ITEM 8-A
Council Meeting: April 19, 1994
TO: City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt an Ordinance for Repair and
Reconstruction of Residential and Non-residential
Buildings Damaged by the January 17, 1994 Northridge
Earthquake
INTRODUCTION
On March 1, 1994, the City Council directed staff to prepare an
ordinance which would facilitate recovery from the Northridge
earthquake by establishing development review standards for the
repair and reconstruction of damaged buildings. In addition, the
Council directed staff to study various issues related to the
repair and reconstruction standards and review emergency
ordinances previously adopted in response to the Northridge
earthquake.
This staff report provides the results of the studies requested
by Council concerning on-site parking, reconstruction bonuses,
and the financial impact of the reconstruction standards and
incentives, and discusses the specific provisions of the
earthquake recovery ordinance.
BACKGROUND
On March 1, 1994, the City Council reviewed the general
parameters of a program presented by staff for the repair and
reconstruction of residential and non-residential buildings
damaged by the Northridge earthquake and directed staff to
prepare an ordinance to implement this program. The Council
additionally asked staff to study certain issues related to the
proposed repair and reconstruction standards and return to
Council with the results of its evaluations.
The proposed program is designed to achieve the goals of
facilitating a rapid recovery, maintaining affordable housing,
and preserving the residential and commercial character of Santa
Monica. In general, the program provides for expedited permit
processing for earthquake-related repairs and reconstruction,
allows damaged buildings to be rebuilt to their pre-earthquake
conditions (even when these conditions do not conform to present
zoning standards), and establishes incentives for the rapid
reconstruction of multi-family rental developments. At the same
time, the program establishes thresholds for compliance with
building codes.
This staff report is organized around three major issues: 1) the
results of the staff evaluation of issues related to possible
parking requirements and development bonuses for reconstructed
buildings; 2) a discussion of the results of a financial analysis
of development incentives for reconstruction; and, 3) a
description of the provisions of the proposed repair and
reconstruction ordinance.
The key recommendations of this report are as follows:
o In-kind Repair and Reconstruction: Allow for in-kind
repair and reconstruction of legal non-conforming structures
and expedited permit processing;
o Parking: Require replacement of pre-earthquake parking
spaces, but no additional parking;
o Incentives for Repair and Reconstruction: For multi-
family rental housing, allow a 15 percent square footage
bonus, a five-foot height bonus, and decreased setbacks, as
long as setback non-conformity is not increased, or the
project complies with the minimum setbacks in the Zoning
Ordinance.
o Affordable Housing: Where affordable housing requirements
are not imposed by Rent Control, require that 25 percent of
the reconstructed units in residential housing projects be
affordable to low- and moderate-income households.
ISSUES FOR STUDY
In conjunction with the direction to prepare the ordinance,
Council directed staff to evaluate specific issues related to the
proposed repair and reconstruction development standards,
including: 1) the need and desirability of requiring additional
parking for earthquake-damaged buildings having substandard
parking, 2) the feasibility of floor area bonuses to encourage
reconstruction of multi-family residential projects, and 3) the
financial impact of allowing development incentives for multi-
family rental developments.
Parking
Staff examined pre-earthquake parking conditions in yellow- and
red-tagged buildings in order to determine the extent of
underparking. Utilizing construction dates obtained from
assessor files, staff compared building dates with applicable
City parking standards at the time of construction to estimate
the amount of parking at each site.
Residential Structures
A review of the City's historical parking requirements shows that
there were no parking requirements for multi-family residential
development until 1937. In that year, the City adopted a
requirement of 1 space per unit for multi-family residential
development, which represents approximately 50 percent of the
City's current standard. In 1948, this standard was modified to
require 1 space per every two units for projects above 5 units in
the R2 zone, and 1 space per every three units for projects above
10 units in the R3 and R4 zone, effectively reducing the amount
of required parking for larger projects. In 1960, the parking
requirement for multi-family residential development was raised
to 1 and 1/2 spaces per unit, representing approximately 75
percent of the current standard. In 1975, the City began to
require 2 spaces per unit for units with two or more bedrooms.
Currently, for multi-family apartment development, the City
requires 1.5 spaces per one-bedroom, 2 spaces per 2 or more
bedrooms, and visitor parking for projects of five units or more.
For condomimiums, the City requires 2 spaces per one or more
bedrooms.
Table I shows when the red- and yellow-tagged multi-family
buildings were built in relation to the time periods
corresponding to different parking standards. Nearly half of the
buildings were built prior to 1937 when the City had no specific
parking requirements. Approximately 19 percent were built
between 1937 and 1959 when the City required approximately 1
space per unit. Another 22.2 percent were built during the 1960-
1975 period when the City required one and one-half spaces per
unit. Less than 5 percent were constructed under the requirement
of two spaces per unit for one- and two-bedroom units.
Site inspections of several of the buildings showed that indeed
many of the pre-1937 developments provide substantially less
parking than current code requires. For example, the Charmont
apartments and Sovereign apartments have no on-site parking. On
the other hand, the El Cortez apartments provide 23 parking
spaces for 40 units. However, the El Cortez apartments appear to
be the exception rather than the rule for pre-1937 residential
buildings. Most are severely underparked and rely on street
parking.
Non-residential Structures
Prior to 1948, the City had no specific minimum parking
requirements for retail and office development. Beginning in
1948, the City required one space per 1,000 square feet for
buildings larger than 2,500 square feet. In 1960, the
requirement was increased to one space per 300 square feet of
office and retail development, which is the same as the City's
current requirement.
Table II shows that approximately 67 percent of the non-
residential red- and yellow-tagged buildings were built prior to
the time that the City had any applicable parking requirements.
Another 9.7 percent were constructed during the 1948-1959 period
when the City required 1 space per 1,000 square feet, or
approximately one-third of the current requirement. Only 18
percent were built under requirements similar to current
standards.
Although a large proportion of the non-residential buildings in
the City were constructed prior to the imposition of parking
requirements, most still appear to provide some on-site parking.
Site inspections of several of the pre-1948 buildings revealed
that on-site parking amounted to between 30 and 60 percent of the
current on-site parking requirements. This may be because owners
have provided parking voluntarily for business purposes, or
because they have been required by the City to increase parking
as part of development applications.
Parking Recommendation
Even though many of the earthquake-damaged buildings, especially
residential buildings, may have substandard on-site parking,
staff does not recommend requiring additional parking as part of
the reconstruction ordinance. The primary goal of the City's
repair and reconstruction program is to allow property owners to
promptly restore properties to their pre-earthquake conditions.
