in this report, direct staff to initiate the
environmental review process, and direct the Planning Commission
to initiate a Resolution of Intention to amend the Zoning
Ordinance in order to create a Bayside Zoning District. In
addition, at the August 11, 1992 Council meeting, the Council
directed staff to prepare an interim ordinance which would impose
limitations on the total number of alcohol outlets and eating
establishments in the Bayside District as well as examine a
limitation on the total number of seats in these businesses on a
block by block basis. As directed, the ordinance also prohibits
game arcades in the Bayside District. The City Attorney's staff
report is contained in Attachment A and the ordinance is included
as Exhibit A of the City Attorney report. The Resolution of
Intention is contained in Attachment B. The Council further
requested that staff address in this follow up staff report the
following key issues: limitations on alcohol outlets, limitations
on food serving establishments, the location and size of the
Passageway Overlay Zones, provisions for housing in the Bayside
District, and establishment of a Transfer of Development Rights
program. Other miscellaneous issues also are discussed.
BACKGROUND
Previous Council Action
At the August 11, 1992 meeting, Council agreed to limit the
discussion to a review of the issues and delay deliberations and
final action on the draft Specific Plan until the September 15,
1992 Council meeting. While Councilmembers identified a number
of key concerns as well as made suggestions on how to address
these issues, no motions were adopted directing staff to prepare
specific policy changes to the draft plan. Therefore, the
recommendations presented in this report were prepared with
consideration to the range of concerns expressed by the Council.
Council Comments on Staff's Recommendations Regarding Alcohol
Outlets and Restaurants
Council disagreed with the staff recommendation to place a block
by block limitation on all alcohol outlets. Instead, it was felt
that a distinction should be made between the different types of
alcohol serving establishments. In particular, Councilmembers
felt that limitations on bars and entertainment facilities should
be separate from the restrictions placed on restaurants whose
primary purpose is meal service. It was also stated that the
Specific Plan should address whether or not there are
restrictions on the sale of alcohol for off-premise consumption.
The draft document is silent on this issue.
Councilmembers also expressed the need to address the size of the
alcohol outlets. There is a substantial difference between the
approval of 200 seat restaurants and the approval of smaller,
cafe-style restaurants with only 50 seats. It was suggested
that, rather than limit individual restaurants to a specific
seating number, categories could be established with seating
ranges. For example, one block might be allowed 6 restaurants,
each with 50 seats or less, 3 restaurants could be permitted to
have up to 125 seats, and 1 restaurant could be permitted to have
over 125 seats.
In general, Council expressed concern that staff's proposal to
allow a limited expansion of alcohol outlets throughout the
district was overly broad, while the Planning Commission's
recommendation to freeze the number of outlets at the existing
total was too restrictive. The Bayside District Corporation
proposed to permit one additional outlet on each side of the 1400
block of Fourth Street, one outlet on the east side of the 1200
block of the Promenade, approval of the proposed restaurant at
1333 Third Street Promenade and the Criterion Plaza Food Court at
1315 Third Street Promenade, and the opening of a new restaurant
on the 1400 block of Second Street. Some Councilmembers thought
this to be a more reasonable proposal.
In addition to the limitations on alcohol serving establishments,
the Council felt that limitations should also be placed on the
overall number of restaurants, with or without alcohol service,
permitted within the District. The purpose of this limitation
would be to reserve the remaining street level building frontage
in the District for retail uses. It was stated that many
property owners prefer to lease to restaurants rather than retail
tenants. Consequently, the rental rates have become too
expensive for many prospective retailers. Restricting the total
number of food serving establishments in the District to a
specific number would serve as a mechanism to encourage expansion
of retail uses in the area. An inventory of all alcohol outlets
and food serving establishments is contained in Attachment C. A
map and list of alcohol outlets and food serving establishments
is contained in Attachment D.
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO SEATING LIMITATIONS
Planning staff has considered various approaches to limiting the
number of seats for restaurants in the Bayside District. While
the concept of creating seating categories addresses the issue of
limiting the number of large establishments, an area wide policy,
if site specific, would eliminate the flexibility restaurants are
entitled to under their current CUP's or under those
circumstances where the only limit is fire code exiting
standards. It is also problematic to determine rational seating
limits on a restaurant by restaurant basis. In addition, staff
has significant concerns regarding the ability to maintain an
accurate seating count and the impact this effort will have on
the City's limited enforcement staff.
