TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Mark Danaj, City Manager
FROM:
Anne McIntosh, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Title
Interim Ordinance Prohibiting the Establishment of New Health Care Uses (Community Development Director McIntosh).
ADOPT URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 17-0015-U
Line
_________________________________________________________
Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Urgency Ordinance 17-0015-U, an urgency ordinance prohibiting the establishment of new health care uses.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There may be a short-term impact to permit and plan check fees while additional research is conducted to determine if the urgency ordinance should be extended or new zoning standards developed.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council is concerned that a recent proliferation of new health care facilities, including medical office, urgent care facilities, clinics, treatment centers and the like, is having a detrimental impact to economic development goals, potential sales tax, the diversity of land uses, and the activation of pedestrian activity along streets in the commercial districts of the City.
DISCUSSION:
The Urgency Ordinance will be effective for 45 days, with the possibility of extension for up to a total of two years, during which health care uses will be studied in greater detail and permanent policy changes can be implemented.
POLICY ALTERNATIVES:
The Urgency Ordinance as drafted will prevent all new health care facilities throughout the City until such time the issue is studied and permanent regulations are adopted. The City Council may wish to limit the types of health care uses covered under the urgency ordinance and/or restrict the moratorium to specific locations rather than the entire City.
ALTERNATIVE #: 1
Apply moratorium to new construction projects.
PROS:
Still allows smaller existing tenant spaces to be converted to health care and other uses.
CONS:
Does not meet all of the goals of the moratorium (e.g., preventing a proliferation of uses before they can be studied).
ALTERNATIVE #: 2
Apply moratorium to Sepulveda Boulevard only (or other limited areas as defined)
PROS:
New health care uses could be established in certain commercial districts in the City
CONS:
Does not meet all of the goals of the moratorium (e.g., preventing a proliferation of uses in other part of the City before they can be studied)
ALTERNATIVE #: 3
Narrow the definition of health care facility to medical offices or medical clinics.
PROS:
Continues to allow clinics, laboratories, hospitals to apply for a use permit, but would prohibit medical offices (which are currently ministerial)
CONS:
Does not meet all of the goals of the moratorium (e.g., preventing a proliferation of other uses that can be studied).
PUBLIC OUTREACH/INTEREST:
Due to the urgency of this matter, the City Council has not yet conducted public outreach on this matter. Opportunities for public input will occur as policies are developed for long-term policy regarding medical uses.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption of this Ordinance would have a significant effect on the environment, because the Ordinance will impose greater limitations on development in the City by temporarily prohibiting medical and dental uses, and will thereby serve to reduce potential significant adverse environmental impacts. It is therefore exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review pursuant to Title 14, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Code of Regulations.
LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney has reviewed and approved as to form the draft ordinance.
Attachment:
1. Draft Ordinance No. 17-0015-U