ITEM 8-C
Council Meeting: March 8, 1994 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City staff
SUBJECT: Review of Proposed Standards for Portions of the M1 and
C5 Districts (the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District); Introduction for First Reading of Ordinance
Amending Existing Interim Ordinance; and Authorization
of Selection of a Consultant to Prepare the
Environmental Impact Report on the Proposed Permanent
Standards.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council hold a public
hearing, review the proposed standards for environmental review
for portions of the M1 and C5 districts located north of the
Santa Monica Freeway and east of Nineteenth Place Alley (the
Light Manufacturing and Studio District), introduce for first
reading an ordinance amending the existing interim ordinance
(Ordinance 1707), and authorize staff to hire the consulting firm
of Christopher A. Joseph and Associates to prepare an
environmental impact report (EIR) on the proposed standards.
BACKGROUND
In June of 1993 the City Council adopted Ordinance 1687(CCS)
which imposed new development standards for most commercial areas
of the City. At that time the Council also adopted interim
zoning requirements for portions of the M1 and C5 districts
located north of the Santa Monica Freeway and east of 19th Place
Alley, (now referred to as the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District) pending the completion of a land use study and
environmental impact report. The area is currently subject to
Ordinance 1707(CCS) which sets interim development standards and
permitted uses. Ordinance 1707(CCS) will be in effect for
sixteen months and fifteen days, and will expire on March 26,
1995.
The interim ordinance adopted by the City Council applies to the
area shown on the attached map (Attachment A), and includes a
special study zone consisting of three separate parcels. The
interim development standards for the special study zone include
a reduced floor area ratio for commercial projects and a floor
area ratio bonus for residential projects. At the time the City
Council adopted the interim ordinance, the Council directed staff
to examine other cities' ordinances in relation to studio use
districts, and hire a design consultant and an economic
consultant to study the feasibility of allowing or encouraging
residential uses in the special study zone. The City Council
also directed staff to conduct public hearings before the
Planning Commission and City Council following completion of the
design and economic studies in order to define the EIR project
alternatives.
In December 1993, the Planning Commission held a public hearing,
reviewed the results of the design and economic studies, and made
recommendations regarding permanent standards. The Commission
approved a motion recommending that the proposed permanent
standards and uses be consistent with those contained in the
interim ordinance and that the EIR consider the four alternatives
recommended by staff for the special study zone as well as one
additional special study zone alternative. The Planning
Commission recommendation is discussed in detail under the
Planning Commission Action section of this report.
The timeline for completion of the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District rezoning project is as follows:
March '94 City Council to hold public
hearing, review standards and
authorize staff to hire consultant
to prepare EIR.
Summer '94 Public Hearings on certification of
EIR and adoption of permanent
standards.
Fall '94 Adoption of permanent standards.
ANALYSIS
Studio District Ordinances
In reviewing standards for three local communities with studio
uses (Culver City, Los Angeles and Burbank), staff found that Los
Angeles and Burbank do not have specific studio districts, but
allow studios and studio related uses in various commercial and
industrial districts. In Culver City, the City has an area
designated as a Studio Zone. However, the zoning ordinance
requirements for the Studio Zone are minimal, and according to
Culver City Planning staff, the future development and expansion
of studios within the zone will be governed by review and
approval of specific development plans.
Design Study
Following the adoption of the interim ordinance in October 1993,
staff hired the firm of Elizabeth Moule and Stefanos Polyzoides,
Architects and Urbanists, to develop preliminary design standards
for the three parcels in the special study zone. The results of
the design study include overall policies for the area
surrounding the special study zone, as well as specific height
and setback recommendations for projects developed on the three
subject parcels.
In regard to the overall urban strategies for the special study
zone, the design consultants recommend that a number of street
extensions be considered as part of any new development project
in order to increase pedestrian and vehicular access through the
area. As indicated in the design study (Attachment B), this
could be accomplished by connecting Franklin and/or Stewart
Street to Olympic Boulevard, and connecting Pennsylvania Avenue
to Stewart Street. In addition, the consultants recommend that
alleys be introduced on large parcels in order to reduce parcel
square footages and create development options for smaller
projects.
The design consultants also recommend specific design standards
for development in the special study zone including setbacks,
open space location and street frontage requirements. These
standards are intended to insure that any residential development
is compatible with surrounding uses.
