When Santa Monica’s city staff was culled amid drastic budget cuts in 2020, the City shifted its focus, resulting in less emphasis on areas that would move development forward and more on essential services like public safety and trash collection. Now, nearly two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, that shift in resources has resulted in a backlog of development projects, some of which are staring down the barrel of application and permit deadlines.
In light of this, when it meets on Tuesday, Jan. 25, Santa Monica City Council will discuss extending parts of the City’s interim zoning ordinance (IZO) designed to help developers weather ongoing pandemic.
As the pandemic is poised to linger on into its third year, Council has the option to continue some or all of the special rules it developed to help ease COVID-19-related burdens.
City staff cited “the ongoing impacts of COVID-19 to City operations and the building industry,” in a report detailing an IZO that “would continue the COVID-era deadline extensions for planning entitlements, building permits, and plan reviews for projects with active planning entitlements, building permits or plan reviews as of the start of the COVID emergency, and for projects that have been issued planning entitlements, building permits, plan checks or have submitted applications for planning entitlements, building permits or plan reviews starting with the COVID emergency until December 31, 2022.”
In essence, anyone whose building project was in the pipeline at the start of the COVID-19 emergency, or who have received permits, entitlements or were in plan check during the ongoing emergency, would receive an extension on project deadlines.
“A current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and general welfare continues to exist due to the devastating impact the COVID-19-mandated closures and limitations have had on the local economy, and the proposed interim zoning regulations and emergency ordinances are necessary to stimulate economic recovery and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare,” City staff argued in the agenda report.
Though Santa Monica’s municipal code states that IZOs may be put in place for up to five years, the particular ordinances Council was set to discuss have been extended alongside the protracted local state of emergency, which began in March 2020 and, up to this point, has been extended through Jan. 31, 2022.
The item up for discussion on Tuesday would extend such deadlines for two years, with some key exceptions: “The time extension does not apply to review and permit-related actions relating to compliance with timelines set forth in SMMC Chapters 8.58, 8.60, 8.64, 8.76 and 8.80 (i.e., seismic retrofit deadlines, excluding soft-story retrofits), unless an application was pending as of March 13, 2020.”
The item goes on to state that, “for consistency,” the Landmarks Ordinance was also set to be extended for two years.
In a separate Council item, the Landmarks Ordinance IZO extension was described in greater detail.
Beginning in 2018, the City undertook a review of the Landmarks Commission’s demolition policies. In the middle of the review, the pandemic struck.
Because of staff shortages due to the pandemic, and in light of the rules that were already being scrutinized, city staff proposed a way to streamline the demolition approval process. Instead of holding a public hearing for each permit application, the City would maintain its 180-day period for the Landmarks Commission to review applications (including a 75-day waiting and public notification period).
That move was approved at the time, and is up for a two-year extension to remain in place until Nov. 13, 2023, “to allow further study and monitoring of the revised process as economic recovery continues prior to making permanent changes to the Zoning Ordinance.”
Staff said data seemed to indicate the streamlining was not having adverse effects.
Since the Commission resumed meetings in July 2020, 66 demolition applications have been filed; four of those resulted in historic designation applications filed to halt demolition. In addition, five designation applications were filed outside the demolition review process (meaning, not as a result of threatened demolition).
According to city staff, those numbers reflect the same level of public engagement in historic designation that existed outside the changed rules: “It does not appear that the revisions to the demolition review have resulted in a change in the rate of historic resources preservation.”
The public portion of the meeting is set to begin at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Jan. 25. To watch live Council meetings, go to smgov.net/video or watch on the City’s YouTube Channel.
emily@smdp.com
