TITLE
Recommendation to review and consider information related to the recommendations by the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee in relation to Neighborhood Character Stabilization and mansionization recommendations; and
Adopt a minute order requesting City Attorney, in cooperation with the Department of Planning and Building, to prepare an interim zoning ordinance pursuant to Chapter 21.50 of the Long Beach Municipal Code (LBMC), for notice and placement on the City Council agenda for hearing at its third meeting following the adoption of the minute order; further request the Department of Planning and Building and the Planning Commission to undertake a formal study of the existing zoning regulations, zoning uses, or developmental standards as are more fully described in the text of this Council letter; and request that during the period between the adoption of the subject minute order, and the adoption or rejection of an ordinance prepared pursuant to the terms of this Council letter and action, that no permit or other entitlement for use of any kind be issued for any project or proposed use, inconsistent or in conflict with the initiated action. (District 3)
DISCUSSION
This item is in response to the action taken by the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee related to Neighborhood Character Stabilization and the demolition of structures greater than 45 years or older.
A Neighborhood Character Stabilization Plan is a strategy to respond to the issue known as "Mansionization". This term is used to characterize new homes or additions that are larger in size and out of character with the existing houses in a neighborhood.
On July 17, 2007, the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee reviewed options presented by staff (Attachment A) and received testimony by a number of residents. After considering this information, the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee recommended that the City Council enact interim regulations on the size and character of homes and demolitions in specific neighborhoods. On September 18, 2007, the City Council enacted interim regulations for the Rancho Estates neighborhood, and the Los Cerritos Neighborhood. The current item deals with the adoption of interim regulations for the Belmont Heights neighborhood and the Belmont Shore neighborhood as discussed in this report.
If the City Council approves the Committee's recommendation for interim restrictions, the City Attorney will draft an interim ordinance that would temporarily alter development standards to control the size of new homes or additions, as well as limit demolitions in Belmont Heights. The intent of the interim ordinance would be to prevent development that could affect the character of the neighborhood until a full study and a permanent ordinance can be developed.
Interim Ordinances
The recommendations listed in the following sections of the report deal with interim ordinances. The LBMC (21.50.040) allows for interim ordinances to be enacted for up to one year to avoid development that would negate the impact of planning or zoning studies, or rezoning or regulation amendments relating to such studies, being considered or undertaken at the time of initiation of the interim ordinance. The LBMC allows for an interim ordinance for the purpose of prohibiting or restricting certain land uses orthe application of certain developmental standards and entitlements pending the completion of planning or zoning studies, rezonings or amendments to the zoning regulations. The specifics of an interim ordinance can include a limited number of regulatory mechanisms.
The City Council must make findings (LBMC 21.50.020) in order for an interim ordinance to be enacted. Staff feels that the necessary findings can be made, as the interim ordinances that are proposed would allow time for the completion of planning and zoning studies that could affect changes to the zoning regulations. The interim ordinance regulations are intended to prevent further development that may be inconsistent with the results of the proposed planning studies.
LBMC Section 21.50.020 states that the interim ordinance will take effect on the date that the minute order is adopted by the City Council, and that no application shall be accepted and no permits issued pursuant to the interim regulations. However, staff recommends that any plan check application submitted to the City prior to the City Council action on any of the recommended interim ordinances should be exempt from the interim regulations. In addition, the Belmont Heights Community Association has requested a delay in the effective date of the interim standard; the effective date would be October 23,2007.
IMPACTED NEIGHBORHOODS
The Housing and Neighborhoods Committee specifically identified Belmont Heights as an area where the interim zoning measures should apply. In addition, the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee requested that staff meet with Belmont Shore and Peninsula neighborhoods to discuss mansionization and recommend appropriate interim measures to address development issues identified by the community.
Since July 17, 2007, staff has met with the leadership of the Belmont Heights Community Association and hosted a publicly noticed community meeting with Belmont Shore and Peninsula neighborhoods. A total of 6,236 public notices have been mailed to all property owners within these areas. At the Belmont Shore and Peninsula meeting, comment cards were distributed and the address for an on-line survey was provided. In addition, a powerpoint presentation tailored to the neighborhood was presented.
The following sections outline the major issues raised at the public meeting and discussions with the leadership of the Belmont Heights Community Association, and possible solutions.
BELMONT HEIGHTS (See Attachment B)
The Belmont Heights Community Association (BHCA) met with City staff and the community on several occasions to discuss Neighborhood Character Stabilization and Mansionization. The BHCA held several meetings with the community to discuss the issues related to these subjects, such as demolition of older homes and significant remodels. One of these community meetings was noticed by the BHCA with direct mail to each property owner in the neighborhood. In discussions with staff, BHCA leadership requested that design guidelines for new construction or additions be developed for the area. The Housing and Neighborhoods Committee requested that an interim ordinance be enacted limiting demolitions and major remodels while a more in-depth process occurs to develop permanent standards. Based on the nature of the neighborhood issues, and after consultation with BHCA, staff recommends the following:
Interim Ordinance - Demolitions and Larqe Remodels
In order to limit projects that are out of character, and provide the City time to study the impacts projects have on neighborhood character, the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee recommends an interim ordinance that reduces existing development standards. The following are the recommended elements of an interim ordinance.
> Demolitions of existing homes should be limited and are subject to Site Plan Review.
> The current definition of "demolition" should be changed to ensure that more of the home
will remain in place during a remodel. This will help to preserve the character of the home
and neighborhood.
> Projects that include demolition of an existing structure, or an addition greater that 800
square feet, will be subject to a staff issued site plan review permit.
> No demolition of an existing home may occur until a building permit is issued for the
replacement project.
In consideration of any hardship this interim ordinance may cause to residents that have been developing plans for remodeling their homes, but have not yet submitted the plans to the Planning and Building Department, staff recommends that a process be established to provide relief from the interim ordinance. Applicants that wish to remodel and/or demolish and rebuild their homes may apply for Site Plan Review. Site Plan Review is a process that is currently established (LBMC 21.25.501) and conducted by the Director of Planning and Building. Site Plan Review ensures that new projects are compatible with existing neighborhoods in terms of scale, style and construction materials.
The fee for Site Plan Review is $4,822 plus $3.00 for each 100 square feet of new construction. The determination and conditions of a Site Plan Review is appealable for consideration to the Planning Commission. An appeal to the Planning Commission involves an additional cost of $ 2,960.00.
The BHCA also requested that if the City Council decides to approve an interim ordinance for Belmont Heights on October 9, 2007, that it not be effective until October 23, 2007. This means that the Department of Planning and Building will accept all complete applications for single-family home remodels and any demolition associated with those plans, until close of business on October 23,2007. These applications will be subject to current development standards and not subject to the interim ordinance regulations.
Lonq- Term Actions
During the interim period, staff will study current development standards, related to additions and new homes. If there is a consensus, staff will develop permanent standards and continue to work with the neighborhood to create design guidelines. The recommendations would then be forwarded to the Planning Commission and the City Council for consideration of permanent changes to the zoning regulations.
BELMONT SHORE AND THE PENINSULA (See Attachments C and D)
The community meeting was held on August 15, 2007, at Lowell Elementary School, with approximately 80 people in attendance from the Belmont Shore and Peninsula neighborhoods. Many of the people voiced concern regarding the issuance of standards variances. Some thought that these approvals were not necessarily negative and that the existing zoning standards and requirements caused the need for the variances.
Residents from Belmont Shore expressed concern about recent remodels with three stories of living space within the allowable height limit. Presently, the standards do not limit the number of stories that can fit within the building envelope. Residents of the Peninsula stated that they are generally satisfied with the current zoning standards with the exception of projections into the front yard setback. Because of the small lot sizes, the current front yard setback is only 3 feet. The Zoning Ordinance allows front porches and other types of extensions to be 6 inches from the front property line in this zoning district.
Another issue raised was the location of property lines. With the small-sized lots in the Belmont Shore and Peninsula areas, the precise location of property lines can be important with regards to determining building setbacks and the location of fences and walls. Research of surrounding cities shows that some cities require property line surveys for all projects, while most have the ability to request a survey of the property, especially for projects with minimal setbacks from the property line. When surveys are required, the property owner pays for a licensed surveyor to prepare the property line survey. The City of Long Beach currently requests builders to provide a survey on a case-by-case basis when there is a dispute or question about the property line location. Staff recommends the development of an administrative policy requiring surveys for parcels in Belmont Shore and the Peninsula.
Since this meeting took place, 59 comment cards and on-line surveys have been received for the Belmont Shore area. Seven of the responses noted that the granting of variances is a problem. Twenty-four thought that mansionization was an issue in Belmont Shore, while sixteen did not. Attendees at the community meeting had mixed response to mansionization issues.
Twenty-eight comment cards and on-line surveys have been received for the Peninsula area. In the open-ended responses, only four indicated that mansionization was a problem. The rest did not feel mansionization was a problem, but were concerned with the granting of standards variances.
In regards to the concern about granting of standards variances, when a variance is requested, it is analyzed on a case-by-case basis. The decision of whether to grant the variance is only made in these cases where a valid hardship or extreme uniqueness exists and where the neighborhood will not experience an impact. Staff will emphasize these requirements with all applications. Based on the feedback from residents, staff recommends:
Interim Ordinance - Two Stories in Belmont Shore
> A short-term solution for Belmont Shore would be to maintain the current
height limits and allow only two stories of living space (prohibiting third stories ).
Interim Ordinance - Peninsula
> No interim ordinance is recommended.
Lonq-Term Actions
In both Belmont Shore and the Peninsula, staff can evaluate the current zoning standards and make recommendations regarding changes to the Zoning Ordinance that will reduce the number of variances requested. The allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) will be studied to determine if the size of the home allowed pursuant to the current FAR, can be constructed without a variance. Also, staff will analyze the appropriateness of a decreased vehicle turning-radius for homes that are located on an alley.
In Belmont Shore and an adjustment to the height calculations as they relate to roof decks and shade covers on the roof deck should be studied.
In The Peninsula the appropriateness of architectural projections, such as a front porch, should be studied in the long-term with community participation as a primary component.
REVIEW OF DEMOLITION PERMITS
On September 18, 2007, the City Council discussed the issue of discretionary review of demolition permits for structures over 45 years of age. Based on issues raised at this meeting, staff has provided additional information for City Council consideration.
Currently, demolition permits are issued administratively, except in those cases where the demolition is associated with a larger project or in an historic district. Administrative permits are approved if basic requirements are met. In order to allow review of demolition permits to determine if a structure is an historic resource, demolition permits would have to become discretionary. Discretionary demolition permits can be denied if a building is found to be an historic resource.
Discretionary review of demolition permits could require an applicant to follow one of the three options presented below:
First Option - Consultant Preparation of a Historic Assessment Survey
1. Applicants would provide an historic assessment survey of their property. An historic assessment survey is a document prepared by a qualified historic preservation consultant that evaluates the historic significance of the affected property. Survey costs range from $1,200 to $3,000, and take approximately four (4) weeks to complete. Historic Preservation staff would review the assessments.
2. If the property is not an historic resource, the demolition permit may be issued.
3. If the property is shown to have historic merit, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) will be triggered. Depending on the historic merit of the property, either a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be required to proceed with demolition.
a. An MND takes approximately 11 weeks to prepare and certify. In this case,
the Cultural Heritage Commission will determine whether or not to certify the
document as complete, pursuant to CEQA guidelines. The cost to the applicant
for this is $7,348.24.
b. An EIR takes approximately 6-9 months to prepare and certify. In this case,
the Cultural Heritage Commission will determine whether or not to certify the
document as complete, pursuant to CEQA guidelines. The cost to the applicant
for an EIR in this case, is up to $100,000.00. The decision of whether to certify
the EIR and adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration would belong to
the hearing body.
Second Option - Initial Determination by the Historic Preservation Officer
1. Applicant provides application materials and photographs of the property to the Historic Preservation Officer (HPO).
2. The HPO makes a preliminary determination regarding historic merit. It the property does not have merit, the demolition permit is issued. If the property does have historic merit, the HPO sends the case to the Cultural Heritage Commission (CHC) for further analysis. If the CHC finds no historic merit, the demolition permit is issued. If the CHC finds the property is historic, CEQA is triggered. This process will take approximately 60 days.
3. If the property is shown to have historic merit, the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) will be triggered. Depending on the historic merit of the property, either a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be required to proceed with demolition.
a. An MND takes approximately 15 weeks; the Historic Assessment Survey is
done as part of the MND. In this case the Cultural Heritage Commission will
determine whether or not to certify the document as complete, pursuant to CEQA
guidelines. The cost to the applicant for this is $7,348.24.
b. An EIR takes approximately 6-9 months to prepare and certify. In this case
the Cultural Heritage Commission will determine whether or not to certify the
document as complete, pursuant to CEQA guidelines. The costto the applicant
for an EIR in this case, is up to $100,000.00. The decision of whether to certify
the EIR and adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration would belong to
the hearing body.
Third Option - Initial Determination by the Cultural Heritaqe Commission
1. Applicant provides application materials and photographs of the property to the Historic Preservation Officer (HPO).
2. The HPO does a preliminary analysis on all submittals, prepares a staff report and recommendation and sends all demolition requests to CHC for determination. This process will take approximately 60 days.
3. If the CHC finds that the property is not historic, the demolition permit is issued. If the CHC finds the property does have historic merit, CEQA is triggered.
4. If the property is shown to have historic merit, the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) will be triggered. Depending on the historic merit of the property, either a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be required to proceed with demolition.
a. An MND takes approximately 15 weeks; the Historic Assessment Survey is
done as part of the MND. In this case, the Cultural Heritage Commission will
determine whether or not to certify the document as complete, pursuant to CEQA
guidelines. The cost to the applicant for this is $7,348.24.
b. An EIR takes approximately 6-9 months to prepare and certify. In this case,
the Cultural Heritage Commission will determine whether or not to certify the
document as complete, pursuant to CEQA guidelines. The costto the applicant
for an EIR in this case is up to $100,000.00. The decision of whether to certify
the EIR and adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration would belong to
the hearing body.
Staff does not support discretionary review of demolitions citywide due to staffing and workload impacts. Under any of the three scenarios provided, approximately two new staff positions would be necessary. In the long-term, the Historic Preservation Element of the General Plan that is currently being processed will develop strategies for addressing this issue, such as providing a Citywide Historic Resources Assessment Survey, which will identify potentially eligible properties for Federal, State, or Local landmark designation.
This report was reviewed by Assistant City Attorney Michael J. Mais on October 1,2007, and by Budget and Performance Management Bureau Manager David Wodynski on October 1 , 2007.
TIMING CONSIDERATIONS
None.
FISCAL IMPACT
Costs of Recommended Actions
The preparation of interim ordinances and long-term ordinance changes can be met with existing staff, however, response times for other current activities may experience diminishment. Should the City Council choose to require discretionary review of all demolition permits for structures that are 45 years or older, two additional staff members would be required. Also, the applicants could experience extensive delays and increased costs if their request is subject to CEQA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff is recommending that interim ordinances be enacted which would place certain restrictions (see below) in place while long-term changes are considered. These interim restrictions would apply to any project in Belmont Shore that has not filed for a permit or plan check prior to October 9, 2007. At the request of the BHCA, Belmont Heights projects would be subject to new standards on October 24,2007.
BELMONT HEIGHTS
Request that the City Attorney prepare an interim ordinance as follows:
> Demolitions of existing homes should be limited and are subject to Site
Plan Review.
> The current definition of "demolition" should be changed to ensure that
more of the home will remain in place during a remodel.
> Projects that include demolition of an existing structure, or an addition
greater than 800 square feet, will be subject to a staff issued site plan
review permit.
> No demolition of an existing home may occur until a building permit is
issued for the replacement project.
Direct the Planning Commission to study and make recommendations to the City Council on the following:
> The development standards for new construction and remodels in
the Belmont Heights area.
> The creation of design guidelines, with community involvement.
BELMONT SHORE AND THE PENINSULA
Request that the City Attorney prepare an interim ordinance for Belmont Shore as follows:
> In Belmont Shore, limit new construction to two stories of living space
(prohibiting third stories).
Direct the Planning Commission to study and make recommendations to the City Council on the following:
> In both Belmont Shore and the Peninsula, evaluate the current zoning
standards and make recommendations regarding changes to the Zoning
Ordinance that will reduce the number of variances requested. Also analyze
the appropriateness of a decreased vehicle turning-radius for homes that
are located on an alley.
> In Belmont Shore study a possible adjustment to the height calculations as
they relate to roof decks and shade covers on the roof deck should be studied.
> In The Peninsula the appropriateness of architectural projections, such as
a front porch, should be evaluated with community participation as a primary
component.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve recommendation.
Respectfully Submitted,
SUZANNE FRICK
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING
NAME |
APPROVED: |
TITLE |
|
|
|
|
PATRICK H. WEST |
|
CITY MANAGER |