In addition, the study concludes that three critical issues must
be accommodated within the development code. These include:
safety in the passage of residents between parking places and
their dwellings; direct access to and from sidewalks as a way of
separating residents from the areas that are used primarily by
industrial users; and adequate open space for shared recreational
or public use. The EIR will consider the recommended design
standards for the special study zone as part of the project
alternatives.
Economic Study
Following the adoption of the interim ordinance, staff hired the
Real Estate Consulting firm of Kotin, Regan and Mouchly (KRM) to
determine the economic feasibility of mixed use development in
the special study zone. KRM analyzed the economic feasibility of
industrial and mixed-use industrial/residential development on
the three subject parcels. Within the constraints of the interim
zoning for the three lots under study, KRM used land use residual
models to illustrate the profitability to developers of
alternative development scenarios based on current development
costs and operating income and expense assumptions. The analysis
concludes that the price of land determines the economic
feasibility of a project. Therefore, it is a policy decision
whether to adjust the development standards to achieve certain
property values or establish development standards with the
understanding that property values will adjust based upon the
maximum development potential.
Based on recent transactions in the area, KRM determined
industrial property to have a raw land value of approximately $78
per square foot, and residential property to have a raw land
value of approximately $50 per square foot. It should be noted
that due to the few number of recent industrial property sales in
the area, the economic consultant's estimate for the industrial
property raw land value is based on only two recent transactions.
The economic analysis concluded that based on a commercial rent
of $2.25 per square foot, a mixed-use development with a floor
area ratio of 1.5 containing 75% residential apartments and 25%
high-tech industrial would be profitable with a land cost of $54
per square foot or less. The analysis also concluded that a
development with a floor area ratio of .65 containing only high-
tech industrial would be profitable with a land cost of $52 per
square foot or less. Based on estimated land values in the area,
development of a mixed-use project with a 1.5 floor area ratio
and 75% residential would only be slightly more profitable than
development of a 100% commercial project with a .65 floor area
ratio. Therefore, the additional floor area ratio incentive
contained in the interim ordinance may not be adequate to
encourage residential development. A higher ratio of commercial
square footage to residential square footage would result in a
more profitable project. For example, a project with a mix of
50% commercial and 50% residential could be profitable with a
land cost of up to $63 per square foot, and a project with a
ratio of 60% commercial and 40% residential could be profitable
with a land cost of up to $93 per square foot.
Based on the findings of the economic analysis, staff is
recommending that in addition to the mixed-use ratio contained in
the interim ordinance, the project EIR look at an option which
contains a higher ratio of commercial square footage to
residential square footage.
Amendment of Interim Ordinance
Since the Planning Commission review of the proposed standards in
December of last year, an issue has been raised regarding the
potential expansion of Crossroads School which is located in the
interim zoning area. Under the provisions of the existing
interim ordinance, schools would be subject to a 1.0 FAR and a
two story height limit. Representatives of Crossroads School for
Arts and Sciences located at 1714 21st Street have requested that
the interim ordinance be amended to allow projects associated
with the expansion of public or private elementary and secondary
schools (Grades K through 12) existing prior to September 8,
1988, a 1.5 FAR and a four story height limit. This provisions
would also be included in the proposed permanent ordinance for
the Light Manufacturing and Studio District. Staff is
recommending that the City Council introduce for first reading
the attached ordinance (Attachment C) which would amend the
existing interim ordinance to include the exception for
elementary and secondary schools as described above. As
proposed, the revised interim ordinance would be identical to
Ordinance 1707 (CCS), with the following modifications to the
"Property Development Standards" noted in bold:
(D) Property Development Standards. All property
in the area designated as the interim zoning study area
on the attached map shall be developed in accordance
with the following standards:
(1) Maximum Building Height. Maximum
building height shall be 2 stories, 30 feet, except
that for projects associated with the expansion of
public or private elementary and secondary schools
(Grades K through 12) existing prior to September 8,
1988, a maximum height of four stories, 45 feet shall
be permitted. For projects located on parcels
designated "special study zones" on the attached map, a
maximum height of four stories, 45' may be permitted
with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit for
projects containing at least 75% residential. There
shall be no limitation on the number of stories of any
detached parking structure so long as the height does
not exceed the number of feet permitted in the
district.
(2) Maximum Floor Area Ratio. 1.0, except
that for projects associated with the expansion of
public or private elementary and secondary schools
(Grades K through 12) existing prior to September 8,
1988, a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 shall be
permitted. For projects located on properties
designated "special study zones" on the attached map,
.65, except that a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 may
be permitted with the approval of a Conditional Use
Permit for projects containing at least 75% residential
on such "special study zone" designated properties.