In many cases, requiring additional parking could result in a
substantial change in building design and costs, which could in
turn impede the City's goal of facilitating rapid repair and
reconstruction. It is the opinion of experts contacted by City
staff that lenders will be forgiving in terms of substandard
parking, to the extent that they, too, are eager to facilitate
rebuilding. Moreover, since the number of residential units
cannot be increased, and square footage cannot be added to
commercial structures, the demand for parking will be no greater
than that existing prior to the earthquake. Where a residential
rental property owner wishes to voluntarily increase parking, or
where the lender may require more parking as a condition of
lending to such an owner, the proposed ordinance allows for an
increase in parking.
Other Data on Red- and Yellow-Tagged Buildings
In order to determine key dimensions of the buildings that were
damaged by the earthquake, data on the number of stories and
number of units per building were gathered and analyzed. Table
III shows the number and proportion of red- and yellow-tagged
buildings by number of stories. The table shows that the
majority (56.9 percent) of the buildings have two stories.
Approximately one-quarter (24.6 percent) have only one story,
while another 11.5 percent have three stories. Less than five
percent are more than three stories.
Table IV shows the breakdown among red- and yellow-tagged
buildings by number of units in the building. Among 177
residential damaged buildings including single-family homes,
approximately 34 percent consist of one or two units; thus, the
majority have three or more units. Approximately 18 percent of
the buildings consist of between 3 and 5 units; 34.4 percent
consist of between 6 and 15 units. Approximately 10 percent have
between 16 and 30 units. Few buildings have more than 30 units.
Feasibility of Development Bonuses
The Council directed staff to investigate the feasibility and
impact of permitting a development bonus as an incentive for the
reconstruction of residential development.
In evaluating the appropriateness of allowing an increase in the
pre-earthquake size of residential buildings, staff first
determined that such an incentive would be most appropriate for
multi-family rental development. This is due primarily to
potential for significant loss of this type of housing as a
result of the earthquake, and the goal articulated by the City
Council to maintain affordable housing. The development bonus
did not seem necessary for condominium development and single-
family homes due to the fact that the condominium and single-
family homeowner, by virtue of the fact that s/he generally
resides in the unit, already has a strong incentive to
reconstruct; and, due to the practical difficulty of determining
how to distribute the bonus among the numerous condominiums.
The approach utilized by staff to determine the incremental
increase in square footage that would be necessary to provide a
significant incentive to encourage affordable housing development
is described in detail in the next section of this report. It
should be noted that while the square footage bonus will permit
an increase in building square footage, it will not permit an
increase in the number of dwelling units.
The City Attorney has reviewed the applicable State law and
determined that the State density bonus provisions will not apply
to reconstruction under this ordinance.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
The City Council directed staff to evaluate the financial impact
of various alternative development standards incentives for
reconstruction. The analysis would identify a set of development
standards which would provide a significant financial incentive
to encourage rapid reconstruction while simultaneously achieving
the City's goal of maintaining affordable housing. The financial
incentive would equal or exceed other investment options, thereby
providing a level of economic return that would be highly
attractive to the owner. The firm of Kotin, Regan & Mouchly
(KRM), Inc. was contracted to conduct the analysis.
Before describing the methodology and results of this analysis,
it should be noted that there are many factors which go into the
decision of whether to reconstruct. These include the extent to
which earthquake insurance is available, the nature and terms of
the debt encumbering the property, and the financial
circumstances of the owner, along with the size, density, and
configuration of the existing development. It would not be
possible in an analysis of this sort to capture all the possible
combinations of financial and other circumstances facing an
owner. Nevertheless, the analysis performed was designed to
capture a reasonable range of alternatives and depict the
relative impact of different policies.
Below, the development scenarios and assumptions contained in the
analysis are described, the financial methodology and assumptions
are discussed, and a summary of the results are reported.
Development Scenarios and Assumptions
The analysis focuses on reconstruction, as opposed to repair. It
assumes that each structure will be demolished and reconstructed
to its pre-earthquake dimensions, including number of units and
on-site parking spaces; that all projects will be subject to a
the requirements of one of two rent control removal processes;
and, that all projects will be eligible for a reconstruction
bonus.
Five multi-family developments in the City that were either red-
or yellow-tagged as a result of the earthquake were used as
prototypes in the analysis. In order to reflect the diversity of
multi-family housing developments in the City, these prototypes
vary in size and include 8, 10, 16, 24, and 42 units,
respectively. Four of the five developments are located north of
Wilshire, where the majority of the red- and yellow-tagged
residential buildings are located.
The reconstruction scenarios focus on the differential impacts of
two key variables: square footage bonuses and affordable housing
requirements. Square footage bonuses of 0, 10, 15, 20, and 25
percent were analyzed. It was assumed that there would be no
increase in the overall number of units in each development, and
that the incremental square footage from the bonus would be
absorbed by the individual units. Square footage bonuses would
only apply to existing multi-family apartment developments.
Alternative affordable housing requirements of 0, 15, 20, and 25
percent are analyzed. The 15 percent affordable requirement
scenario, applicable to an Earthquake Category D removal, assumes
that the affordable units would be affordable to lower-income
households (i.e., households earning 80 percent of the Los
Angeles County median income). This scenario also assumes that
the remaining 85 percent of the units initially would be rented
at market rate and thereafter be subject to rent control.
Applicable to an Earthquake Category C removal, the 20 and 25
percent alternative affordable requirements assume that exactly
half of the affordable units would be affordable to moderate-
income households (i.e., households earning 100 percent of the
County median household income), while the remaining half would
be affordable to low-income households (i.e., households earning
60 percent of the County median household income). The balance
of units in each development would be market rate units and not
subject to rent control.
Affordable units were assumed to be 600 square feet for one-
bedrooms, 850 square feet for 2-bedrooms, 1,080 square feet for
3-bedrooms, and 1,260 for 4-bedrooms. The number of affordable
units in each development was determined by using a 0.5 round-up
factor. For the 25 percent affordable housing requirement
scenarios, it was assumed that the first affordable unit would be
affordable to a moderate-income household, the second unit to a
low-income household, and thereafter alternating.
Financial Methodology and Assumptions
The financial analysis focuses upon the cost of reconstruction
from the perspective of the existing property owner. The
objective of the analysis was to determine if the property owner
could recover original (pre-earthquake) net operating income
(NOI) and also obtain a significant additional financial return
on investment to encourage reconstruction.
Original net operating income (NOI) was calculated using gross
rent levels provided by the Rent Control Department. Operating
expenses were estimated based on an average of $.27 per square
foot per month. NOI was calculated by reducing total rental
income by operating expenses.
The new NOI (that is, the NOI from the newly reconstructed
building) is calculated based upon income from new rents minus
operating expenses. Marginal income, or the difference between
rental income generated after reconstruction and rental income
prior to the earthquake, was then calculated by subtracting the
original NOI from the new NOI. Taking the marginal income and
dividing by the cost of rebuilding yields the return on
investment (ROI) on new investment capital. The analysis
considers only the return on investment during the first year.
Threshold ROI
In order to establish a threshold return on investment, three
main factors must be considered: the availability and cost of
equity capital; the availability and cost of debt financing; and,
the expectation of future rents.