The seating count compiled for this study was based upon the
seating limitations imposed by Conditional Use Permit approvals
as well as from a field inspection count of seating in the many
establishments that were not required to receive CUPs. The
establishments without CUPs currently do not have any seating
restrictions other than fire safety. Therefore, while the
seating count may be accurate at one point in time, there is no
way to know when an establishment changes the number of seats.
There is no practical reason for an operator to notify the City
regarding a small seating increase and, for non-alcohol serving
establishments, the operator is not required to obtain any City
approvals for the additional seats. In addition, the enforcement
of seating limitations imposed by a CUP are typically conducted
in response to a specific complaint. The City does not have
sufficient enforcement staff to inspect restaurants regarding
seating on a continuous basis. In addition, staff does not
believe maintaining a constant inventory of seating in Bayside
District food establishments is an effective use of enforcement
staff. Further, unlike Fire Department occupancy requirements,
the proposed seating limitations do not involve public safety
issues, but rather perceptions regarding appropriate restaurant
size. Due to these issues, staff does not supporting the
adoption of seating limitations in the Bayside District.
There has also been discussion among Bayside District Corporation
board members and the Corporation's City Council liaisons
regarding establishing seating limits for the proposed four
additional restaurants in the Bayside District. However, given
staff's position regarding a block by block seating limitation
and the fact that the Planning Commission, in the review of a
CUP, can limit seating based on the restaurant's location and the
nature of its operation, staff also does not recommend adopting
seating limits for the proposed additional restaurants at this
time.
ALCOHOL OUTLET LIMITS
Planning staff recommends that the concerns regarding the
establishment of different limitations for bars and alcohol
serving restaurants be resolved by basing the limitation on
license type. Restaurants with either a Type 41 beer and wine
license or a Type 47 full bar license, both of which are license
types granted only to public eating places, would be grouped into
one category. Bars with an ABC Type 48 general alcohol license,
which is an ABC license type granted to public premises that
serve alcohol but do not necessarily serve food, would be placed
in a separate category. The proposed limitations are based on
the existing number of Type 41, Type 47, and Type 48 licenses in
the Bayside District, plus the pending Criterion Food Plaza,
which, although it requires 6 Conditional Use Permits, is
considered herein as one restaurant outlet; the pending
restaurant at 1333 Third Street Promenade; and the four
additional restaurants with alcohol licenses as recommended by
the Bayside District Corporation. A map identifying the number
of existing and proposed alcohol outlets permitted per block is
contained in Attachment E.
Policy Revisions
Described below are proposed revisions to policies in the draft
Specific Plan relating to the limitations on alcohol outlets
which are included to effectuate Council direction.
Policy Revision #1
Policy 4.1.9 is recommended to be revised to state:
The number of on-sale alcohol outlets in the Bayside District
shall be limited on a block by block basis by the Alcohol
Beverage Control license type. The Criterion Food Plaza
located at 1315 Third Street Promenade shall be considered
one alcohol serving restaurant outlet. The limits per block
shall be as follows:
Block Type 41 and Type 47 Type 48 Total
Beer and Wine or General Alcohol Types
General Alcohol Service Service For 41,47
For Public Eating Place Public Premise and
48
Existing Proposed Total Existing
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 2 0 2 1 3
3 5 2 7 1 8
4 9 1 10 0 10
5 10 0 10 0 10
6 11 0 11 0 11
7 2 0 2 0 2
8 2 0 2 0 2
9 6 1 7 2 9
Total 47 4 51 4 55
In addition, in order to encourage the conversion of the existing
bars into restaurants, it is recommended that a policy be added
to permit this kind of operational and license type change.
Policy Addition #1 is intended to create such an incentive.
