City Council Meeting: April 24,
2007
Agenda Item: 7-D
To: Mayor and City Council
From:
Subject: Emergency interim ordinance to
establish a discretionary review process for single room occupancy housing developments
throughout the City above a specified threshold, extension of the development
review requirement to all projects in the Light Manufacturing and Studio
District above a specified threshold, consideration of a Conditional Use Permit
process for single room occupancy housing, and consideration of pedestrian-oriented
design standards and/or uses for projects located in the Broadway Commercial
District
Recommended
Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt
the subject emergency interim ordinance, which:
1.
Establishes a Development
Review permit for single room occupancy projects with 40 or more units or more
than 15,000 square feet of actual floor area throughout the City; and,
2.
Extends the Development
Review permit requirement to all projects over 7,500 square feet in area
located in the Light Manufacturing and Studio District
Executive
Summary
On April 10, 2007,
the City Council directed staff to evaluate and prepare an emergency ordinance
to provide greater oversight of certain development activity to address
potential neighborhood impacts due to the significant project size and lack of
discretionary review. The intent of this action is to protect the community
effort and direction made with the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE)
update planning effort, and to ensure that development proposals of
considerable size provide adequate process for public review and consideration
of possible adverse impacts to the environment.
The City Council
specifically identified large single room occupancy developments as projects
requiring discretionary review in order to effectively evaluate potential
impacts. At Council’s direction, staff analysis includes all development
activity in the Light Manufacturing and Studio District (LMSD) to ensure
current and planned development proposals do not conflict with or preclude City
policy direction forthcoming in the General Plan and zoning ordinance update.
This report examines
these two issues and also presents alternatives to require pedestrian-oriented
uses on the ground floor of projects located in the Broadway Commercial
District. Attachment A contains an emergency ordinance to implement the
recommendations in this report. There are no budget impacts associated with this
item.
Discussion
Background
The City continues to maintain a long standing
commitment to the production of housing generally and affordable housing
specifically. Recent amendments to the Municipal Code include adjustments to the
on- and off-site affordable housing requirements; affordable housing fee;
development review thresholds for certain housing projects; and, enhancement of
the City’s local density law consistent with the State Density Bonus law. All of
these examples reflect and reinforce this important policy objective. In
addition, affordable housing projects throughout the City will continue to be eligible
for the following development incentives, as applicable:
·
Ten foot increase in building height (commercial property)
·
Fifty percent floor area bonus (commercial property)
·
Setbacks reductions
·
Unexcavated side yard limitations
·
Higher Development Review threshold or straight exemption (in most
districts)
Single room occupancy (SRO) housing is one
component of the City’s approach to address local and regional housing needs. This
form of housing limits the size of units to 375 square feet and benefits from
reduced parking standards, elimination of open space requirements and exemption
from discretionary review, except for design-related matters, which are
evaluated by the City’s Architectural Review Board. Traditionally, SROs have
been viewed and provided as a form of very affordable, transitional housing for
those in need. However, recent development activity suggests there may be a
shift to this paradigm.
Developers are beginning to propose projects
that capitalize on code incentives related to SROs. It is anticipated that
these units will be marketed as a form of workforce housing for young
professionals, students and other individuals. Most of these units will be deed
restricted and available for households earning 80% of the
While there are clear benefits for providing
workforce housing in the City, using SROs to accomplish that form of housing
requires careful review. The largest SRO units are comparable in size to a
standard two car garage. While the Zoning Ordinance limits the number of occupants
that can live in each unit to two persons, the small size of the units significantly
increases density because more units can be accommodated on-site. Other multi-family
projects typically contain bedrooms and have larger floor plans. Comparatively,
this reduces overall density and serves to advance public policy objectives
that support more family-sized housing opportunities. Given the size, scope,
and location of recent SRO projects, there is concern that these developments will
conflict with and/or preclude the City from advancing policy objectives being
articulated by the public through the ongoing LUCE project. This requires
re-evaluation of certain policies related to SROs and development in the LMSD.