For the purposes of this analysis, a loan-to-value ratio of 85
percent is assumed. It is also assumed that debt financing would
be obtained at a rate of 8 percent, which assumes a combination
of market rate and Small Business Administration (SBA) loans.
Equity capital--that is, the portion of funds needed to cover the
remaining 15 percent of the cost of reconstruction--is assumed to
require a rate of return of at least 20 percent. In other words,
in order to provide the owner significant incentives to
reconstruct as opposed to invest the same capital in another
investment, s/he would need to realize at least 20 percent return
on that capital through reconstruction.
The chart below shows how the threshold return, or the minimum
financial return required in order to prompt investment, is
calculated on the investment necessary in order for the owner to
meet the debt service on an 8 percent loan and still obtain 20
percent return on the equity portion of the investment.
Calculating Threshold ROI on
Entire Financing (Debt plus Equity)
A. Debt Portion: 85% Loan
x 8% Interest Rate
6.8%
B. Equity Portion: 15% Down payment
x 20% Return on Investment
3.0%
A + B = 9.8%
The table shows that the combined threshold ROI for the debt and
equity portion of the investment is 9.8 percent.
The threshold ROI of 9.8 percent also assumes that apartment
rents would increase with the normal inflation rate. However,
threshold ROI would be somewhat higher for units with controlled
rents. Based on the City's prior experience whereby controlled
rents increased at approximately 70 percent of the CPI, KRM has
estimated that the threshold ROI would have to be adjusted by .75
percent to provide a property owner with an equivalent long-term
rate of return, thereby requiring a 10.55 ROI for units subject
to rent control.
Other Assumptions
A number of other assumptions factor into the analysis, including
assumptions about market rents, operating expenses, design and
construction costs, parking costs, and overhead costs, among
others. The standard assumptions used in the analysis and a
sample proforma are combined in Attachment A. Because of the
nature of the assumptions utilized in this analysis (i.e.,
consideration of pre-earthquake net operating income and
exclusion of land costs), the approach taken is not transferable
to an analysis of the financial feasibility of new construction.
Results
Table V shows the results of this analysis for the different
affordable and square footage bonus levels. In order to
interpret the table, it is important to keep in mind the
applicable threshold ROI at which new development is likely to
occur under each type of Rent Control removal permit: for
Earthquake Category D removal, 10.55 percent (9.8 percent plus
.75 percent to factor for additional return required for the rent
controlled units); for the Earthquake Category C removal, 9.8
percent.
Staff utilized Table V to identify an appropriate combination of
square footage bonus and affordable housing requirements that
would meet the threshold ROI under either a Category C removal,
with a 25 percent affordable requirement, or the Category D
removal, with a 15 percent affordable requirement.
The table shows that several combinations of affordable
requirements and square footage bonuses meet the threshold ROI.
For example, nearly all prototypes provide sufficient financial
return under the 20 and 25 percent square footage bonuses and all
affordable housing requirement levels to encourage
reconstruction. In addition, all but one prototype would meet
the threshold ROI. In particular, under the 15 percent square
footage bonus allowance, the threshold ROI is met for four of the
five prototypes under a 15, 20, or 25 percent affordable housing
requirement. More specifically, the threshold ROI is met for
Prototypes 1, 3, and 4 with a 15 percent affordable housing
requirement, and for Prototype 5 with a 25 percent affordable
housing requirement. At the same time, the table suggests
that, with a 15 percent square footage bonus, an affordable
housing requirement above 25 percent would not provide the
threshold ROI desired to encourage reconstruction.
Consistent with the program goal of maintaining the character of
existing development and neighborhoods, staff recommends allowing
the minimum square footage bonus needed to meet the threshold
ROI. Based on preceding analysis, this is 15 percent. The 15
percent bonus would provide sufficient financial returns either
at the 15 percent or 25 percent affordable housing requirement
level to stimulate reconstruction.
Therefore, staff is recommending a 15 percent square footage
bonus along with the following affordable housing requirements
for reconstruction:
o For Earthquake Category D removals, 15 percent of the
units shall be affordable to lower-income households; and,
o For Earthquake Category C removals, 25 percent of the
units shall be deed-restricted for affordable housing, with
half affordable to moderate-income households and half
affordable to low-income households.
REPAIR/RECONSTRUCTION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS
The key sections of the Repair and Reconstruction Standards
Ordinance are as follows: Findings and Purpose (Section 1),
Definitions (Section 2), Development Standards and Use
Restrictions (Section 4), Affordable Housing Obligation (Section
5), Permit Application and Review processes (Sections 6 and 7),
Standards for Review (Section 8), and Building Standard
Compliance (Section 11):
The following discussion outlines the key provisions of the
proposed ordinance.
Key Provisions
In the interest of having clear and readily understandable rules
that will facilitate repair and reconstruction, the proposed
ordinance sets forth a single set of standards and procedures for
repair and reconstruction which override the existing Zoning
Ordinance.
In formulating these development standards, staff has attempted
to consider a range of rebuilding scenarios to address a variety
of situations that might reasonably be expected to occur.
Nevertheless, as applications for repair and reconstruction are
processed, it may become apparent that modifications and
requirements are necessary. Staff believes that the City should
be open to such modifications when it is apparent that they could
improve and expedite the recovery process.
The provisions of the proposed ordinance, including the repair
and reconstruction threshold criteria and review procedures, and
the building and safety requirements, are described in detail
below.
Repair/Reconstruction Thresholds and Review Process
The proposed ordinance establishes a four-tier review process for
repair or reconstruction, with the required level of review
contingent upon the extent and cost of the damage and the scope
of changes to the project. While some projects may be subject to
more than one of the following steps, all projects will
ultimately require at least a plan check.
Plan Check Only
The following projects are subject to a plan check review
process only:
1. Structures where the repair costs are less than 50% of
the estimated replacement value of the structure and
are reconstructed to the height, setbacks, density,
number of and type of units (apartments,
condominiums), design and parking that existed prior to
the earthquake.
2. Structures where the repair costs are greater than 50%
of the estimated replacement value of the structure,
and where less than 50% of the exterior walls will be
demolished, and the building is reconstructed to the
height, setbacks, density, number and type of units
(apartments, condominiums), design, and parking that
existed prior to the earthquake.
Expedited ARB or Landmark/ARB Review
The following projects are subject to an expedited
Architectural Review Board process, or Landmark/ARB review
process if applicable, and then subject to a plan check
review process.
1. Structures where the repair costs are greater than 50%
of the estimated replacement value of the structure,
and where more than 50% of the exterior walls will be
demolished, and the new development is below the
development review threshold for the district in which
it is located. Two Landmark Commission members are
required to review and vote on the project as part of
the ARB review process if the project involves a
landmark or potential landmark.