Policy Addition #1
Existing bars with Type 48 licenses permitting general
alcohol service in public premises may receive a 10 percent
increase in seating, notwithstanding any other seating
limitations set forth in this Specific Plan, if the business
operation converts to a restaurant with a Type 41 license
permitting beer and wine service in a public eating place or
a Type 47 license permitting general alcohol service in a
public eating place. The Planning Commission shall have the
discretion to approve this operational change through the
Conditional Use Permit process.
Policy addition #2 is intended to address the need for a limited
number of neighborhood serving uses in the District, particularly
the need for a market to serve the north of Wilshire residential
neighborhood.
Policy Addition #2
The sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption
shall be limited to one neighborhood serving food market
located on the 1200 block of the Promenade and to one
specialty food market located on the 1400 block of Second
Street. Both facilities shall be approved at the discretion
of the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal, through
the Conditional Use Permit process.
FOOD SERVING ESTABLISHMENT LIMITS
Two policies are proposed to address the concerns expressed
regarding the overall number of food serving establishments in
the Bayside District. Food serving establishments includes
restaurants, coffee houses, and sandwich shops, with or without
alcohol services, but excludes the four establishment's in the
Bayside District with Type 48 bar licenses. Policy revision #3
limits the total number of food serving establishments on a block
by block basis. Policy revision #4 further limits restaurant
expansion by prohibiting existing restaurants from expanding into
the first 50 feet of building depth of an adjacent structure as
measured from the front property line. This portion of the
building shall be reserved specifically for retail use.
Planning staff recommends the following additions to the General
Policies Section of the Specific Plan Land Use Element under the
category of Types of Uses.
Policy Addition #3
The number of food serving establishments in the Bayside
District shall be limited on a block by block basis as
follows:
Block With Alcohol Without Alcohol Total Permitted
(Types 41
and 47)
1 0 1 1
2 2 0 2
3 7 0 7
4 10 8 18
5 10 6 16
6 11 7 18
7 2 1 3
8 2 0 2
9 7 1 8
Total 51 24 75
Policy Addition #4
Existing alcohol outlets and food serving establishments
shall be prohibited from expanding into adjacent buildings
for the first 50 feet in building depth, as measured from
the street facing building frontage. Retail uses shall be
encouraged to occupy this portion of the building.
PASSAGEWAY ZONES
The draft Specific Plan did not propose any changes to the
existing policies regarding the location or number of permitted
public passageways in the District. However, Councilmembers
concurred with the Bayside District Corporation's recommendation
to make the location of the public passageways on each block more
flexible and to limit the total number of passageways to one for
each side of a block. It was suggested that the Passageway
Overlay Zone be expanded 150 feet in each direction from the
existing zone boundaries.
Planning staff recommends that the concept outlined by Council
for expanding the size of the Passageway Overlay Zone be achieved
by locating the proposed Passageway Zone across the center
portion of each block. The zone would exclude the area located
within 100 feet of the cross streets of Wilshire Boulevard,
Arizona Avenue, Santa Monica Boulevard and Broadway. This would
increase the number of parcels in each zone area from four to
eight. It further focuses on the need for more mid-block
connections from the alleys and parking structures to the
Promenade. The cross streets can then serve as the end-block
connectors to the parking structures as well as to businesses and
other uses located on Second and Fourth Streets. Maps
identifying the existing and proposed Passageway Overlay Zone are
contained in Attachment D. The following policy is recommended
to describe the zone boundaries.
Policy Addition #5
The Passageway Overlay Zone shall encompass all
Promenade-fronting parcels located at least 100 feet from the
corner of the nearest cross street. Only one new public
passageway shall be permitted on each side of each block.
Existing public passageways shall not count toward this
limitation.
HOUSING
Councilmembers had a variety of comments regarding increasing
housing opportunities in the Bayside District. It was suggested
that additional housing on the Promenade be encouraged by
requiring the projects that receive a two story height bonus for
providing a public passageway to devote the bonus floors
exclusively to housing. By both expanding the size of the
Passageway Overlay Zone and requiring housing to be included in
projects that take advantage of the passageway bonus, two high
priority goals can be achieved.
Other concerns regarding housing in the District focused on
protecting residential units from the impacts of noise generated
by the high level of pedestrian activity in the area. Policies
in the draft Plan currently address this concern.
There was also discussion regarding allowing six story buildings
on the west side of Second Street if housing is provided. Staff
has recommended that the existing 3 story height limit be
retained. Council's comments on this issue were mixed with some
stating that creating housing opportunities is a priority and
that the additional height would not impact views in the area.
Others stated that retaining the existing height limits was
appropriate and that they did not believe development standards
should be intensified.
The following policy revisions are recommended to address the
concern for providing additional housing on the Promenade.
Policy Revision #2
Policy 4.1.23
There shall be no limitation on the number of stories of any
structure which, at a minimum, is all residential above the
first floor, is located in the Passageway Overlay Zone and
has received a height bonus for the provision of a public
passageway, or is a detached public parking structure, so
long as the height does not exceed the maximum number of feet
permitted in this Specific Plan for the subject Specific Plan
land use zone or overlay. Such structures may include retail
uses at the ground floor.
Policy Revision #3
Policy 4.1.49
Permit structures to be constructed to a maximum height of 6
stories, 84 feet when a passageway is provided. The fifth
and sixth stories must be devoted exclusively to residential
use. A seventh story may be permitted within the 84 foot
height limit with Planning Commission approval, if said story
is developed as the upper loft area with internal
circulation to the residential units on the sixth floor.
In addition, in order to insure that the incentives included in
the recently adopted Affordable Housing Ordinance are available
in the Bayside District, staff recommends the inclusion of the
following policy under the General Policies section in the
Specific Plan Land Use Element.
Policy Addition #6
Notwithstanding any policies in this Specific Plan to the
contrary, affordable housing projects as defined in Ordinance
1635 (CCS) shall be subject to the development standards set
forth in said ordinance.
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
Establishing a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program in
the downtown was also discussed at length. In general, while
additional incentives to encourage the preservation of
historically significant buildings in the Bayside District was
considered a positive goal, the TDR proposal as presented by the
Bayside District Corporation was considered too broad. It was
suggested that, while the goal was appropriate, the concept
should be more narrowly defined to address the intent to preserve
two specific buildings, the Mayfair Theatre and the Europa
Building.
Planning staff, therefore, recommends that the following two
policies be included under the Land Use policies for Zone 1 and
Zone 2.
Policy Addition #7
The City shall encourage the preservation of the Europa
Building by working with the property owner through the
Development Agreement process to achieve the following goals:
o Development of a single project that includes the
preservation of the Europa Building and the development of
the two adjacent parcels that are under the same
ownership;
o Inclusion of a neighborhood serving food market in the
Europa Building; and
o Conversion of the 360 seats approved for a single
restaurant into three smaller restaurants. These three
restaurants shall count as one in the block by block
limit.
Policy Addition #8
The City shall encourage the preservation of the Mayfair
Theatre by working with the property owner through the
Development Agreement process to achieve the following goals:
o Preservation of the Mayfair Theatre;
o Establishment of a live theatre that contributes to the
cultural diversity of the City and the Bayside District;
and
o Development of a strategy to identify other appropriate
theatre related uses for the building.
OTHER ISSUES
The Council also addressed a variety of other issues. It was
stated that amusements and game arcades should be prohibited in
the area. This recommendation, which excluded the pending
application for a Virtual Reality center, has been incorporated
into the interim ordinance. The potential of overflow parking
impacting the North of Wilshire residential neighborhood was also
noted by some Councilmembers. As recommended, a policy has been
prepared stating that requests for a Preferential Parking
District in this neighborhood shall be quickly processed. It was
further suggested that live theatre and cultural facilities and
events be encouraged uses. This has been addressed in the policy
recommending preservation of the Mayfair Theatre. Finally, the
function and purpose of Fourth Street was discussed. The key
concerns were how to generate additional activity on these
streets, should the priority be to make Fourth Street pedestrian
oriented or should the street be retained as a traffic corridor.
Once the Fourth Street on ramp is opened and new traffic patterns
have been established, Parking and Traffic Engineering staff will
report back to the Bayside District Corporation and the City
Council regarding the BDC's requests for on street parking,
removal of left turn limitations on Santa Monica Boulevard, and
loading zones on Fourth Street.
