Skip to main content
Manhattan Beach Logo
File #: 16-0413    Version: 1
Type: Consent - Staff Report Status: Agenda Ready
In control: City Council Regular Meeting
On agenda: 10/18/2016 Final action:
Title: Zoning Text Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment Proposal for Detached Condominiums (Community Development Director Lundstedt). DIRECT PLANNING COMMISSION TO SCHEDULE HEARING ON ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
Attachments: 1. Manhattan Beach Municipal Code 10.52.110 Residential Condominium Standards, 2. Manhattan Beach Local Coastal Program A.52.100 Residential Condominium Standards, 3. Mr. Chris Carey’s Letter to City Council, July 26, 2016 with Supporting Documents, 4. Manhattan Beach Municipal Code 10.96 Amendments

TO:

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

 

THROUGH:

Mark Danaj, City Manager

 

FROM:

Marisa Lundstedt, Community Development Director

Laurie B. Jester, Planning Manager

Ted Faturos, Assistant Planner

                     

SUBJECT:Title

Zoning Text Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment Proposal for Detached Condominiums (Community Development Director Lundstedt).

DIRECT PLANNING COMMISSION TO SCHEDULE HEARING ON ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT

Line

_________________________________________________________

Recommended Action

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

A Zoning Text Amendment requires a deposit of $10,000, and Staff’s time to work on the proposed Zoning Text Amendment is billed to the applicant from the $10,000. A $3,040 Environmental Assessment Fee, as well as public notice fees will also be required. Staff has already spent a significant amount of time working with the applicant and there will not be cost recovery from these resources already expended.

 

BACKGROUND:

Mr. Chris Carey proposes a Zoning Text Amendment and Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment to the Residential Condominium Standards found in each respective document. Mr. Carey’s proposed amendments will allow him to demolish his condominium and rebuild his home, located at 132 Marine Avenue. 


DISCUSSION:

The Residential Condominium Standards (MBMC 10.52.110 and LCP A.52.100- Attachments 1 & 2) state that “all residential condominiums consisting of two (2) units on a single lot which is to be owned in common shall be developed with units which are approximately equal in size and age.” Under this statute, the owner of one of two condominiums on a lot could not demolish and rebuild their condominium because the resulting two units would not be “of the same age”, as one of the units would be new and the other unit would be the original age.

 

The Code (MBMC 10.04.030 and LCP A.4.030) defines condominiums as

 

 An estate in real property consisting of an undivided interest in common in a portion of a parcel of real property together with a separate interior space in a residential, industrial or commercial building on the real property, such as an apartment, office or store. A condominium may include, in addition, a separate interest in other portions of the real property.

 

Mr. Chris Carey, the owner of a condominium zoned RM, Area District III (Coastal Zone), located at 132 Marine Ave, would like to demolish his detached condominium and build a new home in its place. Mr. Carey proposes a Zoning Text Amendment and a Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment that would carve out an exception to the “same age” rule for condominiums that meet a narrow set of requirements. Mr. Carey’s property at 132 Marine Ave would be exempt from the “age rule” under his proposed Zoning Text Amendment and LCP Amendment, as follows:

                     

a.                     Exception: Detached condos built before July 19, 1979 can be completely rebuilt, without regard to valuation, if the condos are no more than two on a lot and are completely detached from one another. The rebuilt condo cannot take more than half of the maximum allowable buildable floor area (BFA) for the lot, and will be required to receive approval of a use permit for the new construction.

 

As Mr. Carey indicates in his letter to the City Council (Attachment 3), the City’s Residential Condominium Standards have changed substantially since the first condominium regulations were passed in 1975 with Ordinance 1417. In July 1979, Ordinance 1563 was passed which required that condominiums be “approximately equal in size”. In September 1980, Ordinance 1589 was passed which further required that condominiums be “approximately equal in size and age”.

 

In his letter to City Council, Mr. Carey explains that his building was converted to a condominium before the passage of Ordinances 1563 and 1589 required two-on-a-lot condominiums to be “approximately equal in size and age”, and believes approximately only 15 other condominium properties in the City would be eligible to tear down and rebuild their structures if his proposed amendments are approved.

 

Mr. Carey believes that his and other properties like his have an “unfair restriction” on them and that by allowing to tear down and rebuild their condominiums, they will be actually improving their respective neighborhoods by building structures that meet today’s Planning, Building and Safety, and Fire codes.

 

On the other hand, as condominiums have common areas of ownership, and common financial responsibility, a two unit condominium project with units of a different size and age may create a disparity in the shared maintenance costs for the owners with smaller and/or new units paying a disproportionate amount.

 

Municipal Code Section 10.96.010 provides that only the City Council or Planning Commission may initiate, by motion, a zoning code amendment.  Should City Council believe Mr. Carey’s proposed amendments warrant consideration, City Council could adopt a motion directing the Planning Commission to consider a proposed amendment. Staff will provide to the Commission a detailed analysis of the implications of an amendment. Planning Commission could then make a recommendation to the City Council on whether Mr. Carey’s proposed amendments should be adopted and what modifications, if any, should take place.  Duly noticed public hearings must take place before both the Planning Commission and City Council before the Council can adopt a zone amendment ordinance. 

PUBLIC OUTREACH/INTEREST:

Public outreach on this item will occur through the formal public notification and hearing process if staff is directed to pursue the application through the Planning Commission.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Environmental review of this item will occur through the public review process if staff is directed to accept the application.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney has reviewed this report and determined that no additional legal analysis is necessary.

 

Attachments:
1. Manhattan Beach Municipal Code 10.52.110 Residential Condominium Standards

2. Manhattan Beach Local Coastal Program A.52.100 Residential Condominium Standards

3. Mr. Chris Carey’s Letter to City Council, July 26, 2016 with Supporting Documents

4. Manhattan Beach Municipal Code 10.96 Amendments