Expedited Administrative Review
If the project is consistent with the above thresholds, yet
the project modifies the floor area, height, or footprint by
no more that 15%, the project will be subject to an
expedited administrative review process. After completion of
the administrative review, the project will be subject to
the ARB or ARB/Landmark Review and plan check processes
outlined above.
Expedited Planning Commission Review
The following projects are subject to an expedited Planning
Commission review and then subject to a plan check review.
1. Structures where the repair costs are greater than 50%
of the estimated replacement value of the structure,
and where more than 50% of the exterior walls will be
demolished, and the structure is above the development
review threshold for the district in which it is
located.
Requirements Unique to Residential Uses
The development thresholds and review processes are nearly
identical for residential and non-residential development.
However, the provisions for the repair and reconstruction of
multi-family rental development differ in that they allow
development incentives for reconstruction and, where affordable
housing requirements are not imposed by Rent Control, establish
additional requirements for affordable housing.
Building Code Standards
The proposed ordinance contains the following building standards
as directed by the Council. These standards are based in large
part upon the State Model Ordinances.
o When the estimated value of repair does not exceed 10% of
the replacement value of the structure, only the damaged
portions may be restored to their pre-disaster condition.
This applies except when the damaged elements include
suspended ceiling systems, in which case the repair must
comply with the current technical code.
o When the estimated value of the repair is greater than 10%
but less than 50% of the replacement value of the structure,
the damaged elements, as well as the critical ties,
supported elements and supporting elements associated with
the damaged elements, shall be repaired and/or brought into
conformance with structural requirements of the current
technical code.
o When the estimated value of repair is 50% or more of the
replacement value of the structure, the entire structure
shall be brought into conformance with the current technical
code.
o Landmark eligible buildings shall comply with the above
provisions; however, an owner may request a modification to
the above provisions as long as the modification is
consistent with Part 8, Title 24, California Code of
Regulations, the State of California Historic Building Code.
Other Provisions
The repair and reconstruction ordinance contains various other
provisions which are described below.
o Environmental Review (CEQA): The City's existing
administrative CEQA Guidelines do not provide for an
exemption for reconstruction after a natural disaster.
Therefore, the proposed ordinance establishes a categorical
exemption for all projects receiving an Earthquake Recovery
Permit.
o Parking: The proposed ordinance requires that the amount
of on-site parking be no less than that provided prior to
the earthquake.
o Right of Re-Occupancy: The proposed ordinance
establishes procedural requirements governing the right of
reoccupancy of residential rental units by tenants displaced
from these units due to an owner's need to repair or
reconstruct an earthquake damaged structure.
o Non-conforming Uses: The same use that existed prior to
the earthquake may be re-established. For non-residential
structures, nonconforming uses may be resumed after repair
or reconstruction, or may be replaced with conforming uses.
Conforming uses may be changed to other conforming uses so
long as the parking requirement for the new use does not
exceed the parking requirement for the pre-earthquake use.
o Non-conforming buildings: While the proposed ordinance
will permit the "in-kind" reconstruction and limited
expansion of existing, non-conforming buildings, any
expansion in the non-conforming building beyond the limits
specified in the proposed ordinance would be subject to the
non-conforming section (Section 9.04.18) of the Zoning
Ordinance.
o Demolition: Demolition would be permitted as part of an
Earthquake Recovery Permit and only upon issuance of a
building permit. Demolitions in any other circumstances
will be processed according to the existing City procedures
unless the demolition was ordered by the City's Nuisance
Abatement Board.
o Timeframe for Repairs: Consistent with Council direction,
the proposed ordinance will require that building permits
for repair or reconstruction be issued within two years of
date of the ordinance.
o Time Limit for Permit Processing: The City Council asked
staff to consider and recommend appropriate time limits for
the processing of permits for reconstruction. However,
until the volume of applications is known, staff is
reluctant to commit to a specific timeframe within an
ordinance. Staff will process the applications
expeditiously and, once the volume is better known, develop
timelines for public distribution.
o Construction Hours: The council originally directed the
establishment of two sets of construction hours, one for
residential and the other for non-residential development.
However, due to the difficulty of enforcing two sets of
standards, staff is recommending a single standard for all
development, as follows: from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on
weekdays, and 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays.
o Repair or Reconstruction Projects Subject to Existing
Zoning Ordinance Standards: Any structure that does not
qualify for an Earthquake Recovery Permit shall be subject
to the present Zoning Ordinance standards.
o Suspension of North of Wilshire Construction Rate
Program:
The proposed ordinance exempts all repair and reconstruction
projects in the North of Wilshire area from the North of
Wilshire Construction Rate Program.
o Verification of pre-existing building dimensions: At
least two sources of documentation demonstrating the prior
development conditions of the building shall be required.
o Determining Repair and Reconstruction Costs: For purposes
of determining the cost of reconstruction, the property
owner will be required to submit a valid contract with a
licensed contractor for the repair work and two estimates
from properly licensed contractors for the repair work. The
estimates will be required to contain sufficient detail to
ascertain the scope of the proposed work and include profit,
overhead and insurance cost. The City will determine the
replacement cost by using the quarterly adjusted, nationally
recognized, construction cost indicators for buildings of
similar use, construction and amenities.
o Increasing the size and number of residential units: For
residential uses, the square footage and number of bedrooms
of individual units may be increased. However, the number
of units may not be increased.
o Height and Setback modifications for building and safety
reasons: Building modifications would be permitted in order
to comply with technical construction codes even though this
may result in modifications to the height and setbacks.
o Fee Waiver: The proposed ordinance authorizes the City
Manager to waive any and all permit processing fees which
may otherwise be necessary for the repair and reconstruction
of earthquake-damaged buildings. This is consistent with
the Council's previous action.
The proposed ordinance does not prevent property owners who have
purchased their property after the January 17 earthquake from
applying for an Earthquake Recovery Permit.
Finally, the proposed ordinance modifies the City's standard
severability clause in that it stipulates that if any section of
the ordinance is found to be invalid or unconstitutional, the
entire ordinance shall be considered invalid.
STATUS OF OTHER EMERGENCY ORDINANCES
Since the Northridge earthquake the City Council adopted several
emergency ordinances to address the post-earthquake conditions.
The following summarizes the status of the adopted ordinances:
Ordinance 1720: Ordinance waiving development related fees.
This ordinance is being repealed in Section 16 of the proposed
ordinance. The fee waiver provisions are now included in Section
15 of the proposed ordinance.
Ordinance 1722: Ordinance requiring structural engineering
reports and restoration of vital building systems. This
ordinance is being repealed since the proposed ordinance now
requires the submission of a structural engineering report prior
to the issuance of an earthquake recovery permit. A requirement
to restore vital building functions for green-tagged buildings is
no longer necessary.
Ordinance 1723: Ordinance regulating price increases. This
ordinance will remain in effect.