In order to address the concern regarding parking in the north of
Wilshire residential neighborhood, the following policy is
recommended for inclusion in the Parking Section of the Specific
Plan Circulation Element.
Policy Addition #9
In order to protect the north of Wilshire residential
neighborhood from Bayside District related overflow parking,
the City shall expeditously process preferential parking
district requests.
INTERIM ORDINANCE
The limitations on alcohol outlets and food serving
establishments set forth in the attached draft interim ordinance
have been based upon the recommended Specific Plan policy changes
and additions discussed in this report. The section by section
analysis of the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney's office
is contained in Attachment A. The ordinance establishes a
limitation by block on alcohol serving restaurants and bars and
establishes a limitation by block on the total number of food
serving establishments. In addition, the ordinance prohibits
future game arcades in the Bayside District.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have a
direct budget or fiscal impact. Future land use changes
permitted by implementation of the proposed policies may have
future fiscal impacts to the City which have not been analyzed at
this time. Upon completion of the City's FIND model, an analysis
can and will be done as part of the environmental review process.
The preparation of an environmental impact report was not
budgeted in the FY 92/93 budget. Once a consultant is selected
and the cost is finalized, staff will return with a
recommendation as to appropriating the needed funds.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council conceptually approve the
draft Bayside District Specific Plan with the revised and added
policies recommended in this report, authorize staff to begin
preparation of an environmental impact report and return with
selection of a consultant and request for an appropriation to
fund the EIR, direct the Planning Commission to initiate a
Resolution of Intention to amend the Zoning Ordinance to create a
Bayside Zoning District, and adopt an ordinance prohibiting game
arcades and establishing limitations on the number of alcohol and
food serving establishments in specified portions of the C3 and
C3C districts on an interim basis.
Prepared By: Paul Berlant, Director of LUTM
Suzanne Frick, Planning Manager
David Martin, Associate Planner
Amanda Schachter, Associate Planner
Land Use and Transportation Management Department
Program and Policy Development Division
Attachments: A. City Attorney Staff Report and Ordinance
B. Resolution of Intention
C. Inventory of Food Serving Establishments and
Alcohol Outlets in the Bayside District
D. Map and List of Food Serving Establishments and
Alcohol Outlets in the Bayside District
E. Existing and Proposed Alcohol Outlets
F. Maps of Existing and Proposed Passageway
Overlay Zone
STAFF REPORT
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Emergency Interim Ordinance Prohibiting Game Arcades
and Establishing Limitation on the Number of Alcohol
and Food Serving Establishment in the Proposed
Bayside District
At its August 11, 1992 meeting, the City Council directed
the City Attorney to prepare an interim Ordinance prohibiting
game arcades and limiting the number of alcohol and food serving
establishments in the proposed Bayside District. The Ordinance
is attached as Exhibit "A."
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
SECTION 1. This Section sets forth the finding and purpose
for the ordinance, including the findings necessary for interim
and urgency ordinances.
Section 2. This Section defines terms used in the
Ordinance. Because the Ordinance regulates uses on a block by
block basis, geographic definitions of Block One through Block
Nine are included, as well as a description of the Proposed
Bayside District. Food Serving Establishment is defined to
include restaurants and any use which includes incidental food
service.
Section 3. This Section provides that the Ordinance only
applies to projects the application for which was filed after
August 11, 1992, and exempts projects which have received
specified permits prior to the effective date of the Ordinance.
Section 4. This Section provides that all new alcohol and
food serving establishment must receive a permit or
administrative approval from the City. It also defines a new use
as one where the previous use has ceased operation for a
continuous period of six months or longer.
Section 5. This Section establishes the number of on-sale
alcohol outlets, including existing outlets, which will be
allowed on a block by block basis, and differentiates between
different types of on-sale alcohol licenses.
Section 6. This Section establishes the number of food
serving establishments, including existing establishments, which
will be allowed on a block by block basis, and differentiates
between those which do and do not serve alcohol.
Section 7. This Section provides that no new game arcades
will be allowed in the Proposed Bayside District.
Section 8. This Section provides that the Ordinance is
effective for 45 days unless lawfully extended.