Land Use and Circulation Element
For over two and half years the City has been
actively engaged in a process to re-examine land use policy, identify
priorities, and establish a plan to direct all future development and
circulation patterns as well as infrastructure in the City. Most recently, the
City held three neighborhood workshops that were attended by over 200
residents. Earlier outreach efforts received input from thousands of residents,
business owners, and visitors. Throughout this effort, participants have
expressed a desire to preserve neighborhoods, address traffic and ensure that
future development is appropriately scaled. Significantly, the LUCE project is
looking at these and other issues:
·
Involving the community in creating a shared vision for the City;
·
Defining how the City should look, function, and evolve;
·
Integrating planning and transportation policy;
·
Establishing consistency and predictability for residents,
business owners and property owners, through clear policies, standards and
design guidelines;
·
Creating a planning and review framework where projects will enhance
the quality of the built environment;
·
Understanding and defining community benefits;
·
Identifying and planning infrastructure needs to accommodate City’s
future direction; and
·
Establishing appropriate land uses and land use patterns to
support the future Exposition Light Rail line.
While the entire City is being evaluated through
the LUCE effort, the LMSD in particular is regarded by many as the most
significant opportunity to advance public policy and create new community places,
neighborhoods, and improve mobility and the pedestrian environment.
Light Manufacturing and Studio District
The LMSD presents the City with some of the
greatest challenges and opportunities as it evolves in the future. Some of issues
that are frequently discussed include:
·
preserving light industrial uses;
·
protecting small businesses;
·
providing family housing opportunities;
·
advancing sustainability principles;
·
creating opportunities for transit oriented development;
·
supporting light rail stations with connections to the broader
·
evaluating appropriate land uses and circulation needs to support
a future vision; and,
·
identifying and planning infrastructure requirements and capital
improvement opportunities.
LMSD is unique in the City because it has
unusual lot patterns and street alignments. The average parcel size in LMSD is
nearly five times greater in area than the City’s typical 7,500 square foot lots.
This part of the City is also receiving a considerable amount of development
pressure. Nearly 44 percent of all currently proposed housing units in the City
are located in this area, as shown in the following table:
|
HOUSING UNITS PENDING APPROVAL |
||
|
|
LMSD |
Citywide (including LMSD) |
|
SRO |
623 |
758 * |
|
Artist Housing |
50 ** |
217 |
|
Other Multi-family Housing |
|
551 |
|
TOTAL HOUSING UNITS |
673 units |
1,526 units |
|
* Three
SRO housing projects were administratively approved since December 2005
creating 211 additional units. 165 of those units were approved in the LMSD ** A 22-unit Artist Studio project was approved
in 2006 |
||
Another 145 unit SRO project is planned, but has
not been filed with the City. It is anticipated that this project will be
located at or around
The significant increase in planned SRO units in
the City compared to prior years suggests an urgent need to reassess policies
related to SROs and evaluate potential impacts caused by large, high density,
SRO developments. Moreover, a coordinated and comprehensive planning process is
needed in the LMSD area, which is quickly changing in an unplanned manner with
respect to street connections, open space and other public benefits and infrastructure.
Closer scrutiny of development activity in the LMSD through the discretionary
review process can significantly benefit the City’s ability to plan this area.
It is important that projects being advanced through the entitlement process be
subject to an appropriate level of public and environmental review. Similarly,
large single room occupancy projects receiving significant City incentives also
require a process in which to evaluate neighborhood compatibility, building
mass and scale, parking, open space and potential environmental impacts.
Analysis
Single Room Occupancy Housing
SRO projects on commercial or industrial land do
not have density limitations, other than code-established restrictions to
height and floor area. In many districts, housing floor area is also discounted
creating an opportunity for even more building area. The most recent SRO
projects approved by the City include 502
Recent development activity, however, suggests significantly
larger SRO projects may be in demand. As stated earlier, 758 of the 1526 housing
units pending City approval are SROs, which represent nearly half of all
proposed units. There are another 145 SRO units anticipated in the near future.
