CITY HALL — The process for revising Santa Monica's master zoning code continues to grind forward with residents reiterating opposition to the plan at the micro and macro level.
Santa Monica's master zoning code has expired and development within the City is being governed by specific development agreements that provide unique restrictions/guidelines on a per-project basis. The City has an interim zoning regulation that stipulates legal restrictions on development and the Land Use Circulation Element (LUCE) that expresses the desires of the community in a non-binding way. In some cases, the two are in conflict and an update to the zoning code is needed to reconcile the differences.
The City is working on an update to the master zoning ordinance and sections of the proposed updates were discussed at the Dec. 3 Planning Commission meeting as part of an ongoing process culminating in approval of a new Zoning Ordinance Update in June of 2015 by City Council. Discussion at the Dec. 3 meeting was supposed to focus on Divisions 1 (introductory provisions) and 5 (general terms) of the plan.
Brad Misner, principal planner in the City's planning division said the goal was to establish a base from which more complex elements could be understood.
"Our belief is that with an understanding of the provisions and general terms, that will form a basis, a foundation for understanding the remainder of the code," he said.
However, the entire document was open for debate and while some comments did address specifics of Divisions 1 and 5, some speakers continued to voice frustration at the entire process or address broader concerns about the future of development in Santa Monica.
Three specific topics have become a rallying point for some residents. There is opposition to allowing "activity centers" on Wilshire Blvd., to the conversion of some residential lots to commercial use and to the proposed density of development allowed along Wilshire. Speakers criticized the process for leaving their concerns out of the most recent draft of the rules but staff said some concerns have been addressed and those that were omitted were left out because the limited scope of the zoning rules require some changes be discussed in another venue.
Misner said staff has read every comment made by residents but that only those directly relevant to amending the zoning code can influence the current process.
"As we were putting together the red line draft, many comments fell into a very large policy discussion area and in some instances it didn't have a bearing on the zoning ordinance, and I say that knowing that I'm not trying to be slight," he said. "It's just that when you talk about an issue like activity centers, activity centers are a concept that's in the land use and circulation element, and the ability to have activity centers is predicated on a specific planning process, so what you'd find in the red line zoning ordinance is one page that talks about any activity center will go through that process so there really wasn't an in-depth response we could make there. Things that were very specific about technical aspects of the code we reviewed and many times it informed how we drafted the red line. There were some instances when frankly it didn't rise to the level that required a change."
Longtime residents Brian and Cheryl Stecher were the first to address the commission during public comment and Cheryl said neighbors had participated in the process for years with the issue of activity centers, development on Wilshire and the so called A-lots rising to the top of their priority list.
"We felt betrayed at the last planning commission, this effort was apparently ignored and these three issues that matter most to our neighborhood were singled out for exclusion from further discussion," said Brian.
Commissioner Jim Ries said he expected to hear many similar comments throughout the meeting and said the commission isn't deaf to the community's concerns, but said the process of updating the zoning code must conclude before those specific issues can be addressed.
"It certainly wasn't that we were ignoring you or that you were betrayed," he said.
Other speakers during the meeting did provide input on specific issues including the definition of creative office space, the statement of purpose for zoning, maximum building heights, the overall pace of development and a feeling that the rules favor businesses over residents.
The Commission will continue to discuss the proposed update at its meetings on Dec. 10, Dec. 17, Jan. 7. Jan. 14., Jan. 21 and Jan. 28. The process will then continue at City Council.
matt@www.smdp.com