Section 9. This Section declares the presence of an
emergency pursuant to the City Charter and relevant zoning
ordinance provision.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the accompanying
Ordinance be adopted.
PREPARED BY: Joseph Lawrence, Acting City Attorney
Mary H. Strobel, Deputy City Attorney
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA PROHIBITING GAME ARCADES
AND ESTABLISHING LIMITATIONS ON THE NUMBER OF ALCOHOL
AND FOOD SERVING ESTABLISHMENTS IN SPECIFIED PORTIONS
OF THE C3 AND C3C DISTRICTS ON AN INTERIM BASIS
AND DECLARING THE PRESENCE OF AN EMERGENCY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. The City Council finds
and declares:
(a) At its August 11, 1992 City Council meeting, the City
Council held its first public hearing regarding the establishment
of a Bayside District zoning district ("District") which will
encompass portions of the current C3 and C3C zoning districts.
(b) At the same meeting, the City Council considered the
adoption of the Bayside District Specific Plan which, among other
things, proposes limits on the number of alcohol and food serving
establishments which will be allowed in the District, and would
prohibit entirely the establishment of new game arcades.
(c) Further action is needed by the City Council to
establish the Bayside District zoning district and to adopt the
Bayside District Specific Plan, including completion of
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality
Act ("CEQA"). Further, the City Council will consider at a later
meeting the adoption of specific zoning ordinances regulating
permitted uses and property development standards in the District
consistent with the Specific Plan.
(d) If current development activity is allowed to continue
in the District pending such final approval, uses incompatible
with the proposed Bayside District Specific Plan and zoning
ordinance implementation will occur.
(e) Pending the establishment of the Bayside District and
adoption of zoning ordinances implementing the provisions of the
Bayside District Specific Plan, to protect the public health,
safety, and welfare, it is necessary to limit the number of
alcohol and food serving establishments in the District and to
prohibit uses incompatible with the proposed Specific Plan and
implementing ordinances on an interim basis.
(f) The City wishes to limit the number of alcohol and
food serving establishments as a way to control the recent
proliferation of such establishments in the area and also to
encourage other types of uses. Because of the proliferation of
alcohol and food serving establishments, there exists a current
and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare,
and the approval of additional administrative approvals,
development review permits, conditional use permits, or any other
applicable entitlements for use in the District incompatible with
the standards of this interim ordinance would result in a threat
to public health, safety, or welfare.
SECTION 2. Definitions. The following words or phrases as
used in this Ordinance shall have the following meanings:
Block One: That area bounded by the south side of Wilshire
Boulevard on the north, the north side of Arizona Avenue on the
south, the east side of Fourth Street on the east, and the west
side of Fourth Street on the west.
Block Two: That area bounded by the south side of Arizona
Avenue on the north, the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard on
the south, the east side of Fourth Street on the east, and the
west side of Fourth Street on the west.
Block Three: That area bounded by the south side of Santa
Monica Boulevard on the north, the north side of Broadway on the
south, the east side of Fourth Street on the east, and the west
side of Fourth Street on the west.
Block Four: That area bounded by the south side of
Wilshire Boulevard on the north, the north side of Arizona on the
south, the east side of the Third Street Promenade on the east,
and the west side of the Third Street Promenade on the west.
Block Five: That area bounded by the south side of Arizona
Boulevard on the north, the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard
on the south, the east side of the Third Street Promenade on the
east, and the west side of the Third Street Promenade on the
west.
Block Six: That area bounded by the south side of Santa
Monica Boulevard on the north, the north side of Broadway on the
south, the east side of the Third Street Promenade on the east,
and the west side of the Third Street Promenade on the west.
Block Seven: That area bounded by the south side of
Wilshire Boulevard on the north, the north side of Arizona on the
south, the east side of Second Street on the east, and the west
side of Second Street on the west.
Block Eight: That area bounded by the south side of
Arizona on the north, the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard on
the south, the east side of Second Street on the east, and the
west side of Second Street on the west.
Block Nine: That area bounded by the south side of Santa
Monica Boulevard on the north, the north side of Broadway on the
south, the east side of Second Street on the east, and the west
side of Second Street on the west.
Food Serving Establishment: Any restaurant, including,
without limitation, any drive-through or drive-in restaurant,
fast-food or take-out restaurant, or sidewalk cafe, and any use
which includes incidental food service.
Proposed Bayside District: That area bounded by the south
side of Wilshire Boulevard on the north, the north side of
Broadway on the south, the west side of Second Street on the
west, and the east side of Fourth Street on the east.
SECTION 3. Applicability. The provisions of this
Ordinance apply only to applications for projects to be located
in the Proposed Bayside District, and only to projects the
application for which was filed after August 11, 1992. Any
project which has received a conditional use permit,
administrative approval, or alcohol exemption determination on or
before the effective date of this Ordinance shall be exempt from
the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4. Approval of all new alcohol or food serving
establishments to be located in the Proposed Bayside District
which do not otherwise require the issuance of a conditional use
permit, alcohol exemption determination, or development review
permit, shall require the issuance of an administrative approval.
For purposes of this Ordinance, an establishment shall be
considered a new alcohol or food serving establishment if the
prior alcohol or food serving establishment at that site has
ceased operation for a continuous period of six months or longer.
SECTION 5. The Planning Commission and City staff are
directed to disapprove all requests for the issuance of
administrative approvals, development review permits, conditional
use permits, alcohol exemption determinations, or any other City
approvals for on-sale alcohol outlets, if the granting of such
approval would cause the number of on-sale alcohol outlets,
including existing outlets, on the block on which the project is
located to exceed the following limitations:
(a) Block One. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 0. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 0. Other On-sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(b) Block Two. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 2. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 1. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(c) Block Three. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 7. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 1. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(d) Block Four. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 10. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 0. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(e) Block Five. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 10. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 0. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(f) Block Six. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 11. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 0. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(g) Block Seven. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 2. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 0. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(h) Block Eight. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 2. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 0. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
(i) Block Nine. Type 41 and Type 47 Beer and Wine or
General Alcohol Service For Public Eating Place: 7. Type 48
General Alcohol Service for Public Premise: 2. Other On-Sale
Alcohol License Types: 0.
SECTION 6. Nothwithstanding the provisions of Section 5,
the Planning Commission and City staff are directed to disapprove
all requests for the issuance of administrative approvals,
development review permits, conditional use permits, alcohol
exemption determinations, or any other City approvals for food
serving establishments, if the granting of such approval would
cause the number of food serving establishments, including
existing establishments, on the block on which the project is
located to exceed the following limitations:
(a) Block One: Food serving establishments which also sell
alcohol: 0. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 1.
(b) Block Two: Food serving establishments which also sell
alcohol: 2. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 0.
(c) Block Three: Food serving establishments which also
sell alcohol: 7. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 0.
(d) Block Four: Food serving establishments which also
sell alcohol: 10. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 8.
(e) Block Five: Food serving establishments which also
sell alcohol: 10. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 6.
(f) Block Six: Food serving establishments which also sell
alcohol: 11. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 7.
(g) Block Seven: Food serving establishments which also
sell alcohol: 2. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 1.
(h) Block Eight: Food serving establishments which also
sell alcohol: 2. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 0.
(i) Block Nine: Food serving establishments which also
sell alcohol: 7. Food serving establishments which do not sell
alcohol: 1.
SECTION 7. The Planning Commission and City staff are
directed to disapprove all requests for the issuance of building
permits, administrative approvals, development review permits,
conditional use permits, or any other City approvals for game
arcades in the Proposed Bayside District, except as exempted
under Section 3.
SECTION 8. This Ordinance shall be of no further force or
effect 45 days from its adoption, unless extended in the manner
required by law.
SECTION 9. This Ordinance is declared to be an urgency
measure adopted pursuant to the provisions of Section 9120.6 of
the Santa Monica Municipal Code and Section 615 of the Santa
Monica City Charter. There is a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety, and welfare. It is necessary for
preserving the public peace, health, safety, and welfare and the
urgency for its adoption is set forth in the findings above.
SECTION 10. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of
this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no
further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary
to affect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 11. 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 any competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each and
every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether
any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared
invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 12. 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 upon adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
JOSEPH LAWRENCE
Acting City Attorney