This is a significant increase in this type of housing and a unit density
increase that greatly exceeds historic development patterns.
Larger projects support greater density and can
take advantage of building height incentives and benefit from an administrative
approval process when the units are deed restricted for affordable housing. The
impacts of a large SRO project, given current standards, cannot be significantly
evaluated for potential impacts to neighborhood character, traffic impacts or
other quality of life or environmental impacts because they are
administratively reviewed. Establishing a public review process would provide
project neighbors, the public, and the City an opportunity to evaluate the
impacts associated with a project and require changes or modifications to
address those impacts. Depending on the size and scope of the development, an
environmental impact report may be required.
The City’s current Development Review (DR) permit
is the most appropriate application type to apply to these projects. If the DR
threshold is met, a public hearing is required. Findings must also be approved
that relate to:
·
building scale and mass;
·
placement of the structure on the site;
·
compatibility with surrounding sites and the neighborhood;
·
compliance with the General Plan
·
ability of City infrastructure to accommodate the development; and,
·
implementation of reasonable mitigation measures identified in the
environmental review process.
Significantly, even if the proposed ordinance is
adopted, SRO projects, including affordable SRO housing, will continue to be
allowed throughout the City and will be eligible for many existing incentives,
including height bonuses and reduction in parking and open space requirements,
as applicable. The DR process ensures that SRO projects will receive adequate
evaluation.
Accordingly, it is recommended that the
threshold for SRO projects throughout the City be established based on the
number of units and the size of the project. Specifically, an SRO project,
regardless of its household income affordability, should require a DR permit if
it contains 40 or more units or more than 15,000 square feet of actual floor
area, inclusive of any floor area incentives offered by the Municipal Code to
encourage housing. This threshold is appropriate given the densities that can
be achieved in this type of project and the potential impacts related to the
mass and scale. This review would be subject to the constraints
imposed by State law. Depending on the project size, it may also
allow for consideration of potential environmental impacts associated with a
project.
Light Manufacturing & Studio District
Similarly, because of the important and
continuing effort to establish a future vision in the City generally and the
LMSD specifically, it is recommended that all development projects that exceed 7,500
square feet of actual floor area in the LMSD area, inclusive of any floor area
incentives offered by the Municipal Code, require a DR permit. Most projects in
LMSD are already subject to this standard. Extending this provision would
require a few discrete projects that are currently exempt from the standard to
obtain discretionary approval. Establishing a DR threshold to all projects over
7,500 square feet in LMSD will provide the public and the City an opportunity
to evaluate projects for consistency with applicable policy documents,
including policies that support family-sized housing, sustainable practices,
improved architectural quality, neighborhood compatibility, and opportunities
for a more pedestrian environment. It also seeks to protect the community
effort and progress made with the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element
(LUCE) update project and ensures that development proposals of considerable size
provide adequate process for public review and consideration of possible
adverse impacts to the environment.
Both SRO housing projects throughout the City
and new development in the LMSD will continue to be eligible for all density
and height incentives afforded by State Law and the City regulations. As
recommended in the attached emergency ordinance, these projects will not be
eligible for the DR permit exemption set forth in Santa Monica Municipal Code
section 9.04.10.14.050 (Exceptions from development review thresholds). This
section allows certain housing projects to be exempt from DR threshold if a
specified percentage of floor area is devoted to affordable housing.
First Floor Pedestrian-Oriented Design
The City Council previously considered the
appropriateness of requiring pedestrian-oriented uses on the first floor in
projects located along Broadway in the Broadway Commercial District. At that
time, the discussion was deferred for consideration in the ongoing LUCE effort.
However, recent development activity along Broadway has raised the question
again as to whether this issue should be advanced prior to completion of the
LUCE project.
