City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Favorably consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation to
disapprove Zoning Code Amendment, ZCA P-2009183.
-OR-
2. Introduce the proposed ordinance, Zoning Code Amendment ZCA P-
2009183, to amend the Culver City Municipal Code to reduce building
height and increase setback requirements in the commercial zones to
address issues of compatibility with abutting residential zones.
PROCEDURE:
1. Mayor seeks a motion to receive and file the affidavit for publishing legal
notice.
2. Mayor requests a brief staff report and City Council poses questions to
staff as desired.
3. Mayor seeks a motion to open the public hearing and invites public
comments.
4. Mayor seeks a motion to close the public hearing.
5. City Council discusses the proposed recommendation and arrives at its
decision.
Meeting Date: 05/23/11 Item Number: PH-2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING - Introduction of an Ordinance
(Zoning Code Amendment ZCA P-2009183) Amending the Culver City Municipal
Code to Reduce Building Height and Increase Setback Requirements in the
Commercial Zones to Address Issues of Compatibility with Abutting Residential
Zones.
Contact Person/Dept.:
Thomas Gorham/CDD Planning
Phone Number: (310) 253-5727
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No [X]
Public Hearing: [X] Action Item: [] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification: Legal notice published in the Culver City News (5/5/2011); Agenda
and Meetings – City Council (05/19/11).
Department Approval:
Sol Blumenfeld (05/11/11)
City Attorney Approval:
Carol Schwab (by H. Baker) (05/18/11)
Chief Financial Officer Approval:
Jeff Muir (05/18/11)
City Manager Approval:
John M. Nachbar (05/19/11) City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
BACKGROUND:
On March 17, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2008-006
amending Tile 17, Zoning, of the CCMC, Section 17.400.065 Mixed Use
Development Standards. The adopted ordinance amended the Zoning Code
to reduce residential densities and include height and setback provisions
“intended to make mixed-use projects more compatible with surrounding uses
and protect adjacent residential neighborhoods.” The height and setback
standards of the mixed use development standards reduce the impact of
building bulk and mass on adjacent residential properties by reducing the
height and increasing the setbacks of mixed use buildings.
The Commercial Setbacks Zoning Code Amendment was initiated as part of
the City’s Council’s adoption of the Planning Division’s 2009/2010 work plan
included in the budget adopted in June 2009. This work plan was intended to
explore changes to the Zoning Code to reduce building height and increase
setback requirements for non-mixed use buildings in the commercial zones to
match those for mixed use projects.
The proposed Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA) was reviewed by the Planning
Commission on May 12 and October 27, 2010. As part of its review, the
Commission requested that staff prepare an analysis of the financial impacts
related to the proposed commercial setbacks. Staff worked with the
Redevelopment Agency real estate consultant, Keyser Marston Associates
(KMA), to prepare the analysis (described in detail in the Discussion section
below).
After thorough review, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the
City Council disapprove the Zoning Code Amendment. The primary reasons
for the Commission’s recommendation were concerns with the economic
impacts of reduced building square footage; reduced property values; and the
lack of commercial development in the City that may result from the proposed
changes. The Commission also recognized that there has been no major
commercial development along the West Washington corridor in particular for
many years, and further restrictions on commercial development resulting
from the proposed Zoning Code Amendment may further limit opportunities
for new development there. Please see attached Planning Commission
Minutes (Attachment No. 2).
DISCUSSION:
City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Current Commercial Zoning District Development Standards
The height and setback requirements for Commercial Neighborhood (CN),
Commercial General (CG), Commercial Community (CC), and Commercial
Downtown (CD) zones are provided in Section 17.220.020 Table 2-6 of the
Zoning Code (Attachment No. 3).
The commercial development standards require less restrictive setbacks then
the mixed use ordinance where developments in commercial zones abut
residential zones in order to protect the character of the residential district.
Commercial District Development Standards for the CN, CG, CC and CD
zones require setbacks along the side and rear yards when a development in
the commercial zone abuts a residential zone as follows:
• A minimum 10-foot setback is required at ground level, with a 60
degree clear–zone angle maintained from the rear property line,
measured 15-feet above the existing grade and from 10 feet from the
property line.
• No setbacks are required along the street facing portion of the building.
The development standards provide for the following maximum heights:
• 43 feet in the CN zone
• 56 feet in the CC and CG zones.
• Height requirements for structures in the CD zone are provided in
Section 17.220.035 of the Zoning Code (Attachment No. 4). They
range from 30 feet on either side of Main Street (except for the
southerly 80 feet, north of Culver Boulevard), and 44 feet for the
remainder of Main Street); the north side of Culver Boulevard from
Canfield to Duquesne Avenues; and on the north or south sides of
Washington Boulevard between Watseka and Hughes Avenue. All
other areas are limited to a height of 56 feet.
Proposed Changes to Commercial Zoning District Development Standards
The ZCA will modify the Commercial Zoning District Development Standards
to be consistent with the adopted Mixed Use Development Standards.
Specifically, the ZCA will modify height and setback requirements for new
structures in the Commercial Neighborhood (CN), Commercial General (CG),
Commercial Community (CC), and Commercial Downtown (CD) zones
abutting residential zones as follows:
City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
• Structures in the CN, CG, CC, and CD zones abutting R1 and R2
Zones will have a maximum height of 35 feet, with an allowance of up
to 45 feet for those portions of the building 35 feet or more from an
adjacent residential property line.
• Structures in the CN Zone will have a maximum height of 45 feet when
adjacent to multi-family zones (R3, RLD, RMD or RHD Zone) or when
on a split-jurisdiction lot|1010|.
• Building heights in the CG, CC or CD zones, when abutting a multi-
family zone (R3, RLD, RMD, or RHD), will be 45 feet; however, on lots
with 150 feet or more in depth that abut multi-family zoned lots, it will
be permissible to step the building up to 56 feet, provided no part of
the stepped portion of the building is closer than 50 feet to the abutting
residential lot.
• For buildings in the CG, CC and CD zones, adjacent to non-residential
zones or on a split-jurisdictional lot, the maximum building height will
remain 56 feet.
In addition to the above setback provisions, the existing 10 foot setback
abutting residential zones with a 60-degree clear-zone angle will remain as
depicted in new Figure 2-1 – Commercial Setback Adjacent to Residential
Zone. Further, a 5 foot front setback will be required for portions of the
structure above 15 feet in height to provide building relief along the street
frontage.
The ZCA would modify Chapter 17.220 – Commercial Zoning Districts,
Section 17.220.020, Table 2-6, Commercial District Development; Figure 2-1,
Commercial Setback Adjacent to Residential Zone; and Section
17.220.035.B, Height Requirements for the Commercial Downtown (CD)
District. The proposed changes are presented in “strikethrough/underline”
format in Exhibit A (Attachment No. 5).
Potential Square Footage Loss
Staff has prepared a matrix which shows the potential amount of building
square footage on a typical 10,000 square foot lot that would be lost under
the proposed setback and height changes. The first column shows potential
gross square footage (GSF) based on the existing code requirements. The
subsequent columns show the potential GSF square for each of the various
scenarios, both with and without the proposed 5 foot front step back.
10,000 S.F. Lot Scenarios
City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Floor Existing
Code
(GSF)
Proposed
GSF
adjacent to
R1 & R2
with 5’ front
step back
Proposed
GSF
adjacent to
R1 & R2
without
5’ front step
back
Proposed
GSF
< 150’ lot
Adjacent to
Multi-Family
Zone with
5’ front step
back
Proposed
GSF
< 150’ lot
Adjacent to
Multi-Family
Zone
without 5’
front step
back
Proposed GSF
> 150’ lot
Adjacent
Multi-Family
Zone with 5’
front step
back
Proposed GSF
> 150’ lot
Adjacent
Multi-Family
Zone without
5’ front step
back
1 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000
2 8500 8000 8500 8000 8500 8000 8500
3 7800 7300 7800 7300 7800 7300 7800
4 7100 6000 6500 6600 7100 6600 7100
5 6400 0 0 0 0 4500 5000
Total 38,800 30,300
(-8,500)
31,800
(-7,000)
30,900
(-7,900)
32,400
(-6,400)
35,400
(-3,400)
37,400
(- 1,400)
Financial Analysis
The Commission requested that staff prepare an analysis of the financial
impacts related to the proposed commercial setbacks as outlined above. Staff
worked with the Redevelopment Agency real estate consultant, Keyser
Marston Associates (KMA), to prepare the analysis (Attachment No. 6) based
upon the ZCA.
KMA examined 7 building scenarios as outlined in the above matrix. The net
lost GSF that results from these proposed standards ranges from 1,400 GSF
to 8,500 GSF given a typical commercial lot of 10,000 sq. ft.
KMA has concluded given industry standards for gross leasable area at 75
percent of gross building area, rents at $2.20 per square foot per month, 5
percent vacancy and collection allowance, and $13 per square foot for
unreimbursed operating expenses (vacant space) that the current residual
land value does not support construction costs for projects developed under
the existing Zoning Code and results in a negative value of $152,000 as
follows:
$8,884,000 residual value - $9,036,000 construction costs = ($152,000)
Using these indices the following results for each of the Scenarios identified
given the proposed development standards:
Scenario 1 – Negative $152,000 City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Scenario 2 – Negative $983,000
Scenario 3 – Negative $837,000
Scenario 4 – Negative $925,000
Scenario 5 – Negative $777,000
Scenario 6 – Negative $485,000
Scenario 7 – Negative $288,000
In general, the reasons for the variations in value are due to marginal
construction cost savings related to reduced building size|1010| which are offset
by the decreased monthly income produced by lost -GSF in the various
projects, minus 5 percent vacancy and collection allowance and pro rata
share of operating expenses and an 8 percent return on investment.
In order to generate positive land values in some of the Scenarios, the
supportable rents have to increase to $2.51 per sq. ft. which is not a realistic
expectation in the current economic climate. With rents assumed at $2.51 per
sq. ft. the following residual land values result:
Scenario 1 – $998,000
Scenario 2 – Negative $114,000
Scenario 3 – $82,000
Scenario 4 – Negative $35,000
Scenario 5 – $161,000
Scenario 6 – $554,000
Scenario 7 – $815,000
In summary, KMA believes that given the estimated achievable market rents,
each of the scenarios results in a negative residual land value and only when
rents are increased to $2.51 per sq. ft. do some of the Scenarios produce a
positive residual land value. In general, the supported land values decrease
from between $18 to $111 per sq. ft. of land area depending upon the site’s
base zoning and KMA concludes that “the proposed commercial setback
requirements will impact the values that can be supported by the properties
that are subject to the proposed setback requirements. This will likely
constrain the potential for improved properties to be recycled and may delay
the development of currently vacant properties.”
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA P2009183) is within City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
the scope of the Culver City General Plan Update Program EIR approved on
September 24, 1996 (PEIR 1) and the Culver City Redevelopment Plan
Amendment and Merger Program Subsequent EIR approved on November
16, 1998 (PEIR 2), the circumstances under which PEIR 1 and PEIR 2 were
prepared have not significantly changed and no new significant information
has been found that would impact either PEIR 1 or PEIR 2. Therefore no new
environmental analysis is required.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
There is a potential fiscal impact to the General Fund and Tax Increment
associated with adopting the ZCA due to potential loss of building square
footage and the potential lack of commercial development.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Ordinance No. 2011-______, Zoning Code Amendment, ZCA P-
2009183
2. Planning Commission Minutes May12
th
and October 27
th
2010
3. Zoning Code Section 17.220.020 Table 2-6 Commercial Zoning District
Development Standards
4. Zoning Code Section 17.220.035 Commercial Downtown District
Requirements
5. Exhibit A – Proposed Text Changes in “strikethrough/underline” format
6. Keyser Marston Associates Commercial Setback Analysis dated 9/7/10
MOTION:
That the City Council:
1A. (Staff Recommendation) Favorably consider the Planning
Commission’s recommendation and take no action (in which case
the ZCA would not be implemented and existing requirements would
be retained as recommended by the Planning Commission).
-OR-
1B. Introduce the proposed Ordinance, Zoning Code Amendment ZCA
P-2009183, to amend the Culver City Municipal Code to reduce
building height and increase setback requirements in the City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
commercial zones to address issues of compatibility with abutting
residential zones.
Notes:
1. Split Jurisdiction Lot. As used in the mixed use and commercial setback zoning code text
amendments, shall mean a lot located on the south side of Washington Boulevard
between Del Rey Avenue and Redwood Avenue that is both within the City of Culver City
and the City of Los Angeles.
2. Equal to $131 per sq. ft. of lost Gross Building Area (GBA).
MEETING DATE: 05.23.11
AGENDA ITEM: Introduction of an Ordinance (Zoning Code Amendment
ZCA P-2009183) to amend the Culver City Municipal
Code to reduce building height and increase setback
requirements in the commercial zones to address issues
of compatibility with abutting residential zones.
ATTACHMENTS
Pages
1. Draft Ordinance No. 2011-______, Zoning Code
Amendment, ZCA P-2009183 1-3
2. Planning Commission Minutes May12
th
and
October 27
th
2010 4-16
3. Zoning Code Section 17.220.020 Table 2-6
Commercial Zoning District Development Standards 17
4. Zoning Code Section 17.220.035 Commercial
Downtown District Requirements 18-19
5. Exhibit A – Proposed Text Changes in
“strikethrough/underline” format 20-26
6. Keyser Marston Associates Commercial Setback
Analysis dated 9/7/10 27-42
- 1 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
ORDINANCE NO. 2011-_____
A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE
17, ZONING, OF THE CULVER CITY MUNICIPAL CODE (CCMC), SECTIONS
17.220.020 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,
TABLE 2-6 AND FIGURE 2-1 AND CCMC SECTION 17.220.035 COMMERCIAL
DOWNTOWN (CD) DISTRCT REQUIREMENTS.
(Zoning Code Amendment P-2009183)
WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to initiate a zoning code amendment to
the Commercial Zoning District Development Standards to reduce building height and increase
setback requirements in the commercial zones to address issues of compatibility with abutting
residential zones to match those for mixed use projects.; and
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2010 and October 27, 2010 the Planning Commission
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Zoning Code Amendment, ZCA P-2009183 fully
considering all reports, studies, testimony, and environmental information presented; and
WHEREAS, following conclusion of the public discussion and thorough deliberation
of the subject matter, the Planning Commission determined by a vote of 5 to 0 that recommended
that the City Council disapprove Zoning Code Amendment, ZCA P-2009183; and
WHEREAS, on May 23, 2011, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on the Zoning Code Amendment, ZCA P-2009183, fully considering all reports, studies,
testimony, and environmental information presented; and
WHEREAS following conclusion of the public discussion and thorough deliberation
on the subject matter, the City Council determined by a vote of ___ to ___ that Zoning Code
Amendment, ZCA P-2009183 shall be adopted as set forth herein below.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CULVER CITY,
CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows:
ATTACHMENT 1
1
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the foregoing and as outlined in CCMC Title 17, Section
17.620.030 of the CCMC, the following findings for a Zoning Code (Text) Amendment are hereby
made:
1. ZCA P-2009183 ensures and maintains internal consistency with the goals,
policies, and strategies of the General Plan and will not create any inconsistencies with the
Zoning Code.
2. ZCA P-2009183 is not detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience and welfare of the City in that the amendment reduces height and setback
provisions intended to make commercial projects more compatible with surrounding uses and
protect adjacent residential neighborhoods.
3. Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental
Quality Act, (CEQA), the Planning Commission determines ZCA P-2009183 is within the
scope of the Culver City General Plan Update Program EIR approved on September 24, 1996
(PEIR 1) and the Culver City Redevelopment Plan Amendment and Merger Program
Subsequent EIR approved on November 16, 1998 (PEIR 2), the circumstances under which
PEIR 1 and PEIR 2 were prepared have not significantly changed and no new significant
information has been found that would impact either PEIR 1 or PEIR 2, and no new
environmental analysis is required.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and findings, the City Council of
the City of Culver City, California, hereby adopts Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA P-2009183) as
set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 3. Pursuant to Section 619 of the City Charter, this Ordinance shall take
effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. Pursuant to Sections 616 and 621 of the City
Charter, prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the adoption, the City Clerk shall cause
ATTACHMENT 1
2
- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
this Ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published in the Culver City News and shall post this
Ordinance or a summary thereof in at least three places within the City.
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby declares that, if any provision, section,
subsection, paragraph, sentence, phrase or word of this ordinance is rendered or declared invalid
or unconstitutional by any final action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any
preemptive legislation, then the City Council would have independently adopted the
remaining provisions, sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, phrases or words of this
ordinance and as such they shall remain in full force and effect.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
MICHEÁL O' LEARY, Mayor
City of Culver City, California
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARTIN COLE, CAROL A. SCHWAB,
City Clerk City Attorney
A11-00240
ATTACHMENT 1
3ATTACHMENT 2
4ATTACHMENT 2
5ATTACHMENT 2
6ATTACHMENT 2
7ATTACHMENT 2
8ATTACHMENT 2
9ATTACHMENT 2
10ATTACHMENT 2
11ATTACHMENT 2
12ATTACHMENT 2
13Planning Commission Minutes
October 27, 2010
Page 5 of 8
Sol Blumenfeld, Community Development Director, discussed
the financial impacts analysis and addressed a written
inquiry from absent Commissioner Wyant.
Discussion between staff and the Commission included: the
analysis by KMA; the use of consultants; Commission
options; origins of the item; the significance of the
outcome; the staff recommendation; concerns with effects to
property values; creating a balanced relationship between
the economic viability of the sites and their compatibility
with adjoining communities; alternatives; the mixed use
ordinance; community input; concern with a lack of
development in the City; an analysis of recently traded
properties; origins of the figures used in the analysis;
clarification regarding City Council direction; and
findings for mixed use vs. multiple use properties.
Chair Smith Frost invited public participation.
No speakers came forward.
Thomas Gorham, Planning Manager, read written comments
from:
Scott Wyant
Steven Rose
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER TIGGS AND SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR
PLESKOW TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION CARRIED BY
THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Kuechle, Pleskow, Smith Frost, Tiggs
NOES: None
ABSENT: Wyant
Discussion between staff and the Commission included:
clarification that no issue regarding legal notice existed;
reluctance to move forward; appreciation for information
provided; and concern with negative impacts to recycling
and redevelopment.
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER KUECHLE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
TIGGS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL DISAPPROVE THE ZONING CODE AMENDMENT. THE MOTION
CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
ATTACHMENT 2
14ATTACHMENT 2
15ATTACHMENT 2
161718ATTACHMENT 4
1920ATTACHMENT 5
21ATTACHMENT 5
22ATTACHMENT 5
23ATTACHMENT 5
24ATTACHMENT 5
25ATTACHMENT 5
26ATTACHMENT 6
27ATTACHMENT 6
28ATTACHMENT 6
29ATTACHMENT 6
30ATTACHMENT 6
31ATTACHMENT 6
32ATTACHMENT 6
33ATTACHMENT 6
34ATTACHMENT 6
35ATTACHMENT 6
36ATTACHMENT 6
37ATTACHMENT 6
38ATTACHMENT 6
39ATTACHMENT 6
40ATTACHMENT 6
41ATTACHMENT 6
42