Proposed Standards
The proposed development standards and permitted uses for the
entire Light Manufacturing and Studio District are similar to
those contained in Ordinance 1707(CCS) with the addition of the
exception for school uses. The list of permitted uses includes
industrial and quasi industrial uses, including high tech
entertainment and other design industries. The permitted uses
also distinguish between uses which are limited to a maximum of
50% office space and those allowed with unlimited office space,
as long as the office space is related to the primary use located
on the same site.
The proposed interim development standards for the district
include a two story, 30 foot height limit with a 1.0 floor area
ratio and the exception for schools as stated above. These
standards apply to the entire district, with the exception of
the special study zone. As stated above, the three parcels
located in the special study zone have been considered for mixed-
use and residential development.
Based on City Council direction, the results of the economic and
design studies for the special study zone, staff is recommending
that the environmental impact report consider the following four
alternatives for the special study zones:
o No special study zone. The three subject parcels
would be subject to the same standards that would
apply to the Light Manufacturing and Studio
district as a whole.
o Special study zone with the standards contained in
the interim ordinance. Theses standards restrict
the floor area ratio of commercial projects to .65
and allow a floor area ratio of 1.5 for projects
that contain at least 75% residential.
o Special study zone with standards that restrict
the floor area ratio of most commercial projects
to .50, allow a floor area ratio of up to .65 for
commercial projects that contain a movie studio or
a related use, and allow a floor area ratio of up
to 1.0 for projects that contain a movie studio or
a related use and at least 30% residential.
o Special study zone with standards that restrict
the floor area ratio of commercial projects to .65
and allow a floor area ratio of 1.0 for projects
that contain at least 30% residential and a floor
area ratio of 1.5 for projects that contain at
least 50% residential.
As previously stated, these four alternatives were included in
the original City Council direction. Staff is recommending that
all four alternatives by considered, with Council to determine
what the permanent standards will be based on the EIR results.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed
standards for the Light Manufacturing and Studio District in
December of 1993. Following review of the proposed standards and
the results of the design and economic studies, the Planning
Commission approved a motion recommending that the EIR study the
standards and uses contained in the interim ordinance. In
relation to the special study zone, the Commission recommended
that the EIR consider the four alternatives recommended by staff,
as well as a fifth alternative which would allow a 1.5 FAR for
projects that contain at least 40% residential. The alternative
would read as follows:
o Special study zone with standards that
restrict the floor area ratio of commercial
projects to .65 and allow a floor area ratio
of 1.0 for projects that contain at least 30%
residential and a floor area ratio of 1.5 for
projects that contain at least 40%
residential.
CONSULTANT SELECTION
In January of this year staff sent out a Request for Proposal
(RFP) to prepare the EIR on the permanent standards to sixteen
environmental consultants. A total of nine responses were
received with cost ranging from $48,500 to $82,500. Staff is
recommending the selection of Christopher A. Joseph and
Associates at a cost of $53,482.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS
The recommendation in this report regarding Council authorization
to hire Christopher A. Joseph and Associates to prepare the EIR
for the proposed permanent standards will result in a financial
impact of $53,482. Sufficient funds are available in account
number 01-210-267-000-5506-00000 for this expenditure.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing,
amend the existing interim ordinance, review the results of the
economic and design studies for the special study zone, and
authorize staff to hire Christopher A. Joseph and Associates to
prepare the EIR on the proposed permanent standards.
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director of LUTM
David Martin, Associate Planner
Attachments: A. Map of Light Manufacturing and Studio
District
study area
B. Design Study dated 12/01/93
ORDINANCE NUMBER _____________
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
PORTIONS OF THE C ITY LOCATED IN SELECTED AREAS OF THE
M1 AND C5 DISTRICTS
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 March 16, 1993 meeting, the City Council
approved a motion directing staff to study selected areas of the
C5 and M1 districts (the "Interim Zoning Study Area") and to
conduct environmental review of an option which would rezone the
area to a new zoning designation to be known as "M1/RD". The
Interim Zoning Study Area is shown on the map attached hereto and
incorporated herein as "Exhibit A". Certain portions of the
Interim Zoning Study Area are further designated as the "Special
Study Zone" on the map attached hereto as "Exhibit A".
(B) In order to protect the public health, safety and
welfare, it is necessary, pending completion of the study and re-
zoning of these areas to a zoning designation consistent with the
City Council's direction, to limit on an interim basis the
maximum building height, floor area ratio, and permitted uses for
the study area.