Pedestrian-orientation continues to receive a
considerable amount of attention from participants in the LUCE planning effort.
Community input supports a strong desire to make
The role of the Broadway corridor is currently
being evaluated as part of the LUCE planning effort. It is anticipated,
however, that Broadway will continue to serve as a mixed-use neighborhood
supporting housing, office and retail uses. Currently, ground floor pedestrian-oriented
uses are not required in the BCD. While housing projects represent the most
recent activity along this street and have been receiving the most attention, some
offices, which are not regarded as pedestrian-oriented, are also permitted on
the ground floor. The Municipal Code includes a provision that establishes
pedestrian-oriented design standards for all projects in the BCD. However, the
code also allows an applicant to seek a modification to those standards through
the Architectural Review Board. In the past, some projects, especially housing
projects, have received approval to deviate from the standards.
To further advance pedestrian-oriented design Downtown,
the City Council recently enacted an ordinance that set specific standards to
regulate ground floor space, including first floor window height. Establishing
standards is important to create the kind of pedestrian environment that has
been expressed participants of the LUCE effort. Design standards can also serve
as a mechanism to encourage and support more pedestrian-oriented uses.
If the Council desires to expand the
pedestrian-oriented design standards to the BCD, staff recommends it apply the
recently approved Downtown standards, or some version of it, as model for
Broadway. While language is not included in the emergency ordinance, staff will
be prepared with draft ordinance language at the public hearing.
Alternatives
As an alternative to the recommended action, the
City Council could also consider the following, subject to constraints imposed
by State law:
1.
Requiring discretionary review for all projects
located in the LMSD.
By requiring a Development
Review permit for all projects adding any square footage and/or requiring a
Conditional Use Permit for any change of use in the district, the Council could
further ensure that the future evolution in this part of the City is consistent
with existing and planned policy objectives. This approach will provide a forum
whereby the Planning Commission, and City Council on appeal, could be involved
in a case by case review of all projects in the LMSD area - an area that the
Commission has been studying closely as part of the ongoing LUCE planning effort.
2.
Require a Conditional Use Permit for all SRO
projects in the City, in addition to the DR permit.
The size, mass and scale of
large SRO projects raise significant issues regarding neighborhood
compatibility and, as recommended in this report, should be subject to a DR
permit. With the apparent market shift in some SRO housing projects away from a
very low and low income level household to a more moderate income household,
the City Council may want to consider whether it is also appropriate to require
a Conditional Use Permit when a DR permit is required. This provision would not
extend the time to process the applications, but it would increase application
fees by approximately $1,300. The benefit of this action is that the project
would then also be subject to specific findings that evaluate the proposed use
to the integrity and character of the district; the compatibility with other
land uses; and, provide that a large SRO project would not be detrimental to
the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare.
3.
Require pedestrian-oriented uses on the ground
floor level in the BCD.
The discussion in this report
related to pedestrian-orientation in the BCD addresses specific design
standards to encourage pedestrian uses, though these uses are not required. One
alternative the City Council may consider is to require pedestrian oriented
uses as well as design. The City Council could apply this standard to all
development in the BCD, or just housing projects, including SROs.
Pedestrian-oriented uses are permitted land uses in the BCD.
4.
Reject the subject emergency ordinance and
direct staff to evaluate the issues identified in this report in the LUCE
project.
The impact of this alternative
cannot be fully assessed, but it could limit the City’s effort to establish a
new community vision and disrupt specific, future policy objectives in the
LMSD. Also, SRO projects throughout the City would continue to be evaluated on
an administrative level precluding the opportunity for neighborhood
compatibility analysis or environmental review. This may result in unmitigated
impacts.
Environmental Analysis
The proposed emergency interim 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 applies only to projects having the potential to cause a significant
effect on the environment. The proposed reduction in development review
thresholds does not have this potential. Rather, the proposed amendment will
expand the number of projects subject to discretionary review and evaluated
pursuant to CEQA, while enhancing the public review process.
Budget/Financial Impact
There are no funding implications associated with the recommendations
contained in this report.
Prepared by: Jonathan Lait, AICP, Principal Planner
|
Approved: |
|
Forwarded to Council: |
|
|
|
|
|
Eileen Fogarty Director, Planning & Community Development |
|
P. City Manager |
Attachment A: Emergency
Interim Ordinance
ATTACHMENT
A
EMERGENCY
ITNERIM ORDINANCE
f:\atty\muni\laws\barry\drthresholdinterimord4-24-07
City Council Meeting 4-24-07
ORDINANCE NUMBER (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW THRESHOLDS, INCLUDING
ESTABLISHING A DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS FOR SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY
DEVELOPMENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJETS IN THE LMSD,
THAT MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA,
AND DECLARING THE PRESENCE OF AN EMERGENCY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF
(a)
(b)
Approximately 87,000 people live in the City, on weekdays there are
about 300,000 present in the City, and on weekends and holidays the number of
persons in the City soars to between 500,000 and 1 million.
(c)
(d)
(e) In
the last 25 years, land values within the City have soared due, in large part,
to the land’s scarcity and prime location, the excellent climate, and to the
desirability of living and working in a community which offers a vast array of
urban amenities and services, a unique sense of community, pedestrian-oriented
scale, and economic and social diversity.
(f) In
recent years, ever-escalating land values, economic prosperity, and changes in
state law have fueled a massive increase in development which has significantly
altered the physical and social landscape of the City.
(g) Throughout
this period of rapid development and change, the City Council has adopted a
series of laws relating to land use and housing which were intended to strike
and restrike the balance between potentially conflicting municipal values and
policies in order to best protect the health, safety and welfare of
(h) During
the last ten years, land use planning and regulation in Santa Monica has been
driven by the ceaseless effort to balance the City’s commitment to maintaining economic
and social diversity through the maintenance and production of housing for all
economic segments of the community, with its commitment to protecting the
environment, preserving the quietude of residential neighborhoods, and
maintaining the experience of life on a human scale.
(i) During
that time period, the City Council has adopted a series of laws intended to
foster the development of affordable housing and to concentrate housing
development in the City’s commercial districts in order to both meet housing
goals and preserve quality of life in established residential
neighborhoods.
(j)
Due to these efforts, between 1998 and 2005, 62% of new residential
developments were constructed in the City’s commercial districts and 84% of the
residential units with building permits issued as of December 2005 will be
located in these districts.
(k)
During the RHNA Planning Period of January 1, 1998 through June 30,
2005, the City issued building permits for 2,920 units, 132% of its RHNA target
of 2,208 units.
(l) The
City has also provided various incentives for the production of affordable
housing, including height and density bonuses, and reduced parking and open
space requirements.
(m) In
its continued effort to foster the production of affordable housing, in
December 2003, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 2102 (CCS) which in large
measure reduced the development review threshold in many zoning districts in
the City, but which also entirely exempted 100% “affordable” housing projects located
in most commercial districts from the development review process.
(n) A
development review permit is intended to allow the construction of certain
projects for which the design and siting could result in an adverse impact on
the surrounding area such as development that is proposed to be built to a
greater intensity and building height than generally permit in the area.
(o) A
development review permit allows for the review of the location, size, massing,
and placement of a proposed structure on the site, particularly as the project
relates to the existing context of the area in which it is located. The development review process is designed to
ensure that the development is compatible with and relates harmoniously with the
surrounding neighborhood.
(p) A
project that requires a development review permit is subject to public review
by the Planning Commission, with appeal to the City Council, whereas a project
below the development review threshold can be administratively approved.
(q) For
the most part, the City has been able to preserve residents’ quality of life
and the environment, notwithstanding significant development in an already
extremely dense environment; this has been accomplished by carefully crafting
and adjusting the public review processes applicable to development within the
City.