Ordinance 1725: Ordinance establishing a moratorium on tenant
evictions. This ordinance is being repealed since the procedures
included in the proposed ordinance and adopted by the Rent
Control Board address this issue.
Ordinance 1730: Ordinance establishing repair and reconstruction
procedures for damaged structures. This ordinance is being
repealed since the proposed ordinance sets forth the specific
standards.
CEQA
Under Sections 15269, 15302, and 15303 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), when the Governor has declared
a state of emergency as a result of an earthquake or other
natural disaster, rebuilding projects are exempt from
environmental review.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendations in this report will have a financial impact
due to the waiver of permit fees. However, it is anticipated
that this will not be a significant impact.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing
and adopt the earthquake repair and reconstruction ordinance.
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, LUTM Director
Paul Casey, Acting Senior Planner
Tad Read, Associate Planner
Attachments: A - Financial Feasibility Analysis Assumptions and
Pro-Forma
B - Repair and Reconstruction Ordinance
ORDINANCE NUMBER _______
(City Council Series)
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ENTITLED "THE EARTHQUAKE RECOVERY ACT,"
ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS
FOR REPAIR AND RECONSTRUCTION
OF EARTHQUAKE DAMAGED STRUCTURES
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) Numerous residential and commercial buildings in the
City of Santa Monica experienced substantial damage due to the
January 17, 1994 Northridge earthquake and its aftershocks.
Citywide, more than 2000 dwelling units and 135 non-residential
structures were significantly damaged. As a result, residents
have been displaced from their homes and businesses, and owners
face the task of rebuilding damaged structures. Without a
streamlined permit process, families may be left homeless,
neighborhoods will continue to experience the negative effects of
unrepaired buildings, and economic hardships will result from the
delay in reconstruction.
(b) Many of the buildings which were damaged are currently
nonconforming with respect to density, setbacks, height, floor
area ratio, or other code requirements. Under existing zoning
ordinance provisions, if damage to a structure equals or exceeds
one-half of replacement costs immediately prior to such damage,
the structure must conform to current zoning upon rebuilding.
Adherence to these zoning provisions would significantly delay
rebuilding and recovery.
(c) In addition, numerous damaged buildings contain more
housing units than allowed by current zoning. If current
rebuilding provisions were followed, there is the potential for a
loss of housing units on these sites.
(d) In order to preserve the City's housing stock, to
encourage rapid rebuilding of residential and commercial
structures, to maintain the City's existing residential and
commercial character, and to otherwise promote the public
welfare, it is necessary to adopt an expedited permit process for
rebuilding, and reconstruction standards which encourage
rebuilding.
(e) This Ordinance creates a new permit, an Earthquake
Recovery Permit, which will be available for the next two years.
An Earthquake Recovery Permit will authorize repair and
reconstruction of earthquake damaged structures to their pre-
earthquake condition. The Ordinance also establishes an
expedited review process, in which the level of review depends
upon the extent of damage to the structure and the overall size
of the project. This Ordinance sets property development
standards, allowing in-kind repair or reconstruction of legal
nonconforming structures without complying with current zoning
requirements. The Ordinance also delineates the building
standards applicable to repair and reconstruction, which depend
upon the magnitude of damage to the structure. The Ordinance
establishes reoccupancy rights for displaced residential tenants
of buildings requiring repair or reconstruction.
(f) In order to preserve some level of affordability of
residential rental units, and at the same time provide an
incentive to rebuild, this Ordinance allows residential rental
structures which are demolished and reconstructed to increase in
size by fifteen percent (15%). An affordable housing obligation
is also created for structures requiring a removal permit from
the Rent Control Board. The obligation may be satisfied by
complying with any Rent Control Board imposed affordable housing
obligation, or by deed restricting twenty-five percent (25%) of
the units to be affordable to low and moderate income households,
with the remainder of the units uncontrolled at market rents.
(g) Finally, this Ordinance repeals the majority of the
emergency ordinances adopted since the Northridge earthquake, and
incorporates key provisions of those ordinances which are
intended to remain in effect.
SECTION 2. Definitions. Words used in this Ordinance shall
be defined as provided in this Section. Words not specifically
defined in this Ordinance shall be defined as set forth in the
Zoning Ordinance.
(a) Affordable Housing Unit. A rental unit meeting the
requirements of Section 5 of this Ordinance which is affordable
to a household with low or moderate income.
(b) Change of Use. For residential structures, a change to
non-residential use or a change from apartments to condominiums;
for non-residential structures, any use with a different parking
requirement.
(c) Cost of Repair. The estimated cost to repair or
reconstruct to be determined by the City based upon information
provided pursuant to Section 6(a) of this Ordinance. Cost of
repair shall include the cost of including any additional square
footage allowed as a size incentive pursuant to this Ordinance.
(d) Current Technical Codes. The provisions of Santa
Monica Municipal Code Chapter 8.04, and any other construction
related technical codes adopted by the City, in effect at the
time of issuance of the building permit.
(e) Earthquake Damaged Structures. Structures damaged by
the Northridge earthquake or its aftershocks for which the cost
of repair exceeds $1.00 per square foot of building area.
(f) Earthquake Recovery Permit. A permit to repair, or
remove and reconstruct, earthquake damaged structures or portions
of earthquake damaged structures, issued pursuant to this
Ordinance.
(g) In-kind. In-kind means that, excluding any Size
Incentive allowed by this Ordinance, and except as necessary to
comply with required Current Technical Code provisions, the
square footage of the proposed structure does not exceed the
amount which existed in the building pre-earthquake; the number
of dwelling units is no greater than the number existing pre-
earthquake (although the number of bedrooms or configurations of
units may vary); the height of the structure is no greater than
that which existed pre-earthquake; the setbacks are no less than
those which existed pre-earthquake; the number of parking spaces
provided is no less than the parking provided pre-earthquake
(unless the structure is located in the Downtown Parking
Assessment District); lot coverage is no greater than that which
existed pre-earthquake; landscaping, trash and recycling
enclosures are substantially similar to those existing pre-
earthquake; and that there is no change in use except as
specifically allowed by this Ordinance.
(h) Landmark eligible. A structure meeting one or more of
the following criteria:
(1) Listed on the National Register of Historic
Places;
(2) Listed on the California Register of Historical
Resources;
(3) Designated as a City Landmark;
(4) Identified in the City of Santa Monica Historic
Resources Inventory and evaluated as: (a) eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places as an individual structure
or as part of a district or (b) eligible for designation as a
City Landmark.
(i) New Construction. For non-residential structures, any
construction which is not in-kind; for residential structures,
any construction which, excluding any Size Incentive allowed by
this Ordinance, is not in-kind.
(j) Pre-earthquake. The conditions existing immediately
prior to the January 17, 1994 Northridge earthquake.
(k) Reconstruction. The demolition of an earthquake
damaged structure and construction of an in-kind replacement
structure.
(l) Repair. The in-kind restoration of an earthquake
damaged structure in which total cost of repair is less than
fifty percent (50%) of the replacement value of the structure, or
in which less than fifty percent (50%) of the exterior walls are
removed to the foundation.
(m) Replacement Value. The estimated cost of replacing the
earthquake damaged structure, to be determined by the City using
the most current Building Valuation Table published by the
International Conference of Building Officials.
(n) Residential Rental Project. A parcel containing two or
more rental dwelling units not held in condominium or cooperative
ownership.
(o) Significant Design Change. The architectural style of
a building, building footprint, or the majority of the exterior
building materials are substantially different from that which
existed pre-earthquake.
(p) Size Incentive. An incentive allowing a total square
footage increase of up to fifteen percent (15%) over pre-
earthquake square footage on the parcel, a total floor area ratio
(FAR) increase of up to fifteen percent (15%) over pre-earthquake
FAR on the parcel, a total height increase of five feet per
structure on the parcel; but not allowing any increase in the
number of dwelling units.
(q) Tenant. Any tenant, subtenant, lessee, sublessee, or
any other person occupying a rental housing unit pursuant to a
rental housing agreement.
SECTION 3. Applicability. This Ordinance authorizes the
issuance of an Earthquake Recovery Permit only for In-kind repair
or reconstruction of earthquake damaged structures. Any
application for repair, demolition, or replacement of earthquake
damaged structures involving other than in-kind repair or
reconstruction shall be considered an application for New
Construction.
An application for an Earthquake Recovery Permit shall be
processed and evaluated pursuant to the provisions of this
Ordinance. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not apply to
applications for New Construction. An application for New
Construction shall be processed and evaluated under applicable
Municipal Code provisions, including Subchapter 9.04.18 of the
Zoning Ordinance concerning the repair and alteration of
nonconforming building and uses.
SECTION 4. Earthquake Recovery Permit Development Standards
and Use Restrictions. An Earthquake Recovery Permit authorizes
In-kind repair or reconstruction, subject to the following
provisions:
(a) Nonconforming Buildings and Structures. Any legal
nonconforming building or structure otherwise qualifying for an
Earthquake Recovery Permit may be reconstructed to its previous
nonconforming status. Any residential unit created without a
building permit, and registered with the Santa Monica Rent
Control Board (a "bootleg unit"), may be repaired provided the
unit meets minimum habitability standards. Residential Rental
Projects which are reconstructed pursuant to this Ordinance and
which contain one or more bootleg units may count those units in
the total number of units which may be reconstructed provided all
reconstructed units meet the requirements of the Current
Technical Codes.
(b) Change in Use. No change in use shall be allowed for a
residential structure. For a non-residential structure, a
nonconforming use may be resumed after repair or reconstruction,
or may be replaced with a conforming use; and a conforming use
may be changed to another conforming use so long as the parking
requirement for the new use does not exceed the parking
requirement for the pre-earthquake use. Notwithstanding the
above, nonconforming office use shall not be replaced with
nonconforming retail use, and nonconforming retail use shall not
be replaced with nonconforming office use.
(c) Size Incentive. A Residential Rental Project
qualifying for an Earthquake Recovery Permit is entitled to a
Size Incentive. A Size Incentive allows a total square footage
increase of up to fifteen percent (15%) over pre-earthquake
square footage on the parcel, a total floor area ratio (FAR)
increase of up to fifteen percent (15%) over pre-earthquake FAR
on the parcel, and a total height increase of five (5) feet per
structure on the parcel, but does not allow any increase in the
number of bedrooms. A reconstructed building qualifying for a
Size Incentive may have lot coverage or setbacks which vary from
those of the pre-earthquake structure, but no new nonconformity
in lot coverage or setbacks may be created, or any existing
nonconformity in lot coverage or setbacks be increased. A size
incentive may not be used to construct an additional structure or
structures on the parcel which did not exist pre-earthquake.
SECTION 5. Affordable Housing Obligation. The provisions
of the City's Inclusionary Housing Program, Chapter 9.28 of the
Municipal Code, shall not apply to any project obtaining an
Earthquake Recovery Permit, except as specifically incorporated
in this Section. An affordable housing obligation shall apply to
any Residential Rental Project obtaining an Earthquake Recovery
Permit which also requires a removal permit from the Santa Monica
Rent Control Board. The following affordable housing obligation
shall apply:
(a) If the project has an affordable housing obligation
imposed by the Rent Control Board, such obligation shall satisfy
the requirements of this Section.
(b) If no affordable housing obligation is imposed by the
Rent Control Board, not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of
the total number of dwelling units in the Residential Rental
Project shall be affordable to low and moderate income
households. Low and moderate income levels shall be defined as
set forth in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.28.020.
(c) In determining the number of affordable units
required, the following chart shall be utilized:
No. of Units
Reconstructed Low Income Moderate Income
2 0 1
3 0 1
4 0 1
5 0 1
6 1 1
7 1 1
8 1 1
9 1 1
10 1 2
11 1 2
12 1 2
13 1 2
14 2 2
15 2 2
16 2 2
17 2 2
18 2 3
19 2 3
20 2 3
For more than twenty (20) units, the number of affordable
units required shall equal twenty-five percent (25%) of the
number of units built; any decimal fraction of 0.5 or more
rounded up to the nearest whole number, and any decimal fraction
of less than 0.5 rounded down to the nearest whole number. The
first affordable unit required may be affordable to low or
moderate income households, and alternating thereafter.
(d) Affordable units may have reduced size or amenities as
long as there are no significant identifiable differences between
the affordable units and market rate units visible from the
exterior of the dwelling units, and each of the affordable units
satisfy the following minimum total floor area:
0 bedroom 500 square feet
1 bedroom 600 square feet
2 bedrooms 850 square feet
3 bedrooms 1080 square feet
4 bedrooms 1200 square feet.
(e) The mix of bedroom sizes of affordable units shall be
substantially similar to the mix of bedroom sizes of the market
rate units in the project.
(f) Affordable units shall also comply with the
requirements for inclusionary units set forth in Santa Monica
Municipal Code Sections 9.28.060(c), 9.28.100, 9.28.110,
9.28.130, and 9.28.140.
SECTION 6. Earthquake Recovery Permit Application. To
request an Earthquake Recovery Permit, the applicant must submit
a complete application on a form provided by the Planning and
Zoning Division in addition to any other material, reports,
dimensioned plans, or other information required to take action
on the application. Each application shall also include:
(a) Two estimates of the cost of repair or reconstruction
from properly licensed contractors. The estimates must contain
sufficient detail to ascertain the scope of the proposed work and
include the contractor's profit, overhead and insurance cost.
(b) For structures that have been posted with either a no
entry notice (Red-tagged) or limited entry notice (Yellow-
tagged), a written structural analysis of the structure prepared
by a licensed engineer in accordance with the standards provided
by the Building and Safety Division.
(c) Two sources of documentation of the pre-earthquake
condition of the property or structure sufficient to enable the
City to determine whether the project involves in-kind repair or
reconstruction. Documentation may include: approved building
permits; approved construction drawings; surveys from licensed
surveyors; county assessor information; certified property
appraisals; Sanborn maps; reports or drawings prepared by an
insurance company to support damage claims; photographs; City
planning records; or any other verifiable information.
SECTION 7. Review process. Each application for an
Earthquake Recovery Permit shall require plan check approval as
the final review prior to issuance of the Earthquake Recovery
Permit. In addition, the following procedures shall apply:
(a) Where the cost of repair is less than fifty percent
(50%) of the replacement value of the structure, or where less
than fifty percent (50%) of the exterior walls are removed to the
foundation (regardless of cost of repair), the following review
or reviews will be required:
(1) If there is not a significant design change from
the original design, plan check only.
(2) If the project includes a Size Incentive,
Administrative Approval ("AA") is required.
(3) If there is a significant design change,
Architectural Review Board ("ARB") review is required. Single
family homes are not subject to ARB review pursuant to this
subsection unless the structure is also landmark eligible.
If an application requires both AA and ARB review, AA review
shall precede ARB review.
(b) Where the cost of repair equals or exceeds fifty
percent (50%) of the replacement value of the structure, and
fifty percent (50%) or more of the exterior walls are removed to
the foundation, but the development on the parcel is below the
development review threshold for the district in which it is
located, ARB review shall be required. If the project includes a
Size Incentive, AA Review shall also be required prior to ARB
review.
(c) Where the cost of repair equals or exceeds fifty
percent (50%) of the replacement value and fifty percent (50%) or
more of the exterior walls are removed to the foundation, and the
development on the parcel is above the development review
threshold for the district in which it is located, Planning
Commission review is required prior to plan check. ARB review
shall not be required for any project requiring Planning
Commission review.
(d) Hearings and Notice. Review by the ARB or Planning
Commission shall require a public hearing, to be noticed and
conducted substantially in compliance with the provisions of
Section 9.32.180 of the Municipal Code for ARB hearings, and Part
9.04.20.22 of the Zoning Ordinance for Planning Commission
hearings. For Planning Commission hearings, notice shall be
given to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of
property within a radius of 300 feet from the exterior boundaries
of the property involved in the application.
(e) Issuance of Building Permit. A building permit shall
be issued only after the application has received all approvals
required under this Section, and after approval is granted from
the California Coastal Commission if required. A project may
apply for an Earthquake Recovery Permit before obtaining a
removal permit or determination that a removal permit is not
required from the Rent Control Board. A building permit shall
not issue, however, until such removal permit or determination is
granted.
(f) Demolition Permit. Projects receiving a Earthquake
Recovery Permit pursuant to this Ordinance shall not require a
separate demolition permit. Demolition may occur at any time
after the building permit is granted, and while the building
permit is still valid. Demolition other than pursuant to an
Earthquake Recovery Permit shall require a demolition permit
pursuant to applicable Municipal Code provisions unless the
demolition was ordered by the City's Nuisance Abatement Board.
(g) Appeals. Action of the ARB and Planning Commission
shall be appealable pursuant to the provisions of Section
9.32.160 of the Municipal Code and Part 9.04.24 of the Zoning
Ordinance, except that the appeal of any ruling of the ARB or
Planning Commission must be made within five (5) days of the date
that such ruling is made.
SECTION 8. Standards for Review. The following standards
shall govern the review of an application for an Earthquake
Recovery Permit:
(a) AA Review. AA approval shall be granted if the project
plans reflect in-kind repair or reconstruction, and any
additional square footage, height or FAR complies with the Size
Incentive requirements of this Ordinance.
(b) ARB Review. The ARB, or Planning Commission on appeal,
shall grant approval if both of the following findings can be
made:
(1) The structure's architectural design is
substantially similar to the pre-earthquake design; or, if a
significant design change is involved, the structure's
architectural design is compatible with the general area in which
it is located.
(2) If the structure is landmark eligible, the repair
will not unduly compromise the architectural or historical
integrity of the structure or potential district; or, if
reconstruction is involved, based upon an estimate from a
professional experienced in rehabilitation of historic
structures, it is not economically feasible to repair the
structure.
(c) Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission,
or City Council on appeal, shall grant approval if both of the
following findings can be made:
(1) The structure's architectural design is
substantially similar to the pre-earthquake design; or, if a
significant design change is involved, the structure's
architectural design is compatible with the general area in which
it is located.
(2) If the structure is landmark eligible, the repair
will not unduly compromise the architectural or historical
integrity of the structure or potential district; or, if
reconstruction is involved, based upon an estimate from a
professional experienced in rehabilitation of historic
structures, it is not economically feasible to repair the
structure.
(d) Plan Check. Plan check review will be limited to the
issue of whether the project complies with the requirements of
this Ordinance.
(e) Conditions of Approval. In granting approval of an
Earthquake Recovery Permit, the ARB, Planning Commission, or City
Council on appeal, may impose only such conditions as may be
deemed necessary to bring the project into compliance with this
Ordinance, or as necessary to enable the required findings for
approval to be made.
SECTION 9. Duration of Permit. The rights granted by an
Earthquake Recovery Permit shall expire if a building permit is
not issued within two (2) years of the effective date of this
Ordinance, or if the building permit expires. No extensions of
an Earthquake Recovery Permit shall be granted. After expiration
of an Earthquake Recovery Permit, any subsequent application
shall be considered an application for New Construction.
SECTION 10. Composition of ARB. For purposes of ARB review
of an application for an Earthquake Recovery Permit involving a
landmark eligible structure, structure of merit, structure within
a historic district, or structure identified on the City Historic
Resources Inventory, Volumes 1, 2, and 3 as of January 17, 1994,
two (2) members of the Landmarks Commission, appointed by that
body, shall serve as additional voting members of the
Architectural Review Board. Five (5) affirmative votes shall be
required for approval.
SECTION 11. Building Standard Compliance. The following
building standards govern any work performed pursuant to an
Earthquake Recovery Permit:
(a) When the cost of repair does not exceed ten percent
(10%) of the replacement value of the structure, only the damaged
portion of the structure may be restored to the pre-earthquake
condition without complying with Current Technical Codes.
Notwithstanding the above, when the repair includes repair to
suspended ceiling systems, the repair must comply with Current
Technical Codes.
(b) When the cost of repair is greater than ten percent
(10%) but less than fifty percent (50%) of the replacement value
of the structure, the damaged elements, as well as the essential
ties and support elements associated with the damaged elements,
shall be brought into conformance with the structural
requirements of the Current Technical Codes.
(c) When the cost of repair exceeds fifty percent (50%) of
the replacement value of the structure, the entire structure
shall be brought into conformance with the Current Technical
Codes.
(d) Landmark eligible buildings shall comply with
subsections (a) through (c) above; however, an owner may request
a modification of the above standards which shall be granted so
long as the requested modification is consistent with Part 8,
Title 24, California Code of Regulations, the State of California
Historical Building Code.
(e) Notwithstanding (a) - (c) above, the provisions of
Ordinance Number 1729(CCS) concerning repair and reconstruction
criteria for unreinforced chimneys and walls over 42 inches in
height shall apply to any project obtaining an Earthquake
Recovery Permit.
(f) The standards of this Section shall constitute minimum
standards. Nothing in this Section 11 shall be construed to
prohibit an owner from repairing or reconstructing a structure to
a higher standard than set forth in this Section.
SECTION 12. Compliance With Other Laws. Except as
otherwise specifically provided in this Ordinance, projects
obtaining an Earthquake Recovery Permit shall not be required to
comply with the following provisions of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code:
(a) Chapter 7.10 concerning Urban Runoff Pollution;
(b) Chapter 9.04 concerning Zoning Regulations;
(c) Chapter 9.28 concerning Inclusionary Housing;
(d) Chapter 9.32 concerning Architectural Review;
(e) Chapter 9.36 concerning Landmarks and Historic
Districts; and
(f) Chapter 9.40 concerning the Third Street Neighborhood
Historic District Standards.
Except as specifically exempted in this Section, projects
obtaining an Earthquake Recovery Permit shall comply with the
Municipal Code and all other applicable laws and regulations.
For purposes of Chapter 9.52, the Santa Monica Sign Ordinance,
nonconforming signs removed during work performed pursuant to an
Earthquake Recovery Permit shall not be replaced, or shall be
modified to conform to the requirements of the Sign Ordinance.
SECTION 13. Right of Displaced Tenant to Reoccupy
Residential Housing Unit. A tenant displaced from a residential
housing unit in an earthquake damaged structure shall be entitled
to reoccupy the unit in accordance with the following provisions:
(a) Any owner who reconstructs a residential housing unit
pursuant to an Earthquake Recovery Permit shall first offer the
reconstructed unit for rent or lease to any tenant who has been
displaced from the unit due to the need to undertake the
reconstruction. This requirement shall apply only if the tenant
within thirty (30) days of the displacement or the adoption of
this Ordinance, whichever is later, has provided the owner with
written notice of his or her desire to consider an offer to renew
the tenancy and has furnished the owner with an address to which
that offer is to be directed. That tenant may advise the owner
at any time during the displacement period of a change of address
to which an offer is to be directed.
(b) Within fifteen (15) days after final City sign-off on
the building permit authorizing the reconstruction, the owner
shall submit a good faith offer to renew a rental agreement or
lease on terms permitted by law to any displaced tenant who has
complied with the requirements of subdivision (a) of this
Section. The owner shall also inform the tenant of the expected
date that the unit will be available.
(c) This offer shall be deposited in the United States
mail, by registered or certified first class mail with postage
prepaid, addressed to the displaced tenant at the address
furnished to the owner as provided in this Section and shall
describe the terms of the offer. The displaced tenant shall have
thirty (30) days from the deposit of the offer in the mail to
accept the offer by personal delivery of that acceptance or by
deposit of the acceptance in the United States mail by registered
or certified first class mail with postage prepaid.
(d) The City shall make available official forms to tenants
entitled "Notice of Desire to Renew Tenancy" and "Notice of
Change of Address" which may be utilized by tenants to meet the
requisite notice requirements of this Section.
(e) Within five (5) days after final City sign-off on the
building permit authorizing the repair of an earthquake damaged
structure, any owner who was required to recover possession of a
residential housing unit due to the need to undertake the repairs
shall notify the displaced tenant that the unit is ready for
reoccupancy. Prior to displacement or within thirty (30) days
after adoption of this ordinance, whichever is later, the owner
shall obtain an address to which the tenant notification is to be
directed. Any tenant who has been displaced from such a unit for
a period exceeding fourteen (14) days shall have fourteen (14)
days from the receipt of the owner's notice to reoccupy the unit
and recommence rental payments in the amount established by the
Rent Control Board. An owner shall be relieved of the
obligations specified in this subsection only if the tenant has
previously terminated his or her tenancy in the unit in a manner
authorized by law.
(f) A copy of any notice required to be provided to an
owner or a displaced tenant under this Section shall be provided
to the Santa Monica Rent Control Board within two (2) business
days after it is provided to the owner or displaced tenant.
(g) No owner or agent of the owner shall rent a residential
housing unit in an earthquake damaged structure to a new tenant
unless the owner has complied with the terms of this Section or
is otherwise excused from complying with this Section.
(h) Any displaced tenant may prosecute a civil action to
enforce this Section. The relief available to the tenant in such
an action shall include money damages, equitable relief, and
reasonable attorneys' fees.
(i) The right of a displaced tenant to reoccupy a
residential housing unit as established in this Section is in
addition to any right to reoccupancy that may otherwise be
authorized by law or contract.
(j) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 5 of this
Ordinance to the contrary, a displaced tenant may have priority
for the rental of affordable housing units. This priority will
be established by administrative regulation to be adopted by the
City's Housing and Redevelopment Division.
SECTION 14. Construction Hours and Construction Rate
Program. Construction hours for all construction, whether
pursuant to an Earthquake Recovery Permit or otherwise, shall be
7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. through 6 p.m.
on Saturday. The provisions of the North of Wilshire
Construction Rate Program shall not apply. The provisions of
this Section 14 shall no longer be effective two years from the
effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 15. California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
Exemption. Notwithstanding existing City CEQA Guidelines,
pursuant to Section 15269 of the State CEQA Guidelines and the
State of Emergency declared by the Governor of California,
projects undertaken pursuant to an Earthquake Recovery Permit
shall be considered categorically exempt from the requirements of
CEQA.
SECTION 16. Fee Waivers. The City Council authorizes the
City Manager or his or her designee to waive payment of any
permit processing fees or such other applicable fees as may
otherwise be necessary for the repair and reconstruction of
earthquake damaged buildings or structures, if the City Manager
in his or her sole discretion deems such waiver appropriate to
facilitate the speedy repair or reconstruction of any building or
other structure damaged by the January 17, 1994 earthquake or its
aftershocks.
SECTION 17. Ordinance Numbers 1720(CCS), 1722(CCS),
1725(CCS), and 1730(CCS) are hereby repealed.
SECTION 18. Any provision or 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 effect the provisions of this
Ordinance.
SECTION 19. This Ordinance is declared to be an urgency
measure adopted pursuant to the provisions of Section 615 of the
Santa Monica City Charter. It is necessary for preserving the
public health, safety, or welfare as set forth in the Findings
and Purpose section of this Ordinance.
SECTION 20. 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 all
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would not have passed this Ordinance if any
portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase would
subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 21. 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 be
effective upon its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney