Council Postpones Vote to Downsize Neighborhoods

By Olin Ericksen
Staff Writer

September 14 -- In an effort to head off a controversial State initiative, Santa Monica may soon be the first city in California to drastically limit the size of new development in its neighborhoods.

The vote to require smaller, shorter buildings in most residential areas was delayed by the City Council Tuesday night. But the proposed ordinance will likely be approved later this month before a State initiative limiting a local government’s right to take property goes before voters in November.

“This a very exciting moment,” Kevin McKeown, a long-time slow-growth proponent, said before the council tabled the vote.

One of the pending issues is how the council’s anticipated move to fend off the Anderson Initiative -- which could possibly interfere with a city’s ability to “down-zone” -- could impact Santa Monica’s critically low housing stock.

By voting to “downzone” residential areas right away, the council would seemingly be circumventing two years of community input on what Santa Monica should look like for decades to come.

But City officials, who say they’ve reached consensus on major themes guiding neighborhood development, contend the move is necessary. If the Anderson Initiative passes, they warn, lowering zoning standards in the future could cost the City millions, because it could be considered a “taking.”

While the council deferred an actual vote on the matter, developers and business leaders warned that tinkering with land-use standards, without an in-depth study, may have unanticipated consequences that could harm local housing.

“We’re rushing ahead with no good reason, in a way that won’t get to the heart of the problem, and that is housing,” said Chris Harding, a land-use attorney.

Working to stem the tide of profitable condominium projects and, at the same time, coax other development -- such as denser affordable multifamily housing – council members are expected to give exemptions to preferred projects under the proposed ordinance, allowing buildings to be larger and approved more quickly.

Yet the vote was stalled when the council failed to agree on what incentives should be offered.

Some council members -- such as architect Herb Katz -- believes that any project, even condos, should be exempt from the new standards if they are more environmentally friendly.

Several council members would like to exempt environmentally friendly development, but only if it’s denser. Others – such as McKeown – want apartment buildings to get a break, but only if they are affordable.

While staff will come back in September with a list of possible incentives, it remains unclear how the proposed changes could affect new housing.

Paul Silvern – a City consultant who has conducted numerous studies on how local housing laws can affect a developer’s profit margin – said he feels that downzoning with incentives would still make developers a tidy sum for their troubles.

“There may be a variety of pushes and pulls on developers to make it happen, but it’s seemingly feasible,” Silvern said.

Harding countered that Silvern may have reviewed some preliminary numbers, but has not issued an in-depth analytical study.

“Where’s his report?” Harding said. “I can’t review it.”

On the other end of the spectrum, neighborhood groups – including Friends of Sunset Park, the Ocean Park Association and the Wilshire-Montana Neighborhood Association – are urging the City to downzone futher.