(r) In
July of 2004, the City began preparing a new Land Use and Circulation Element
of the General Plan and a comprehensive revision of the City’s Zoning
Ordinance, a massive project, crucial to the community’s long-term welfare,
which remains ongoing at this time.
(s) The
work on the LUCE update has included numerous public hearings and participation
by thousands of residents, business owners, and visitors. One key goal that has been repeatedly
articulated is that the City should carefully monitor future development –
particularly large-scale development – to ensure that
(t) Recent
experience shows that the policy decision to exempt all affordable housing
projects from any development review threshold must be revisited and refined in
order to protect neighborhoods and quality of life within the City,
particularly while the LUCE process is ongoing.
(u) This
recent experience includes the City’s receipt of community input as to the LUCE
update and of applications for extremely large and extremely dense affordable
housing projects.
(v)
These extremely large and dense projects greatly exceed historic
development patterns in the City. There
are many additional sites in the City which are or could be available for
similar large, dense projects.
(w) In
public hearings on the LUCE update, residents have demanded that development be
regulated strategically to perfect the policy balance between the need for new
housing and the community’s insistence upon preserving quality of life and the
environment.
(x) Residents
have noted that, in general, the development of affordable housing projects
effectuates the City’s goals and policies favoring the preservation and
creation of affordable housing; but those policies should not and were never
intended to foster development of a size, scale and density so extreme as to
threaten quality of life; nor were they intended to override the City’s strong
commitment to environmental protection.
(y) In
order to address the community’s concerns and properly balance competing
housing and environmental policies, development review requirements must be
revised as to very large, dense projects, in those parts of the City where the
protections of the process are lacking and where it is particularly imperative
that the LUCE process proceed to fruition.
(z)
Reducing the development review threshold as proposed by this ordinance
will not materially alter the City’s incentives for residential or mixed use
development throughout the City. More
specifically, among other incentives, in the City’s commercial districts, the
City will continue to either provide FAR bonuses for the residential components
of development projects or discount the residential floor area for the purpose
of calculating FAR.
(aa) As detailed
above, and in the April 24, 2007 City Council staff report, there exists a
current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare should
the interim ordinance not be adopted.
Allowing development that is inconsistent with the contemplated
revisions to the development standards to continue to occur would result in a
threat to public health, safety, and welfare.
For these reasons, the Zoning Ordinance requires review and revision as
it pertains to the development review threshold for single room occupancy
housing in the City and housing in the LMSD.
(bb) Pending
completion of this review and revision, which will occur as part of the Land
Use Element/Zoning Ordinance update, in order to protect the public health,
safety, and welfare, it is necessary on an interim basis to modify the Zoning
Ordinance to require that all single room occupancy housing in the City, except
in the LMSD, be subject to a development review permit if that housing is forty
or more units or exceeds 15,000 square feet and to require a development review
permit for all development projects in the LMSD that exceeds 7,500 square feet,
including single room occupancy housing.
(A) No development or permit shall be approved pursuant to Chapter 1 of Article IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code for single room occupancy housing in the City, unless the following standards are met:
The single room occupancy housing complies with the existing property development standards for the Zoning District in which the housing will be located except, a development review permit shall be required for any such development if it is forty or more units or it exceeds fifteen thousand square feet of floor area. In calculating whether a development review permit is required, square footage devoted to residential use shall not be reduced. The exemptions specified in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.14.050 shall not apply to single room occupancy housing that is forty or more units or that exceeds fifteen thousand square feet in floor area.
Single room occupancy housing in the LMSD shall be subject to subsection (B) of this Section 2.
(B) No development or permit shall be approved pursuant to Chapter 1 of Article IX of the Santa Monica Municipal Code for land in the LMSD District unless the following standards are met:
The project complies with the existing LMSD property development standards including the development review requirement established by Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.35.050(i), except that in calculating whether a development review permit is required, square footage devoted to residential use shall not be reduced. The exemptions specified in Section 9.04.10.14.050 shall not apply in the LMSD.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney