PCD:SF:AA:f:\plan\admin\downtown task force\code changes\cc report.doc

City Council Meeting:  June 8, 2004                                                  Santa Monica, California

 

 

TO:                  Mayor and City Council

 

FROM:            City Staff

 

SUBJECT:     Promenade Uses Task Force Legislative Amendments

 

                       

INTRODUCTION

This report recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance amending Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.15.080 to eliminate the numerical cap on restaurants in the Bayside District and expand the types of alcohol sales subject to a conditional use permit, amending Section 9.04.10.18.050 to provide for a Conditional Use Permit exemption for alcohol-serving restaurants in the Bayside District, amending Sections 9.04.08.15.020 and 9.04.08.15.040 and adding Section 9.04.13.060 to limit the Promenade frontage of any new or expanding retail use to fifty linear feet unless a use permit is obtained, and amending Sections 6.36.030 and 6.36.090 and eliminating Section 6.36.070 to expand the vending cart program subject to a license agreement; and adopt a resolution amending Bayside District Specific Plan Policy 4.1.9 to eliminate the numerical cap on restaurants in the Bayside District,  amending Policy 4.1.28 to allow for expanded outdoor dining areas on the Promenade, and adding Signage Standard 13.5.11 to allow for signage for upper-level restaurants.  The proposed legislative changes are part of a series of programming, management, capital and legislative recommendations developed by the Promenade Uses Task Force to facilitate the continued vitality and diversity of the uses on the Third Street Promenade and in the Bayside District.

BACKGROUND

Maintaining the proper balance of uses on the Third Street Promenade is an important community goal. The original Third Street Mall was primarily a pedestrian retail mall whose failure to attract residents and visitors threatened the viability of the downtown area.  In response, the City embarked upon an extensive planning and community participation process culminating in the adoption of the Third Street Mall Specific Plan, now called the Bayside District Specific Plan.  The Specific Plan was adopted by Council in January 1996 and establishes policies to preserve a unique mixture of uses, a key element to the success of the Promenade.  Over the years, Council has maintained the balance of uses by enacting zoning regulations that foster an appropriate mix of restaurant, retail and entertainment uses.

 

Information presented to Council in November 2001 showed that the mix of uses is at risk.  Five restaurants had been lost in the previous two years, with four more near or at the end of their leases.  As restaurants have left the Promenade, retail uses have grown.  The growth of retail has already exceeded the ten-year projection contained in the Bayside District Specific Plan.  Concern has been expressed that the Promenade is becoming less unique and more like a typical shopping mall.  If allowed to continue, this trend will threaten the unique character and economic and social welfare of the downtown area.

 

In response, on November 27, 2001, the City Council adopted an interim ordinance regulating the concentration of ground floor retail uses on the Promenade by limiting the total linear footage and square footage of retail on each block.  The Council also established a Promenade Uses Task Force to study the relevant issues, seek feedback and input from the community, and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the appropriate mix of uses on the Promenade.  The Task Force included three Council members, one Planning Commissioner, two Bayside District Corporation (BDC) board members, and one Third Street property owner.  The interim ordinance was extended twice in order to enable the Task Force to conduct its work and extended again while the Task Force recommendations are implemented.  The interim ordinance is set to expire in September 2005.

 

PROMENADE USES TASK FORCE

The Promenade Uses Task Force began meeting in May 2002 and met regularly through March 2003.  The Task Force began its meetings by discussing goals, issues and opportunities related to the vitality of the Promenade.  The Task Force also reviewed existing regulatory documents and improvement plans for the area, including the General Plan, Bayside District Specific Plan, and Downtown Parking Strategy.  Early in the Task Force process, it became apparent that outside expertise would be needed to assist the Task Force in its efforts.  Project for Public Spaces (PPS), a non-profit organization that is nationally recognized for helping communities enhance their public spaces, was engaged to provide technical assistance in support of the Task Force’s efforts. 

 

PPS commenced its efforts with the Task Force by focusing on the elements that make great public spaces, including examples of a variety of successful public spaces from around the world.  Under PPS’ guidance, the Task Force also participated in the “Place Evaluation Game”, where participants go to a public space, make critical observations of the place with respect to a variety of criteria (comfort and image, access and linkages, uses and activities, etc.), and make recommendations for short-term and long-term improvements.    

 

To help create an analytical framework for the Task Force’s deliberations, PPS conducted user intercept surveys, time-lapse filming, and activity mapping of pedestrian patterns on the Promenade and in the Bayside District.  Some of the key findings of this analysis included:

§         Unique shops and restaurants tend to be a greater draw to passersby than do formula retail establishments;

 

§         The quality and creativity of individual storefronts has an even greater influence on pedestrian appeal, irrespective of chain affiliation; and

 

§         Outdoor dining that is located on the sidewalk immediately next to a restaurant tends to disrupt the pedestrian flow along the sidewalk and discourage pedestrians from approaching the adjacent storefronts.

 

The Task Force also participated in presentations and discussions with Larry Lund, a retail expert, regarding current trends in national and local retailing.  A national trend that is particularly relevant to the Promenade is the consolidation of retailing by a small group of large retailers.  This trend has impacted the Promenade, as well as most cities throughout the nation, over the past few years and is not expected to abate within the foreseeable future.  The Task Force explored whether there is a formula regarding an appropriate mix of retail, restaurant and entertainment uses for successful urban environments.  Mr. Lund’s research shows a wide variety in the mix among successful areas, ranging from restaurant-heavy areas to areas that are virtually devoid of restaurants in the prime area, though restaurants can usually be found on nearby side streets.

 

On November 17, 2002, the Task Force hosted a public workshop attended by interested members of the community, including residents, restaurateurs, retailers, and property owners.  The workshop included a presentation by PPS of ideas and opportunities for enhancing the mix and vibrancy of the Promenade and Bayside District, followed by attendees’ participation in the Place Evaluation Game.  Some of issues, findings and recommendations identified by PPS, the Task Force and the workshop participants included:

 

§         The use and activity issues on the Promenade cannot be studied and improved in isolation, as the Promenade and adjacent streets have a symbiotic relationship and present opportunities to create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.  Certain places within the District, including Second and Fourth Streets and the alleys, are in need of the same level of attention that has been directed toward the Promenade and Transit Mall streets.

 

§         While the high rents for Promenade storefronts are out of reach for most restaurants, establishing outdoor cafes in the center of the Promenade and at the outside edges of the sidewalks could maintain the food opportunities and environmental amenities associated with restaurants.  Cafes could be associated with restaurants and kitchens that are located in more affordable locations.  Restaurants might also be created on second floors with dining terraces overlooking the Promenade.

 

§         In addition to retail and restaurants, entertainment is a key element of the Promenade’s success and acts as a draw to help support other uses.  The existing movie theaters are outdated and likely will become less competitive in the near future unless they can provide appropriate amenities such as stadium seating.  The current theater sites are generally too small to provide for these modern amenities.  However, encouraging new theater development along Second and Fourth Streets could expand the vitality of the District while maintaining this critical element in the mix of uses. 

 

§         More flexibility in the design elements on the Promenade (seating, planters, fixed kiosks, etc.) is needed to allow for outdoor dining and a greater variety of activities.

 

§         Street vendors of a more local nature could make the area more unique and help support Santa Monica-based micro-enterprises.

 

§         Appropriate resources for event programming, public space management and local business recruitment is needed to support the enhancement and expansion of the vitality of the Bayside District.   

 

In the months following the workshop, the Task Force held additional meetings with PPS and Larry Lund and concluded their meetings in March with a series of recommendations.

 

CITY COUNCIL ACTION

On June 10, 2003, the City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Promenade Uses Task Force, indicated their general concurrence with the Task Force recommendations and directed staff to return with a work program for implementation of the Task Force recommendations.

 

On September 9, 2003, Council discussed the work plan related to the Promenade Uses Task Force recommendations and identified priorities for implementation of Task Force and Bayside District Board recommendations.  At that meeting, Council also adopted Resolutions of Intention directing the Planning Commission to review and make recommendations on the Zoning Ordinance and Specific Plan changes associated with the recommendations.  

 

RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

The legislative changes recommended by the Task Force are discussed below.

 

LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD

The Task Force discussions and expert input pointed to the fact that most restaurants are unable to pay the rents that Promenade-fronting space currently commands.  The Task Force also noted that the City’s regulatory mechanisms are weighted against restaurants, and are especially adverse to independent operators, thereby creating additional barriers to new restaurants.  The following recommendations were meant to address this inequity.

Restaurant Cap

In response to concerns regarding an overabundance of establishments serving food and drink on the Promenade, in the early 1990s the City adopted caps on the total number of restaurants and alcohol-serving establishments permitted within each block of the Promenade and within the Bayside District as a whole.  Due to the drop in the number of restaurants since that time, the caps are not in danger of being approached.  As of February 2003, there were 59 food uses existing within the District, while the caps permit 76 total food uses.  Similarly, 52 food uses are permitted within the three blocks of the Promenade, while 31 food uses existed as of February.

 

Although the restaurant caps are not currently being approached, the existence of the regulatory mechanism requires any new restaurant that opens within the Bayside District to secure a permit from the City, including review of where the new restaurant stands relative to the cap.  While this permit does not require a public hearing, it does involve an additional step in the process that competes for limited staff resources within the Planning Division.  Without the cap, restaurants without alcohol service could open with as little as a business license. The following zoning ordinance and specific plan amendments would remove the restaurant caps and block-by-block alcohol caps, while retaining the overall alcohol cap for the district:

 

SMMC Section 9.04.08.15.080 Limitations on food uses and alcohol outlets.

 

    (a)    The number of alcohol and food serving establishments in the BSC District shall be limited. For purposes of this Section, a food serving establishment shall include any restaurant, including, without limitation, any drive-through or drive-in restaurant, fast-food or take-out restaurant, or sidewalk cafe, and any use which includes incidental food service. The number of food serving establishments and on-sale alcohol outlets in the BSC District shall not exceed the limitations below. For purposes of this Section, fast-food food courts shall be counted as one food serving establishment and one alcohol outlet, even though individual tenants within a fast-food food court may be required to obtain separate conditional use permits in order to obtain an on-sale alcohol license. The total number of food serving establishments and alcohol outlets in the BSC District shall be limited to seventy-six food serving establishments, fifty alcohol-serving establishments of which may have a with Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) alcohol licenses. No alcohol outlets which are not also food serving establishments shall be allowed. Additionally, the number of food serving establishments and alcohol outlets on Block 4, Block 5 and Block 6 shall be limited as follows:

    Block 4: Food Serving Establishments: Eighteen, ten of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol License, and one of which may be a fast-food food court, provided the fast-food food court is located in the northern half of the block. Type 48 (On-Sale General for Public Premise) Alcohol License: None. Other On-Sale Alcohol License Types: None.

    Block 5: Food Serving Establishments: Sixteen, ten of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol License, and one of which may be a fast-food food court.     Type 48 (On-Sale General for Public Premise) Alcohol License: None. Other On-Sale Alcohol License Types: None.

    Block 6: Food Serving Establishments: Eighteen, eleven of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol License, and one of which may be a fast-food food court. Type 48 (On-Sale General for Public Premise) Alcohol License: None. Other On-Sale Alcohol License Types: None.

 

 

Bayside District Specific Plan Policy 4.1.9:

 

The number of on-sale alcohol outlets and food serving establishments in the Bayside District shall be limited on a block by block basis in order to provide for a mix of activities including retail and entertainment, and to prevent an over concentration of food serving and alcohol outlets.

 

 

In order to prevent a future over-concentration of restaurants, the Task Force also recommended that the Bayside District monitor restaurant growth in the Bayside District and inform the City if a proliferation of restaurants appears to be underway.  Adoption of the proposed Specific Plan amendment would not reduce the City’s flexibility to impose restaurant limits within the Zoning Ordinance in the future.

Review of Alcohol-Serving Restaurants

Under the City’s existing regulations, new restaurants with alcohol service are required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit, in addition to securing Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) approval from the State.  The Task Force felt that the CUP requirement, which involves a public hearing before the Planning Commission (appealable to the City Council), can be an expensive, lengthy and uncertain process that creates a barrier for restaurateurs, particularly independent restaurateurs who may not have the resources both to finance a prolonged approval process and pay the Promenade’s elevated rents.  Recognizing that the alcohol conditions that have historically been applied by the Planning Commission are largely standard conditions, applicable to all alcohol-serving restaurants, the Task Force recommended that restaurants with alcohol service require administrative approval only, subject to uniform standards that reflect the conditions that have historically been applied by the Planning Commission.

 

If a proposed restaurant or restaurant expansion were unable to meet the pre-defined standards, a CUP and hearing before the Planning Commission would be required.  The Task Force recommended that the regulatory cap on the number of alcohol-serving restaurants remain in place.  The following zoning ordinance amendment would implement the proposed change:

 

SMMC Section 9.04.10.18.050 BSC-1 Exemptions

 

     Restaurants or “bona fide” public eating places in the BSC-1 portion of the BSC District which offer alcoholic beverages including beer or wine incidental to meal service shall be exempt from the provisions of this part 9.04.10.18 only if the applicant agrees in writing to comply with the following criteria and conditions:

(a)     The primary use of the premises shall be for sit-down meal service to patrons.  Alcohol shall not be served to persons except those intending to purchase meals.

(b)     If a counter service area is provided, a patron shall not be permitted to sit at the counter unless the patron is ordering a meal in the same manner as patrons ordering meals at the table seating.  The seats located around the counter service area cannot be used as a waiting area where patrons may drink before being seated or as a bar where beverages only are served. 

(c)      Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.

(d)     Customers shall be permitted to order meals at all times and at all locations where alcohol is being served.  The establishment shall serve food to patrons during all hours the establishment is open for customers.

(e)     The establishment shall maintain a kitchen or food-serving area in which a variety of food is prepared on the premises.

(f)        Take out service shall be only incidental to the primary sit-down use.

(g)     No alcoholic beverage shall be sold for consumption beyond the premises.

(h)      Except for special events, alcohol shall not be served in any disposable containers such as disposable plastic or paper cups.

(i)        No video or other amusement games shall be permitted on the premises.

(j)        No dancing is permitted.  Live entertainment may only be permitted in the manner set forth in the “Restaurant” definition contained in Section 9.04.02.030.730.

(k)      Any minimum purchase requirement may be satisfied by the purchase of beverages or food.

(l)        The primary use of any outdoor dining area shall be for seated meal service.  Patrons who are standing in the outdoor seating area shall not be served.

(m)   The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions.  The operator shall control noisy patrons leaving the restaurant.

(n)      The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight Sunday through Thursday, and 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday with complete closure and all employees vacated from the building by 1:00 a.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 2:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday.  All alcoholic beverages must be removed from the outdoor dining area no later than 12:00 midnight.  No after hours operation is permitted.

(o)     No more than 35 percent of total gross revenues per year shall be from alcohol sales.  The operator shall maintain records of gross revenue sources which shall be submitted annually to the City of Santa Monica Planning Division at the beginning of the calendar year and also available to the City of Santa Monica and the California Department of State Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) upon request.

(p)     Prior to occupancy, a security plan shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval.  The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.

(q)     Prior to occupancy, the operator shall submit a plan for approval by the Director of Planning regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies.  The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management's policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol-awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the employee shall attend the alcohol awareness training within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director of Planning.  The operator shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement.  The operator shall be subject to any future citywide alcohol-awareness training program affecting similar establishments.

(r)       Within thirty (30) days from the date of approval of this exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the State ABC.  

(s)      Prior to occupancy, the operator shall submit a plan describing the establishment's designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the establishment's patrons.  The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as offering on the menu a free non-alcoholic drink for every party of two or more ordering alcoholic beverages.

  This exemption shall only be valid if approved in writing by the Zoning Administrator.  

 

 

The proposed requirements reflect the standard alcohol outlet conditions associated with CUPs approved by the Planning Commission over the past three years. 

 

Council also discussed whether the streamlined approval process should apply to any restaurant with alcohol service or only to restaurants serving beer and wine.  Under the latter scenario, restaurants proposing to serve a broader array of alcoholic beverages would be required to obtain a CUP.  Because the Planning Commission’s alcohol conditions have historically been applied to both types of restaurants and have proven effective in ensuring that bona fide restaurants do not become de facto bars, staff recommends that the proposed standards and review process apply to both types of restaurants on the Promenade.  In addition, as the Task Force promoted a variety of restaurants on the Promenade, including “special occasion” restaurants that are more likely to offer a full bar with specialty beverages, a streamlined review process for all restaurants is more likely to encourage the desired restaurant variety.

 

Staff’s primary concern with the proposed regulatory process is that it would apply to only one street within the downtown, which creates additional complexity in the Zoning Ordinance and the potential for confusion among applicants and staff.  If the new regulations prove successful, Council may wish to consider expanding the proposed regulatory process to other parts of the Bayside District or to other commercial areas.

 

RESTAURANT INCENTIVES

Recognizing that indoor and outdoor dining plays an important role in the mix of uses on the Promenade and that the loss of this critical element could have long-term implications for the character and vitality of the Promenade, the Task Force also considered incentives to encourage the establishment and retention of restaurants on the Promenade.

Expand Opportunities for Outdoor Dining

The Task Force recognized that outdoor dining is critical to the Promenade’s ambiance and that more opportunities to support sidewalk cafes are essential.  The Task Force reviewed examples from other US and world cities where al fresco dining occurs in the center of pedestrian streets and on the curbside of sidewalks.  PPS also presented time-lapse video showing that restaurant-contiguous outdoor dining areas tend to disrupt the pedestrian rhythm along the Promenade, thereby discouraging pedestrians from approaching the storefronts adjacent to these dining areas.  In addition, the Task Force expected that the availability of additional outdoor dining areas could make the overall rental costs per seat more approachable for restaurants.  In order to reduce regulatory barriers to outdoor dining, the Task Force recommended that such dining be administratively approved, subject to consistency with established guidelines.  In May, 2003 the City Council adopted an interim ordinance providing for administrative approval of outdoor dining on a Citywide basis.

 

The Task Force also recommended that outdoor dining opportunities be expanded to encompass non-contiguous areas, including the outside edges of sidewalks and the three center courts of the Promenade.   Alleys were also identified as a potential dining area, which is discussed later in this report.

 

Enabling outdoor dining to occur within these areas would require a discrete amendment to the Bayside District Specific Plan, which currently permits outdoor dining within only the first 12 feet of any storefront.  In order to ensure fire and emergency service access, any dining between the curb edges of the Promenade would need to occur within the “court” areas (“center court” and adjacent to the dinosaurs on the north and south blocks) to maintain roadway access.  In addition, the extending interim ordinance related to outdoor dining which appears on tonight’s Council agenda includes consistent language related to non-contiguous dining on the Promenade.

 

The City Attorney has advised that allowing central portions of the Promenade to be used as private dining space would pose various legal risks.  Dining areas not contiguous to storefronts would create obstructions and choke points during times when the Promenade is crowded.  This would impact the flow of traffic and could also impact emergency ingress and egress. Because preserving the free flow of traffic and emergency ingress and egress is the basis for regulating street performance and other First Amendment activities, dedicating a center portion of the public street to private uses could jeopardize those regulatory schemes.  Apart from the viability of these regulatory systems, there are legal risks attendant upon attempting to close or restrict a public forum to further private interests.

 

The following discrete amendment of the Bayside District Specific Plan would be necessary to allow for the expanded outdoor dining areas:

 

Bayside District Specific Plan Policy 4.1.28:

 

Allow encroachments of up to 12 feet into the Promenade from the abutting property frontage to accommodate outdoor dining.  Uses located in the Promenade encroachment zone shall be in accordance with the approved Third Street Promenade Outdoor Dining Standards subject to an outdoor dining license agreement.   encroachment permit.  The complete outdoor dining guidelines are contained in Appendix A.

 

 

If the Specific Plan amendment is adopted, staff will return to Council with amendments to the Third Street Promenade Outdoor Dining Standards to reflect the expanded outdoor dining areas and to maintain adequate areas for pedestrian circulation and street performers.

 

Flexibility in Signage Standards for Upper-Level Restaurants

In order to encourage second-story restaurants overlooking the Promenade, the Task Force recommended more flexibility on signage above the second floor, which is currently prohibited more than 30 inches above the second story floor line.  While the municipal code allows the Architectural Review Board to grant adjustments to these requirements, the Task Force and the Council felt that affirmative language would appropriately convey their intentions in this matter.  The Planning Commission recommended that the signage allowances apply to any upper-level restaurant, not only those on the second story.  As the Signage Standards of the Bayside District Specific Plan expressly modify the sign prohibitions in the Sign Ordinance, the following Specific Plan amendment would implement this recommendation:

 

 

Bayside District Specific Plan, 13.5 SIGNAGE STANDARDS:

 

11.       For buildings with Third Street Promenade frontage, restaurant identification signage may be mounted on a building up to thirty inches above the floor line of the floor above the restaurant.   

 

 

OTHER LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS

Promenade Frontage Limitations

An important Task Force concern relates to retail uses whose frontages are too large for the Promenade and thereby adversely alter the visual character and reduce the opportunity for a wide variety of storefronts along the street.  As a result, the Task Force recommended that the Promenade frontage of any new or expanding retail use be limited to 50 linear feet, with a process to permit larger frontages under certain circumstances if a use permit is obtained.  The Council adopted an interim ordinance providing for a 50-foot limitation on Promenade frontages unless a use permit is obtained.  The following Zoning Ordinance amendment would codify these requirements:

 

Section 9.04.08.15.020 Permitted uses.

    (1)    The following uses shall be permitted in the BSC-1 portion of the BSC District, provided that any such use shall obtain a Use Permit pursuant to Section 9.04.08.15.035 if its Third Street Promenade first-floor frontage exceeds fifty (50) feet.  All uses shall be conducted within an enclosed building, except where otherwise specified:

    (a)    Art galleries.

    (b)    Artist studios above the first floor and at the rear seventy-five feet of a parcel.

    (c)    Bakeries.

    (d)    Barber or beauty shops.

    (e)    Business colleges.

    (f)    Child day care centers.

    (g)    Cleaners.

    (h)    Congregate housing.

    (i)    Cultural facilities.

    (j)    Dance studios.

    (k)    Domestic violence shelters.

    (l)    Exercise facilities.

    (m)    General offices above the first floor and in the rear seventy-five feet of a parcel.

    (n)    General retail.

    (o)    Homeless shelters with less than fifty-five beds.

    (p)    Medical, dental and optometrist clinics and laboratories above the first floor and in the rear seventy-five feet of a parcel.

    (q)    Multi-family dwelling units.

    (r)    Museums.

    (s)    Outdoor newsstands.

    (t)    Pawnbrokers.

    (u)    Photocopy shops.

    (v)    Places of worship.

    (w)    Restaurants, subject to the limitations contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080.

    (x)    Senior group housing.

    (y)    Senior housing.

    (z)    Sidewalk cafes, subject to the provisions of the Outdoor Dining Standards for the Third Street Promenade, approved by resolution of the City Council, and subject to the limitations contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080.

    (aa)    Single-room occupancy housing.

    (bb) Tailors.

    (cc)    Trade schools.

    (dd) Transitional housing.

    (ee)    Accessory uses which are determined by the Zoning Administrator to be necessary and customarily associated with and appropriate, incidental, and subordinate to, the principal permitted uses and which are consistent and not more disturbing or disruptive than permitted uses.

    (ff)    Other uses determined by the Zoning Administrator to be similar to those listed above and which are consistent and not more disturbing or disruptive than permitted uses.

    

Section 9.04.08.15.040 Conditionally permitted uses.

    (1)    The following uses may be permitted in the BSC-1 portion of the BSC District subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Additionally, any use for which the Third Street Promenade first-floor frontage exceeds fifty (50) feet shall obtain a Use Permit pursuant to Section 9.04.08.15.035:

    (a)    Bars, subject to the limitations contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080;

    (b)    Billiard parlors;

    (b)    Bowling alleys;

    (d)    Cinemas;

    (e)    Clubs and lodges;

    (f)    Convention and conference facilities;

    (g)    Fast-food food courts, subject to the limitations contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080;

    (h)    Homeless shelters with fifty-five beds or more;

    (i)    Hotels and motels;

    (j)    Nightclubs, subject to the limitations contained in Section 9.04.08.15.080;

    (k)    Open-air farmers markets;

    (l)    Skating rinks;

    (m)    Theaters.

   

 

Section 9.04.13.060 First-floor uses with a Third Street Promenade frontage exceeding fifty (50) feet 

 

            The purpose of this Section is to ensure a wide variety of storefronts on the Third Street Promenade.  A new or expanded use on the Third Street Promenade may have a first-floor frontage that exceeds fifty (50) feet if a use permit is obtained pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.11.010 et sec. and one of the following additional findings of fact is made:

 

(1) The proposed use is an entertainment-related use that adds to the overall vitality and diversity of the Bayside District and the use cannot be accommodated within a Third Street Promenade frontage of 50 feet or less.

 

(2) The proposed use adds to the diversity of the district by providing goods or services that are not otherwise available in the Bayside District and the use cannot be accommodated within a Third Street Promenade frontage of 50 feet or less.

 

(3) The conditions of the proposed site make it physically or practically infeasible for the use to occupy a Third Street Promenade frontage of 50 feet or less.

 

Additional Types of Alcohol Permits

Although not originally considered by the Task Force, Council directed staff to prepare a text amendment to expand the types of permitted alcohol sales in the Bayside District to allow for uses such as alcohol sales incidental to live theater and alcohol sales by specialty retailers.  Currently, the alcohol caps in the Bayside District only allow alcohol sales associated with restaurants.  The proposed changes would allow for other types of alcohol sales associated with permitted uses.  A conditional use permit would continue to be required for these types of alcohol sales, which would count toward the total number of permitted alcohol-related uses in the District.

 

Section 9.04.08.15.080 Limitations on food uses and alcohol outlets.

    (a)    The number of alcohol and food serving establishments in the BSC District shall be limited. For purposes of this Section, a food serving establishment shall include any restaurant, including, without limitation, any drive-through or drive-in restaurant, fast-food or take-out restaurant, or sidewalk cafe, and any use which includes incidental food service. The number of food serving establishments and on-sale alcohol outlets in the BSC District shall not exceed the limitations below. For purposes of this Section, fast-food food courts shall be counted as one food serving establishment and one alcohol outlet, even though individual tenants within a fast-food food court may be required to obtain separate conditional use permits in order to obtain an on-sale alcohol license. The total number of food serving establishments and alcohol outlets in the BSC District shall be limited to seventy-six food serving establishments,.  The total number of alcohol-serving establishments in the BSC District shall be limited to fifty of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine), or Type 47 (On-Sale General) alcohol license. No alcohol outlets which are not also food serving establishments shall be allowed. Additionally, the number of food serving establishments and alcohol outlets on Block 4, Block 5 and Block 6 shall be limited as follows:

    Block 4: Food Serving Establishments: Eighteen, ten of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol License, and one of which may be a fast-food food court, provided the fast-food food court is located in the northern half of the block. Type 48 (On-Sale General for Public Premise) . Alcohol Licenses: Ten None. Other On-Sale Alcohol License Types: None.

    Block 5: Food Serving Establishments: Sixteen, ten of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol License, and one of which may be a fast-food food court.     Type 48 (On-Sale General for Public Premise) . Alcohol Licenses: Ten None. Other On-Sale Alcohol License Types: None.

    Block 6: Food Serving Establishments: Eighteen, eleven of which may have a Type 41 (On-Sale Beer and Wine) or Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol License, and one of which may be a fast-food food court. Type 48 (On-Sale General for Public Premise) . Alcohol Licenses: Eleven None. Other On-Sale Alcohol License Types: None.

 

Bayside District Specific Plan Policy 4.1.9:

 

The number of on-sale alcohol outlets and food serving establishments in the Bayside District shall be limited on a block by block basis in order to provide for a mix of activities including retail and entertainment, and to prevent an over concentration of food serving and alcohol outlets.

 

Vending Carts

In order to enhance the pedestrian environment and broaden the variety of food and services available in the Bayside District, the Task Force recommended that the vending cart program be expanded to appropriate sites on the Transit Mall and that the vending options on the Promenade be expanded to include incidental food, goods and services.  The Task Force also recommended that the leasing and management of vending carts in the downtown (Promenade, Transit Mall and other downtown sites) be consolidated and simplified to provide for a stronger overall vending cart strategy. 

 

The Bayside District Leasing Guidelines, most recently approved by Council in June 2003, provide priorities for a broadened array of incidental food, goods and services in vending cart offerings.  The guidelines also anticipate expansion of the vending cart program to include appropriate sites along the Transit Mall and elsewhere in the downtown, subject to a City license agreement.  The following municipal code modifications would expand the opportunities for vending carts and consolidate the administration of vending cart leases.   

Section 6.36.030 Exemptions.

    The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to:

    (a)    Any approved participant in any farmer’ s market;

    (b)    Any approved participant in any cultural arts and crafts show (pursuant to Chapter 6.44);

    (c)    Any vendor operating pursuant to or under the authority of an approved license agreement on the Pier;

    (d)    Any vendor operating pursuant to or under the authority of an approved license agreement on the pedestrian mall established pursuant to Section 3.36.150 of this Code;

    (e)    Any approved participant in any special event authorized by the City;

    (f)    Any individual vending newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, bumper stickers or buttons;

    (g)    Any individual or organization that vends the following items which have been created, written, composed or otherwise produced by the vendor: books, cassette tapes, compact discs, paintings, photographs or any other item that is inherently communicative and has nominal utility apart from its communication.

 

Section 6.36.070 Special permit procedures for downtown vending.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, an application for a vendor permit for one of the locations set forth in Section 6.36.090(a) shall be issued in accordance with the following procedures:

    (a)    Within thirty days of the effective date of this Chapter, the City shall publish a notice that applications may be filed for vendor permits at the locations described in Section 6.36.090(a). The notice will provide that the vendor applications shall be due within thirty days of the date of the publication. Commencing on February 1, 1992, and every two years thereafter, the City shall publish notice that applications may be filed for vendor permits within thirty days of the date of the publication.

    (b)    The first vendor permits issued pursuant to this Section shall expire on June 30, 1992, unless earlier revoked pursuant to this Chapter. Subsequent permits shall be valid for a period of two years commencing on July 1st.

    (c)    The application shall indicate which one of the six locations set forth in Section 6.36.090(a) the application is being filed for by the applicant. No person shall file an application for more than one location.

    (d)    In order to file an application for the locations set forth in Section 6.36.090(a)(2) and Section 6.36.090(a)(5), the applicant shall present proof that the applicant is disabled within the meaning of any Federal or State law.

    (e)    In connection with each location for which an application has been filed, the City Clerk shall, within ten days of the close of the application period, place cards bearing the name of each applicant in a container, randomly draw the cards from the container, and create a list starting with the first applicant whose name is drawn and followed by the name of each applicant subsequently drawn. The applicant who is first on the list and meets the other standards for issuance of a vendor permit set forth in this Chapter shall be issued a vendor permit for the location for which the application has been filed.

    (f)    If any vendor permit is revoked, a vendor permit shall be issued for the remaining term of the permit to the next applicant on the list who meets the other standards for issuance of a vendor permit set forth in this Chapter.

    (g)    No application shall be accepted for any location set forth in Section 6.36.090(a) except during the time periods set forth in subsection (a) of this Section. However, if there are no applicants for a location, or no persons remaining on the list selected pursuant to subsection (e), a vendor permit shall be issued to the first person who applies for a permit for the location and meets the standards for issuance of a vendor permit set forth in this Chapter. However, in no event shall a permit be issued to any person who has already been issued a vendor permit for another location pursuant to this Section.

    (h)    The holder of a vendor permit whose permit is not renewed because the holder is not selected in accordance with the procedures set forth in this Chapter shall not be entitled to a hearing in accordance with Section 6.36.060 or any other provision of this Code.

    (i)    The applicant for a vendor permit whose application is denied because the applicant is not selected in accordance with the procedures set forth in this Chapter shall not be entitled to a hearing in accordance with Section 6.36.060 or any other provision of this Code.

    (j)    A vendor permit issued pursuant to this Section shall be revoked if the holder of the permit does not vend for at least ten days in any month. (Prior code § 6287; added by Ord. No. 1495CCS, adopted 9/26/89)

 

Section 6.36.090 Vendor location sites.

    No person issued a vendor permit pursuant to this Chapter shall vend in any location in the City except the following areas:

    (a)    Six fixed locations for which no more than one vendor permit shall be issued for each location:

    (1)    The public sidewalk at the northwest corner of Fifth Street at Arizona Avenue.

    (2)    The public sidewalk at the northeast corner of Sixth Street at Santa Monica Boulevard.

    (3)    The public sidewalk at the northwest corner of Fourth Street at Arizona Avenue.

    (4)    The public sidewalk at the northeast corner of Fourth Street at Arizona Avenue.

    (5)    The public sidewalk at the northwest corner of Fourth Street at Santa Monica Boulevard.

    (6)    The public sidewalk at the northwest corner of Fourth Street at Broadway.

    (b)    I in connection with vending from vehicles, such as catering or ice cream trucks, on any street designated in the vendor permit or on private property.

 

Density Bonuses, Fee Reductions, and Development Review Thresholds

Two Task Force recommendations, density bonuses for development with deed-restricted restaurant space and fee reduction incentives for restaurants, independent retailers and community services, were deferred to provide an opportunity to review the effects of other Task Force recommendations.  As recommended by the Task Force, the development review thresholds are being addressed as part of the Downtown Development Standards process, rather than being tied to restaurant development.     

 

 

PROGRAMMING, MANAGEMENT AND CAPITAL RECOMMENDATIONS

 In addition to the proposed legislative changes that are before the City Council for consideration, the Task Force prepared a series of recommendations related to programming, management and capital improvements that were reviewed by the Council.  Top priorities identified by the Task Force and Council are summarized below for informational purposes. 

 

New Cinema Development

Movie theaters are essential to the success, vitality and mixture of uses of the Bayside District.  However, Santa Monica’s cinemas are becoming outdated, particularly with respect to current amenities such as stadium seating, and as a result, are in danger of losing their market position in the next few years.  Reduction of the theaters’ viability could have serious repercussions for the Bayside District, especially District restaurants.  Recognizing that the current cinema sites on the Promenade are too small to accommodate contemporary theater design, the Task Force recommended that the City facilitate cinema development through Development Agreements. Locating new theaters on other downtown streets could help to enliven the entire District.

 

City and Bayside District staff is currently meeting with operators of the cinemas to discuss the City’s openness to cinema redevelopment to enhance the viability of the Downtown.  Staff is also soliciting expert assistance in exploring options to encourage the development of contemporary movies theaters.  Options may include combining cinema development with the downtown parking structure reconstruction and expansion program.

 

Expanded Bayside Services

PPS’ research shows that many successful urban business improvements districts provide a more extensive array of services than what is provided through the BDC.  These services include broader and more extensive programming and marketing, supplemental cleaning services, and concierge services that support the total visitor experience.  Because increased City financial support is not currently feasible, providing enhanced services through BDC would likely require increased assessments, compounded by the assessment proposed to support the Downtown Parking Strategy.  Discussions of this issue among BDC staff, board and members are ongoing.

 

Pedestrian and Ambient Lighting

The Task Force supported expansion of the pedestrian and ambient lighting program in the alleys and streets of downtown.  The City has received an MTA grant to pursue streetscape improvements, including pedestrian lighting, on 2nd and 4th Streets.  The project could consider installing infrastructure to support ambient lighting.  The design process is expected to commence in within the next few weeks, with construction anticipated to begin in late 2005.

 

Public Restrooms

The majority of the Task Force members supported efforts to provide new public restrooms on or immediately adjacent to the Promenade.  City and Bayside staff continue to explore options for public restrooms.

 

Alley Revitalization Demonstration Project

PPS recommended improvement of the alleys in order to enhance the overall aesthetic quality of the District and provide additional locations for dining, performance, independent retailers and other activities.   The Task Force recommended that one alley segment be selected for a demonstration project that includes capital upgrades and enhanced programming.  Given the state of the City budget, implementing capital upgrades in the alleys immediately presents a challenge.  However, alley upgrades could be considered as part of the Downtown Parking Structure program.  In order to maintain access for fire vehicles, programming within the alley rights-of-way would be limited to easily portable items; tables and chairs for dining and tents and canopies for special events would likely not be permitted.  In addition, because the alleys do not have sidewalks, measures that promote regular pedestrian traffic (such as retail or restaurant uses fronting the alleys) when vehicles and trucks are in the alleys could make the City vulnerable in the event of pedestrian injury.  Finally, because deliveries and customer pick-up now occurs during all times of the day, restricting vehicular access to certain hours of each day could present logistical challenges for area businesses.

 

BAYSIDE DISTRICT BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS

The Bayside District Board considered the proposed legislative amendments at its meetings on January 22, 2004 and February 26, 2004.  The Board voted to support the proposed amendments, with a recommendation that the proposed CUP exemption not only apply to Promenade restaurants, but to restaurants throughout the Bayside District.  This recommendation could be implemented by including the entire BSC District in Section 2 of the proposed ordinance (Attachment A).

 

Although not a part of the legislative amendments before the Council, the Board also recommended prioritization of the Programming, Management and Capital recommendations as follows:

1.      Enhanced Pedestrian and Ambient Lighting

2.      Expanded Bayside Services

3.      New Cinema Development

4.      Public Restrooms.

 

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Specific Plan amendments on April 14, 2004 and again on May 19, 2004.  Following public testimony and discussion, the Planning Commission made the following recommendations:

·        Signage allowances be made for restaurants at any level of a Promenade-fronting restaurant; the relevant text recommended by the Planning Commission been incorporated into the proposed ordinance (Attachment A);

 

·        Clarification of the applicability of findings when the frontage of a proposed Promenade business exceeds 50 feet; the relevant text recommended by the Planning Commission has been incorporated into the proposed;

 

·        Retention of the CUP requirements for alcohol-serving restaurants proposed for the Promenade, while allowing these applications to be placed on the Planning Commission consent calendar with a simplified staff report.  Striking Section 2 from the proposed ordinance (Attachment A) would implement this recommendation; and

 

·        Although not a part of the legislative amendments before the Council, the Planning Commission expressed its support for an alley demonstration project in 2nd Court alley between Broadway and Santa Monica Boulevard.

 

CEQA STATUS

The proposed ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation Guidelines in that CEQA only applies to projects having the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment.  This ordinance does not have this potential as it does not change the permitted uses in the subject district and does not change the development standards or amount of development that can occur in the district.

 

CONCLUSION       

The proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Bayside District Specific Plan and Municipal Code, in concert with the programming, management and capital recommendations of the Promenade Uses Task Force, provide important tools for maintaining and enhancing the diversity and vitality of the Third Street Promenade, Bayside District and the Downtown Core.  The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the General Plan and the Bayside District Specific Plan.

 

BUDGET / FINANCIAL IMPACT

Introduction and adoption of the proposed ordinance and resolution may result in an incremental increase in permit, sales tax revenues and license revenues if these measures are successful in promoting additional food-related uses in the Bayside district.  However, any increases are expected to be minimal individually and cumulatively within a fiscal year.

 

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading the ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code and adopt a resolution amending the Bayside District Specific Plan, as contained in Attachments A and B.

 

TEXT AMENDMENT FINDINGS

 

1.      The proposed amendment is consistent in principle with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses and programs specified in the adopted General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Objective 1.3, which reinforces Downtown as the focus of the City, supporting the greatest concentration of activity, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants as a key element in concentrating activity in the Downtown; Land Use Element Policy 1.3.1, which encourages the concentration of land uses and activities Downtown which create activity in both the daytime and evening hours, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants which support activity during the daytime and evening; Land Use Element Policy 1.3.2, which makes Downtown a primary location for uses that encourage street activity after normal business hours, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants which provide outdoor dining areas that enliven the streets during evening hours; and Land Use Element Policy 1.4.1, which concentrates comparison retail use and other complementary uses, such as restaurants, on or near the Third Street Promenade, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants on the Third Street Promenade.

 

2.      The public health, safety and general welfare require the adoption of the proposed amendment, in that the amendment would provide for the continued diversity and vitality of the Third Street Promenade, a primary retail, restaurant and entertainment destination for Santa Monica residents, businesses, and visitors.

 

SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT FINDINGS

 

The proposed amendment is consistent in principle with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses and programs specified in the adopted General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Objective 1.3, which reinforces Downtown as the focus of the City, supporting the greatest concentration of activity, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants as a key element in concentrating activity in the Downtown; Land Use Element Policy 1.3.1, which encourages the concentration of land uses and activities Downtown which create activity in both the daytime and evening hours, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants which support activity during the daytime and evening; Land Use Element Policy 1.3.2, which makes Downtown a primary location for uses that encourage street activity after normal business hours, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants which provide outdoor dining areas that enliven the streets during evening hours; and Land Use Element Policy 1.4.1, which concentrates comparison retail use and other complementary uses, such as restaurants, on or near the Third Street Promenade, in that the amendment supports the creation and retention of restaurants on the Third Street Promenade.

 

Prepared by:              Suzanne Frick, Director

                                    Andy Agle, Assistant Director

                                    Planning and Community Development Department

 

                                    Jeff Mathieu, Director

                                    Elana Buegoff, Senior Economic Development Analyst

                                    Resource Management Department

 

Attachments:

A.     Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code

B.     Resolution Adopting an Amendment to the Bayside District Specific Plan