(C) On March 16, 1993, the City Council directed staff
to prepare an interim ordinance to implement the development
standards proposed for the M1/RD district. On June 15, 1993, the
City Council adopted Ordinance 1686 (CCS), establishing interim
development standards for the Interim Zoning Study Area for a
period of forty-five days.
(D) On July 20, 1993, the City Council adopted
Ordinance 1694 (CCS), extending the interim development standards
to January 10, 1995, in order to allow staff adequate time to
analyze the proposed rezoning and to conduct the required
environmental review.
(E) On September 28, 1993, the City Council adopted
Ordinance 1707 (CCS), which modified the interim ordinance in
order to protect city services and infrastructure and otherwise
effectuate city policy.
(F) Since the adoption of Ordinance 1707 (CCS), it has
become apparent that a modification to the ordinance is necessary
in order to allow existing primary schools a reasonable
opportunity to expand at their current locations. There exists a
present and immediate threat to the public safety health and
welfare should the interim ordinance not be modified and should
existing primary schools be prohibited from expanding at their
current locations.
SECTION 2. Interim Zoning. Subject to the provisions of
Sections 3 and 4 of this ordinance, the Planning Commission and
City staff are directed, after June 23, 1993, to disapprove any
request for the issuance of a building permit, a tentative map, a
tentative parcel map, an administrative approval, a development
review permit, a conditional use permit, or any other City permit
for the construction, erection, conversion, or moving of any
structure located in the area designated as the Interim Zoning
Study Area on the map attached hereto as "Exhibit A", unless the
project complies with the following development standards:
(A) Permitted Uses.
(1) The following primary uses shall be permitted
if conducted within an enclosed building (except where otherwise
permitted), provided any office space included therewith is
directly related to, ancillary to, and supportive of the primary
permitted use on the same site and does not exceed fifty percent
(50%) of the gross floor area of the primary use:
(a) Artist studios and art galleries.
(b) Automobile repair and automobile
painting facilities except those within 100 feet of a residential
district.
(c) Dance studios.
(d) Domestic violence shelters.
(e) Establishments engaged in research
relating to, or the development, manufacturing, fabricating,
assembly, testing, repair, servicing, or processing of, the
following:
(i) Aircraft parts other than
engines.
(ii) Apparel except leather and fur
goods.
(iii) Audio products.
(iv) Metal, wood or canvas awnings.
(v) Coated, plated, and engraved
metal.
(vi) Communication equipment.
(vii) Cut stone and stone products.
(viii) Dance studios.
(ix) Diecut paper and paperboard,
and cardboard.
(x) Electric components and
accessories.
(xi) Electric lighting and wiring
equipment.
(xii) Fabricated textile products.
(xiii) Furniture and fixtures.
(xiv) Glass products.
(xv) Jewelry, silverware, and
plated ware.
(xvi) Luggage.
(xvii) Musical instruments and parts.
(xviii) Office machines.
(xix) Paperboard containers and
boxes.
(xx) Pens, pencils, and other
office and artists materials.
(xxi) Perfumes, cosmetics, and other
toilet preparations.
(xxii) Pharmaceutical products.
(xxiii) Photographic and optical
goods, watches, and clocks.
(xxiv) Plumbing fixtures and heating
apparatus.
(xxv) Pottery and related products.
(xxvi) Professional, scientific, and
controlling instruments.
(xxvii) Toys, amusements, sporting and
athletic goods.
(xviii) Wooden containers.
(xxix) Food products, except that no
food consumption by the public or food take-out by the public
shall be permitted.
(xxx) Products which are determined
by the Zoning Administrator to be similar to those listed above
and which are consistent with, and not associated with more
disturbance or disruption than, permitted products.
(f) On-site production facilities for
advertising purposes.
(g) Establishments engaged in the wholesale
distribution of the following:
(i) Dry goods and apparel.
(ii) Electrical goods.
(iii) Groceries and related
products, except unpackaged or unprocessed poultry and poultry
products, fish and seafood, and fruit and vegetables.
(iv) Hardware, plumbing, heating
equipment and supplies.
(v) Machinery, equipment, and
supplies, except farm machinery and equipment.
(vi) Motor vehicles and automotive
equipment.
(vii) Paper, paper products, and
kindred supplies.
(viii) Pharmaceutical products and
allied products.
(h) Homeless shelters with less than 55
beds.
(i) Photography studios.
(j) Public or private schools existing prior
to September, 1988.
(k) Public utility service centers and
service yards.
(l) Public utility substations.(m) Self
storage or public mini-warehouses. (n) Veterinary
clinics.
(o) Warehouses.
(p) Uses which are determined by the Zoning
Administrator to be similar to those listed above and which are
consistent with, and not more disturbing or disruptive than,
permitted uses.
(2) The following primary uses shall be permitted
if conducted within an enclosed building (except where otherwise
permitted) and may include office space so long as the office
space is directly related, ancillary to, and supportive of the
primary use located on the same site:
(a) Broadcasting/communications,
telecommunications facilities.
(b) Design studios and offices for
architects.
(c) Drafting, printing, blueprinting and
reproduction services.
(d) Laboratories and facilities for medical
testing and scientific research development and testing.
(e) Publishing facilities.
(f) Software and other computer-related
production facilities.
(g) Studios and offices for graphic
designers.
(h) Outdoor or enclosed entertainment-
related facilities including, without limitation, movie studios
and production facilities, distribution facilities, editing
facilities, catering facilities, printing facilities, post-
production facilities, set construction facilities, sound
studios, special effects facilities and other entertainment-
related production operations.
(i) All uses customary or incidental to the
production or distribution of motion pictures and other forms of
audio/visual products, including, but not limited to, education
and entertainment films or tapes.
(j) Uses which are determined by the Zoning
Administrator to be similar to those listed above and which are
consistent with, and not more disturbing or disruptive than,
permitted uses.
(3) General office uses existing as of June 26,
1993, shall be permitted provided that such uses may not expand
by more than ten percent (10%) in floor area.
(4) Service stations shall be permitted provided
that they are not located within 100 feet of a residential
district and they comply with Section 9.04.12.130 of the
Municipal Code.
(5) Restaurants with 500 square feet of floor
area or less shall be permitted.
(6) No use, involving the manufacture,
processing, or treatment of products, which by nature of the
operation is likely to be obnoxious or offensive, whether by
reason of emission of odor, dust, smoke, noxious gases, noise,
vibration, glare, or heat or by reason of other impacts or
hazards relating to materials, process, product wastes or by
other methods, shall be permitted unless mitigation measures are
submitted and are acceptable to the Zoning Administrator.
(B) Conditionally Permitted Uses. The following uses
may be permitted subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit:
(1) Automobile dealerships.
(2) Automobile repair and automobile painting
facilities, and expansion of existing facilities within 100 feet
of any residential district.
(3) Child day care centers.
(4) Health clubs and gymnasiums.
(5) Homeless shelters with 55 beds or more.
(6) Outdoor storage of fleet vehicles if such
vehicles are directly related to the primary industrial or
manufacturing operation on the site.
(7) Parking and automobile storage lots and
structures.
(8) Places of worship.
(9) Residential uses located in the area
designated as the Special Study Zones on the map attached hereto
as "Exhibit A".
(10) Restaurants with over 500 square feet of
floor area.
(11) Retail sales of goods manufactured on the
premises, provided that the floor space devoted to such use does
not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the gross floor area of the
primary permitted use or 2,000 square feet, whichever is less.
(12) Service stations within 100 feet of any
residential district.
(13) New public or private schools.
(14) Any use of the transportation right of way
for other than transportation purposes.
(15) Uses which are determined by the Zoning
Administrator to be similar to those listed above and which are
consistent with, and not more disturbing or disruptive than,
conditionally permitted uses.
(C) Prohibited Uses. The following uses shall be
prohibited:
(1) Rooftop parking on parcels directly abutting,
or separated by an alley from, a residential district.
(2) New general office uses.
(3) Any use not specifically authorized as a
permitted or conditionally permitted use.
(D) Property Development Standards. All property in
the area designated as Interim Zoning Study Area on the map
attached hereto as "Exhibit A" shall be developed in accordance
with the following standards:
(1) Maximum Building Height. The maximum
building height shall be two (2) stories, not to exceed 30 feet,
except that for projects involving the expansion of public or
private elementary and secondary schools (Grades K through 12)
existing prior to September 8, 1988, a maximum height of four
stories, 45 feet, shall be permitted. For projects located on
property in the area designated Special Study Zone on the map
attached hereto as "Exhibit A", a maximum height of four (4)
stories, not to exceed 45 feet, may be permitted with the
approval of a Conditional Use Permit for projects containing at
least 75 per cent residential uses. There shall be no limitation
on the number of stories of any detached parking structure so
long as the height does not exceed the number of feet permitted
in the district.
(2) Maximum Floor Area Ratio. Maximum Floor Area
Ratio shall be 1.0, except that for projects involving the
expansion of public or private elementary and secondary schools
(Grades K through 12) existing prior to September 8, 1988, a
maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 shall be permitted. For projects
located on property within the area designated Special Study Zone
on the map attached hereto as "Exhibit A", the Maximum Floor Area
ratio shall be .65, except that a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5
may be permitted with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit
for projects containing at least 75 per cent residential uses on
such Special Study Zone designated property.
(3) Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size shall
be 15,000 square feet. Each lot shall contain a minimum depth of
150 feet and a minimum width of 100 feet, except that lots
existing on September 8, 1988 shall not be subject to this
requirement.
(4) Front Yard Setback. All landscaping shall be
in accordance with the provisions of Part 9.04.10.04 of the Santa
Monica Municipal Code.
(5) Rear Yard Setback. No rear yard setback shall
be required except:
(a) Where the rear parcel line abuts a
residential district, a rear yard equal to:
5' +(stories x lot width)
50'
shall be required.
The required rear yard may be used for parking or
loading to within five (5) feet of the rear parcel line provided
the parking or loading does not extend above the first floor
level and provided that a wall not less than five (5) feet or
more than six (6) feet in height is erected and maintained along
the rear commercial parcel line. Access shall be permitted to
cross perpendicularly the required rear yard provided the
driveway does not exceed the minimum width permitted for the
parking area. A required rear yard shall not be used for
commercial purposes.
(b) Such rear yard setback as is necessary to
accommodate landscaping and screening for a rear yard buffer
required pursuant to the provisions of Part 9.04.10.04 of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code.
(6) Side Yard Setback. No side yard setback shall
be required except:
(a) Where the interior side parcel line abuts
a residential district, an interior side yard equal to:
5' +(stories x lot width)
50'
shall be required.
The interior side yard may be used for parking or
loading no closer than five (5) feet to the interior side
property line provided the parking or loading does not extend
above the first floor level and provided a wall not less than
five (5) feet or more than six (6) feet in height is erected and
maintained along the side commercial parcel line. A required
interior side yard shall not be used for access or for commercial
purposes.
(b) Such side yard setback as is needed to
accommodate landscaping required for a street side yard,
landscape buffer and screening pursuant to the provisions of Part
9.04.10.04 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
(c) For portions of buildings that contain
windows, doors, or other openings into the interior of the
building, a ten (10) foot setback from an interior property line
shall be required. An interior side yard setback of less than
ten (10) feet shall be permitted if provisions of the Uniform
Building Code related to fire-rated openings in side yards are
satisfied.
(E). Development Review. A Development Review Permit
is required for any development of more than 30,000 square feet
of floor area and for any development with rooftop parking.
(F) Architectural Review. All new construction, new
additions to existing buildings, and any other exterior
improvements that require issuance of a building permit shall be
subject to architectural review pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 9.32 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
SECTION 3. Applicability. Subject to Section 4 of this
Ordinance, the requirements of Section 2 of this Ordinance shall
apply to all projects developed on any property in an area
designated Interim Zoning Study Area on the map attached hereto
as "Exhibit A". Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Ordinance, during the pendency of this Ordinance, any property
that is designated as a Special Study Zone, on the map attached
hereto as "Exhibit A" and which is destroyed in whole or in part
by earthquake, fire or other natural disaster, may be rebuilt to
its pre-existing floor area ratio.
SECTION 4. Exemptions. The following applications are
exempt from the provisions of Section 2 of this Ordinance:
(A) Any building or structure for which a building
permit, which has not yet expired, was issued on or before June
15, 1993, but which has not obtained a Certificate of Occupancy
as of the effective date of this Ordinance.
(B) Any project for which a vesting tentative map
application was filed and deemed complete on or before June 15,
1993, which tentative map has not yet expired.
(C) Any project located on a property subject to a
Development Agreement as of the effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be of no further force and
effect after January 10, 1995, unless prior to that date, after a
duly noticed public hearing, the City Council, by majority vote,
extends the interim ordinance as provided in Section
9.04.20.16.060 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
SECTION 6. Any provisions 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 effectuate the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 7. Ordinance 1707 (CCS) is hereby repealed.
SECTION 8. 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 9. 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 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney