City Council Report - City of Santa Monica

CITY OF SANTA MONICA 

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 

(REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT 

SUCCESSOR AGENCY CANCELLED) 

CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 1685 MAIN STREET 

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2012 

MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 P.M. 

CALL TO ORDER 

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 

ROLL CALL 

(Please note that Agenda Items may be reordered during the Council meeting at the 

discretion of the City Council.) 

1. CLOSED SESSIONS: 

1-A: 

1-B: 

1-C: 

1-D: 

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Anticipate 

significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 

54956.9 (b)- 2 cases: 1) Village Trailer Park and 1 case 

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Consideration of 

whether to initiate litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (c) 

– 1 case 

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Lamle v. City of Santa 

Monica, et al., United States District Court, Case No. CV 04-06355 HGK 

(SHx). 

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Santa Monica Nativity 

Scenes Committee v. City of Santa Monica, et al., United States District 

Court, Central District of California Case No. CV12-08657 ABC (Ex) 

The following is the order of business for items to be heard no earlier than 6:30 p.m. 

1 

November 27, 2012

2. SPECIAL AGENDA ITEMS: 

2-A: 

Special Recognition of Councilmember Bobby Shriver and Mayor Richard Bloom 

3. CONSENT CALENDAR: (All items will be considered and approved in one motion 

unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.) 

3-A: 

3-B: 

3-C: 

Approval of minutes for the September 11, 2012, City Council meeting. 

Coin-Operated Telescopes and Binoculars on the Santa Monica Pier and 

Palisades Park – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate 

and execute a License Agreement with Fare Share Enterprises for the 

installation and maintenance of new coin-operated telescopes and binoculars on 

the Santa Monica Pier and Palisades Park. 

Citywide Custodial Supplies – recommendation to award Bid No. 4035 to 

Clean Source, Empire Cleaning Supply, Royal Corporation, and Staples, in the 

cumulative annual amount of $405,000 for the purchase of custodial supplies 

with an amount not to exceed $1,215,000 over a three-year period. 

3-D: Resolution for a Moratorium on Hydraulic Fracturing in California – 

recommendation to adopt a resolution that calls for a moratorium on hydraulic 

fracturing (fracking) in California until adequate regulatory safeguards are in place. 

3-E: 

256 Santa Monica Pier Leasehold (Rusty’s) – recommendation to authorize the 

City Manager to negotiate and execute an Amended and Restated Lease 

Agreement with Hospitality Industry Management Group, LLC d.b.a. Rusty’s Surf 

Ranch for 256 Santa Monica Pier. 

3-F: Bid Award for the Purchase of Asphalt Materials for Street Maintenance – 

recommendation award Bid No. 3098 to Vulcan Materials Company, in the amount 

of $155,000 for FY 2012-13 for the purchase and delivery of asphalt materials, with 

one additional one-year renewal option in the amount of $250,000, for a total 

amount not to exceed $405,000 over a two-year period. 

3-G: Bid Award for Waterproofing Services at Various City Facilities – 

recommendation to award Bid No. 4037 to Surfside Restoration & Waterproofing, as 

the primary contractor; and Allstate Engineering, as the secondary contractor, in a 

cumulative amount not to exceed $75,000 for FY 2012-13 for waterproofing services 

at various City facilities, with two one-year options to renew, for a cumulative 

amount not to exceed $225,000 over a three-year period. 

3-H: Request for Proposals for Bergamot Station Arts Center Development - 

recommendation that the City Council adopt the project objectives listed and 

authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to development teams led by 

Bergamot Station Ltd./Worthe Real Estate Group, Lionstone Group/Industry Ltd. 

And Rethink Development/Kor Group for development of the City-owned property 

located at 2525 Michigan Avenue, home to the Bergamot Station Arts Center. 

2 

November 27, 2012

3-I: Amend Contract for Geotechnical Testing Services for Civic Center Parks – 

recommendation authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first 

modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9395 (CCS) with Koury 

Engineering & Testing, in an amount not to exceed $86,460 to provide additional 

geotechnical testing services for the Civic Center Parks (Palisades Garden Walk 

and Ken Genser Square Project), resulting in a new agreement in the amount of 

$155,030. 

3-J: 

New Mills Act Contract at 2009 La Mesa Drive – recommendation to adopt a 

Resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute a Historic 

Property Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) between the City of Santa 

Monica and the property owner of the designated City Landmark at 2009 La 

Mesa Drive. 

3-K: 

Bid Award for Purchase of Three Bin Trucks – recommendation to award Bid 

No. F4028 to Wondries Fleet Group in the amount of $127,183, for the purchase 

and delivery of three bin trucks to the Resource Recovery and Recycling 

Division. 

3-L: Amend Agreement for Bi-Annual Resident Survey for FY 2012-13 – 

recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first 

modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 2206 with Fairbank, Maslin, 

Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3), in the amount of $30,495 to conduct the biannual 

resident survey for FY 2012-13, resulting in an agreement for conducting two 

bi-annual resident surveys in the amount of $60,990. 

3-M: Banking Services Agreement with Wells Fargo Bank – recommendation to 

authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Wells Fargo 

Bank, in an amount not to exceed $375,000 for banking services over a five year 

term. 

REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT SUCESSOR AGENCY 

3-N: 

Cancelled, no business to consider. 

7. ORDINANCES: (Public comment is permitted on ordinances for introduction and 

first reading. No public discussion is permitted on ordinances for second reading and 

adoption.) 

7-A: 

Second reading and adoption an Ordinance Approving the Development 

Agreement 07-005 and Tentative Tract Map 12-001 to Allow a Mixed-use 

Project Consisting of 377 Residential Units (161 Apartments and 216 

Condominiums) and up to 24,940 Square Feet of Ground Floor 

Neighborhood-serving Retail of which up to 4,250 Square Feet Could Be 

Converted to Production Space at 2930 Colorado Ave. (Introduced 

November 13, 2012) 

3 

November 27, 2012

8. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: 

8-A: 

8-B: 

Tri-Party Real Estate Exchange to Create Buffer Area Adjacent to Exposition 

Light Rail Phase 2 Maintenance Facility - recommendation to authorize the City 

Manager to negotiate and execute real estate and ancillary agreements with Santa 

Monica College and the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority related to the 

purchase, lease, and exchange of real estate interests in properties located at 2909 

Exposition Blvd, 2900 Exposition Blvd and 3400/3500 Airport Avenue, to allow for 

the creation of the proposed buffer area adjacent to the proposed Phase 2 

Exposition Light Rail Maintenance Facility. 

Development Agreement float-up for a new mixed-use project at 3402 Pico 

Boulevard – recommendation that City Council discuss the applicant’s 

Development Agreement proposal and provide direction regarding the 

appropriateness of the site development and potential community benefits; initiate 

the Development Agreement negotiation and review process between the City and 

Developer. 

9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 

9-A: 

9-B: 

Public Hearing of the Annual Review of the City’s Plan for Homeless 

Services – recommendation that the City Council: Hold a public hearing and 

receive public comment on the Annual Review of the City’s Plan for Homeless 

Services, pursuant to the Municipal Code; Review and comment on strategies to 

address homelessness; and, direct staff to proceed with next steps. 

Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice – recommendation that 

Council review the Draft Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and 

hold a public hearing, receive public comment and approve the Draft. 

13. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS: 

13-A: Request of Councilmember McKeown that the Council direct staff to 

evaluate how best to divest fossil fuel investments from the City's 

portfolios, and return with policy options as part of the February mid-year 

budget review. 

14. PUBLIC INPUT: (Public comment is permitted only on items not on the agenda 

that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. State law prohibits the City 

Council from taking any action on items not listed on the agenda, including issues 

raised under this agenda item.) 

ADJOURNMENT. 

Any documents produced by the City and distributed to a majority of the City Council 

regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at the City Clerk's Counter 

4 

November 27, 2012

located at City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, and at the City’s public libraries 

during normal business hours. Documents are also available at 

http://www.smgov.net/departments/clerk/agendas.aspx. 

For a free subscription to City Council Agendas sign up at http://www01.smgov.net/win 

or call the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211. 

Any member of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an 

item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the meeting by 

mailing them to: City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401. Comments 

may also be e-mailed to: clerk@smgov.net 

Si desea comunicarse con alguien en español, llame a nuestra oficina al (310) 458-8211 y 

pida hablar con Esterlina Lugo. 

City Hall and the Council Chamber is wheelchair accessible. If you require any special 

disability related accommodations (i.e. sign language interpreting, access to an 

amplified sound system, etc.), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 

or TDD: (310) 917-6626 at least 3 days prior to the scheduled meeting. This agenda is 

available in alternate format upon request by calling the City Clerk’s Office. 

Parking is available in front of City Hall and on Olympic Drive and in the Civic Center 

Parking Structure (validation free). 

5 

November 27, 2012

(NOT APPROVED) 


CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 

A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Bloom at 5:35 p.m., on 

Tuesday, September 11, 2012, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street. 

Roll Call: Present: Mayor Richard Bloom 

Mayor Pro Tem Gleam Davis 

Councilmember Robert T. Holbrook (arrived at 5:47 p.m.) 

Councilmember Kevin McKeown 

Councilmember Pam O’Connor 

Councilmember Terry O’Day 

Councilmember Bobby Shriver (arrived at 5:50 p.m.) 

Also Present: 

CONVENE/PLEDGE 

CLOSED SESSIONS 

Councilmember Holbrook 

arrived at 5:47 p.m. 

Councilmember Shriver 

arrived at 5:50 p.m. 

City Manager Rod Gould 

City Attorney Marsha Jones Moutrie 

Assistant City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren 

On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:35 p.m., with 

Councilmembers O’Connor and Shriver, absent. City Clerk, Sarah Gorman 

led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance. 

There was no one present for Closed Session. 

On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:37 p.m., to consider 

closed sessions and returned at 6:40 p.m., with all members present, to 

report the following: 

1-A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Finley v. 

City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case 

Number BS 127077. 

The City Attorney recommended a settlement in the amount of $99,500 to 

the Western Center on Law and Poverty. 

Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember 

Holbrook, to approve Settlement No. 9638 (CCS) in the amount of 

$99,500. The motion was approved by the following vote: 

1 September 11, 2012

AYES: 

NOES: 

ABSENT: 

Councilmembers McKeown, O’Day, Holbrook, O’Connor, 

Shriver, Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Mayor Bloom 

None 

None 

1-B: 

Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated 

Litigation: Anticipate significant exposure to litigation 

pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b): 1 case 

The City Attorney Marsha Moutrie reported that this item was heard with 

no reportable action taken. 

1-C: 

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: 

Consideration of whether to initiate litigation pursuant to 

Government Code Section 54956.9(c): 1 case 

The City Attorney Marsha Moutrie reported that this item was heard with 

no reportable action taken. 

INSPIRATION: 

SPECIAL AGENDA 

ITEMS: 

Moment of silence and full color guard with Police and Fire in 

remembrance of 9/11, was held. 

2-A: Commendation to the Santa Monica Little League Senior All- 

Stars for winning the District 25 Tournament, was presented by Mayor 

Bloom. 

2-B: Kaiser Permanente awarded a Healthy Eating Active Living 

certificate of recognition to Council for adopting policies that promote 

a healthy and active community, was received by Mayor Bloom. 

CONSENT CALENDAR: 

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a 

Councilmember for discussion. 

Members of the public Joy Fullmer, Denise Barton, Christel Anderse, and 

Catherine Eldridge commented on various Consent Calendar items. 

Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Davis, 

to approve the Consent Calendar, except for Items 3-A, 3-C, and 3-F, 

reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The 

motion was approved by the following vote: 

AYES: Councilmembers Shriver, O’Connor, Holbrook, O’Day, 

McKeown, Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Mayor Bloom 

NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

BBB ADMIN BUILDING 

WATERPROOFING 

3-B: Big Blue Bus Administration Building Waterproofing Contract 

– recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute 


Contract No. 9640 (CCS) with Fortex Construction in an amount not to 

exceed $172,590 for building enclosure waterproofing, repair and 

replacement work at the Big Blue Bus Administration building, and 

authorize any necessary changes, was approved. 

BUS TRANSPORTATION 

SERVICES 

SAN VICENTE BOOSTER 

PUMP GENERATOR 

PROJECT 

3-D: Award Bid to Provide Bus Transportation Services – 

recommendation to award Bid No. 4010 to Star-Dust Tours, Inc., for a total 

amount of $81,600 per year to provide bus transportation services as 

requested by the Community and Cultural Services Department, with two 

one-year renewal options for a total amount of $244,800; and appropriate 

budget changes, was approved. 

3-E: Design Services for San Vicente Booster Pump Generator 

Project – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and 

execute professional services Agreement No. 9641 (CCS) with Lee & Ro, 

Inc. in the amount of $328,500 to provide design services for the San 

Vicente Booster Pump Station Emergency Generator Project; and 

appropriate budget changes, was approved. 

REJECT BID NO. 4013 3-G: Reject Bid for Granular Activated Carbon Replacement 

Services – recommendation to authorize City Manager to reject all bids 

received on June 28, 2012 for Bid No. 4013 for granular activated carbon 

replacement services at the Charnock Well Field; authorize to direct staff to 

reissue a request for new bids in order to obtain the best bidder; and 

approve a new, interim purchase order in the amount of $400,000 with 

Carbon Activated Corporation, resulting in a new total amount of 

$1,200,000, was approved. 

WATER WELL REPAIR 

AND MAINTENANCE 

SERVICES 

PIER BRIDGE 

REPLACEMENT 

PROJECT 

GRAFFITTI REMOVAL 

AND PAINT SERVICES 

3-H: Award Bid for Water Well Repair and Maintenance Services – 

recommendation to award Bid No. 4008 to General Pump Company, Inc. 

for an amount not to exceed $180,000 for one year for water well repair and 

maintenance services, with two one-year renewal options for a total amount 

of $540,000 for three years, was approved. 

3-I: Agreement for Pier Bridge Replacement Project – 

recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute 

professional services Agreement No. 9642 (CCS) with T.Y.LIN 

International, in an amount not to exceed $850,000 to provide public 

outreach, conceptual design and environmental documentation services for 

the Pier Bridge Replacement Project, was approved. 

3-J: Award Bid for Graffiti Removal and Painting Services at the 

Pier - recommendation to award Bid No. 4003 to Parrot Painting, in an 

amount not to exceed $40,000 for graffiti removal and painting services at 

the Santa Monica Pier for FY 2012-13, with two one-year renewal options 

with a not to exceed amount of $130,000 over a three-year period, was 

approved. 


PIER DECK BOARD 

REPLACEMENT 

3-K: Award Bid for Pier Deck Board Replacement and Nail Patrol 

Services at the Pier – recommendation to award Bid No. 4004 to John S. 

Meek Company for an amount not to exceed $68,400 for deck board 

replacement and monthly nail patrol services at the Santa Monica Pier for 

FY 2012-13, with two one-year renewal options for a total amount of 

$238,400 for a three-year period, was approved. 

CHRISTMAS TREE LOT 3-L: Short-term Lease of City-owned Property for Christmas Tree 

Lot – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and 

execute License Agreement No. 9643 (CCS) with Chauvet Tree Farms, 

Inc., in the amount of $10,004, for the short-term use of property located at 

12040 – 12048 Wilshire Boulevard, with up to four (4) additional ninety 

(90) day extensions during the 2013-2016 Christmas seasons for up to a 

total of five (5) Christmas seasons, was approved. 

ELECTRICAL AND 

STREET LIGHTING 

CHARNOCK WELL 

MAINTENANCE & 

OPERATION SERVICES 

HOUSING FRAUD 

INVESTIGATION 

SERVICES 

UNIVERSALLY 

ACCESSIBLE 

PLAYGROUND 

3-M: Award Bid for the Purchase of Electrical and Street Lighting 

Supplies- recommendation to award Bid No. 4002 to One Source 

Distributors, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 for the purchase of 

electrical and street lighting supplies for FY 2012-2013, with two one-year 

options to renew for a total amount of $950,000 over a three-year period, 

was approved. 

3-N: Modification for Operations, Maintenance and Management 

Services for the Charnock Well Field – recommendation to authorize the 

City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Contract No. 

9239 (CCS) with Siemens Water Technologies Corporation, in the amount 

of $556,048 to provide operations, maintenance, and management services 

for the Charnock Well Field, resulting in a new four year contract for a total 

amount of $1,112,096, was approved. 

3-O: Modification for Fraud Investigation Services for HUD-funded 

Housing Programs – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to 

negotiate and execute a modification to the Professional Services 

Agreement No. 9164 (CCS) with Program Compliance Solutions, in the 

amount of $50,000 to continue providing fraud investigation services for 

the Housing Division for a new total contract amount not to exceed 

$268,400, was approved. 

3-P: Universally Accessible Playground Construction Contract – 


Contract No. 9644 (CCS) with Micon Construction, Inc. in an amount not 

to exceed $998,481 for construction of the Universally Accessible 

Playground Project; and approve changes, was approved. 

CANCEL MEETING 3-Q: Cancellation of September 25, 2012 Regular City Council 

Meeting, was approved. 


EXPO MAINTENANCE 

YARD BUFFER DESIGN 

CORPORATION YARD 

MASTER PLAN 

3-A: Expo Maintenance Yard Buffer Park Design Contract – 


Contract No. 9639 (CCS) with Mia Lehrer and Associates, in an amount 

not to exceed $297,978 to provide full design services for a new 2.35-acre 

neighborhood open space/park adjacent to the Expo Maintenance Yard, 

was presented. 

Councilmember McKeown removed this item to question staff regarding 

the role that the public, and especially residents who live near the park, had 

in the design process. Staff provided additional information that there were 

two community meetings held to identify uses, and that the public will 

continue to be involved in the process. 


to approve the recommendation. The motion was approved by the 

following vote: 

AYES: Councilmembers McKeown, O’Day, Holbrook, O’Connor, 


NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

3-C: Corporation Yard Master Plan Contract Modification – 

recommendation to: authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a 

third modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9129 (CCS) 

with RNL Interplan, Inc. in the amount of $34,314 to provide additional 

scope of work to complete the Corporation Yard Master Plan, resulting in a 

new total contract amount of $343,340; and authorize budget changes, was 

presented. 

Councilmember McKeown pulled this item to ask staff for clarification 

regarding conflicting statements in the staff report. Staff provided 

additional information and answered questions. 






NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

HOUSING LOAN 

FORGIVENESS AND 

EXTENSION 

3-F: Housing Trust Fund Loan Forgiveness and Extension – 

recommendation to authorize the City Manager to forgive an existing loan 

to the Mountain View Mobile Inn Residents Association in the amount of 

$124,977 for 1930 Stewart Street; and authorize to execute a loan term 

extension until December 2014 for an existing acquisition and 

predevelopment loan to Community Corporation of Santa Monica, in the 


amount of $1,161,185 for 1342 Berkeley Street, was presented. 

Councilmember Shriver pulled this item to obtain additional information 

about the item. Staff provided additional information and answered 

questions. 

Motion by Councilmember Shriver, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Davis, to 

approve the recommendation. The motion was approved by the following 

vote: 



NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

PARKING IN-LIEU FEE 

PROGRAM 

4-A: Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Program Study Session – 

recommendation that Council review and provide direction on issues 

relating to the modifications to the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee 

Program, including direction on the policy issues and trade-offs identified 

in the report, was presented. 

Members of the public Debbie Lee, Chris Harding, and Jerry Rubin 

commented and shared suggestions on the recommendation. 

Discussion ensued on the information presented including, but not limited 

to: getting a better handle on managing parking; creating an inventory of 

parking and the in-lieu fee can pay for the needed parking/valet system; 

allow flexibility during the approval process; improve way-finding and 

signage in the Downtown area; go after more public/private partnerships to 

create parking; suggesting that the 40% in-lieu recommendation is 

conservative and recommended going after at least 60%; using the in-lieu 

fee to provide funding for maintenance to parking structures; reviewing 

each project site by site, with no set formula allowing for flexibility; create 

other bike stations on the other side of the Downtown area; and, making 

sure the amounts of recommended parking are accurate, so that in the next 

decades the promise of parking being available can be delivered. 

On order of the Mayor, this item was received and filed. 

ORDINANCES: 

1548 6 TH STREET 

7-A: Introduction and first reading of an ordinance adopting 

Development Agreement 11DEV-012 to convert 3,038 square feet of 

non-usable space into four residential units within an existing mix-use 

market rate rental housing building at 1548 6 th Street, was presented. 

Member of the public Denise Barton spoke in opposition of the 

recommendation. 


Applicant representative Dave Rand spoke in support of the Development 

Agreement. 


to introduce the ordinance for first reading by title only and waiving further 

reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: 



NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

OFF-STREE FOOD 

TRUCKS 

7-B: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance to Permit Off- 

Street Food Truck Venues in the CM Main Street Commercial District 

and Adjacent A Off-Street Parking Overlay Districts and the C4 

Highway Commercial District by Performance Standards Permit, was 

presented. 

Members of the public Tobi Smith, Mike Snow, Kay Pattison, Garrett 

Gerson, Garner Gerson, and Heidi Granner spoke in support of the 


Members of the public Ellen Hannan, Joe Popersky, Gary Gordan, Ron 

Schur, and Jerry Rubin spoke in opposition or suggested more study is 

needed before moving forward on this matter. 

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Davis, seconded by Councilmember McKeown, 

to send this back to staff to have staff consider the following: Is there some 

sort of interim permit that is currently not on the books, that would be more 

permanent than a temporary use permit, but not as long as the permit being 

recommended. In the interim have things continue to operate under the 

temporary use permit as they currently have; and, to conduct an economical 

study to determine the effect on businesses and the city as a whole. 

Discussion ensued on the merits of the motion with the suggestions to staff: 

an intermediate permit for two years with one additional renewal by staff 

before the permit comes to Council; including a balance of the resident and 

business communities input on this matter; to work cooperatively with the 

merchants on issues of sustainability, and to make sure that the appropriate 

taxes are being collected. 

On order of the Mayor, the motion was approved by voice vote, with all 

members present. 

AFFORDABLE HOUSING 

BASE FEE 

7-C: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance that would 

eliminate the existing discount to the Affordable Housing Unit Base 

Fee, currently 50 percent in industrial/commercial zones and 25 

percent in residential zones which is available under specified 


circumstances; and adopt Resolution No. 10705 (CCS) entitled: “A 

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA 

MONICA AUTOMATICALLY ADJUSTING THE AFFORDABLE 

HOUSING UNIT BASE FEE FOR NEW MARKET-RATE 

MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO SANTA MONICA 

MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9.56.070(b) BASED ON CHANGES IN 

CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND LAND COSTS,” and adopt Resolution 

No. 10706 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTOMATICALLY ADJUSTING 

THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT DEVELOPMENT COST 

PURSUANT TO SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 

9.56.070(c) BASED ON CHANGES IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND 

LAND COSTS”, was presented. 

Member of the public Denise Barton commented on this matter. 

Motion by Councilmember Shriver, seconded by Councilmember 

McKeown, to introduce the ordinance reading by title only and waiving 

further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: 



NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

Motion by Councilmember Shriver, seconded by Councilmember 

O’Connor, to adopt Resolution No. 10705 (CCS) to implement the annual 

automatic adjustment to the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee for new 

market-rate apartments and condominiums, reading by title only and 

waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the 




NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 

Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember 

O’Day, to adopt Resolution No. 10706 (CCS) to implement the annual 

automatic adjustment to the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost, 

reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was 

approved by the following vote: 



NOES: None 

ABSENT: None 


STAFF ITEMS: 

1920 OCEAN WAY 

8-A: Disposition of City-owned Property at 1920 Ocean Way – 

recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute Purchase and 

Sale Agreement No. 9645 (CCS) to sell the City-owned property at 1920 

Ocean way to the Edward Thomas Hospitality Companies for the purchase 

price of $13,150,000; and authorize budget changes, was presented. 

Members of the public Ellen Hannan, Michael Feinstein, and Tom Larmore 

commented on the recommendation. 




AYES: Councilmember McKeown, O’Day, Holbrook, O’Connor, 

Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Mayor Bloom 

NOES: Councilmember Shriver 

ABSENT: None 

WATER MAIN 

BETTERMENTS 

Councilmember O’Day was 

excused at 10:09 p.m. 

8-B: Water Main Betterment Components on Colorado Avenue – 

authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 9646 

(CCS) with the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority in an 

amount not to exceed $2,300,000 to perform final engineering services and 

construction of water main betterments on Colorado Avenue; and authorize 

budget changes, including appropriations, was presented. 

There was no one present for public comment. 

Motion by Councilmember O’Connor, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Davis, 



AYES: Councilmembers Shriver, O’Connor, Holbrook, McKeown, 

Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Mayor Bloom 

NOES: None 

ABSENT: Councilmember O’Day 

COUNCIL ITEMS: 

SANTA MONICA AS A 

ONE CITY 

13-A: Request of Council member Bobby Shriver that City Council 

support designation of Santa Monica as a ONE City to advocate for an 

end to poverty and preventable disease such as HIV/AIDS, particularly 

in Africa, by raising public awareness and working with elected 

officials to support smart, effective life-saving policies and programs. 

Santa Monica would join 150 U.S. cities including the California cities 

of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Redlands, San Jose, and Davis. A 

proclamation would be issued. Any specific policy support would 

conform to Council approved direction, was withdrawn and continued to 

October 2, 2012 meeting. 


ZONING CODE 

POLICIES 

Councilmember O’Day 

returned at 10:22 p.m. 

13-B: Request of Mayor Pro Tem Davis and Councilmember 

McKeown that the Council direct staff to assist the Planning 

Commission in reviewing appropriate employee-per-square-foot ratios 

for commercial projects, and return to Council with an update to 

inform calculations on parking, traffic, and other Development 

Agreement and zoning code policy decisions, was presented. 

Member of the public Valerie Griffin spoke in support of the 



to approve the recommendation. The motion was unanimously approved 

by voice vote with all members present. 

ADVERTISING ON THE 

BIG BLUE BUS 

13-C: Request by Mayor Bloom that the City Council direct staff to 

review Big Blue Bus policies regarding advertising on its vehicles in 

light of current law, in particular, the First Amendment to the United 

States Constitution, and return to Council with information, 

alternatives and recommendations. Request is also made that the City 

Council direct that staff, to the extent practical, maintain the status 

quo that existed prior to recent actions taken with respect to 

advertisers. This may include, among other things, directing staff to 

adopt an interim policy permitting commercial and non-commercial 

advertising on Big Blue Bus vehicles. 

Members of the public Jerry Rubin, Samantha Granberry, Philip Curtis, 

Jeff Goodman, John Duran, Craig Miller, and Catherine Eldridge spoke in 

support of the recommendation. 

Discussion ensued and questions were asked of staff regarding the First 

Amendment legal issues that could arise as a result of allowing non-profit 

organizations to advertise on the side of the Big Blue Bus. The City 

Attorney provided legal advice on the impacts of not enforcing the current 

policy. 

Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Mayor Bloom, to direct staff to 

review Big Blue Bus policies regarding advertising on its vehicles in light 

of current law, in particular, the First Amendment to the United States 

Constitution, and return to Council with information, alternatives and 

recommendations. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, 

with all members present. 

Discussion ensued on the merit of the second recommendation which 

included but not limited to: what should be done in the interim until staff 

returns with an evaluation of policies; and, what are the legal risk involved 

if the Administration continues to not enforce the policy and allow both 

commercial and non-commercial advertising on the Big Blue Bus. 


Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Davis, seconded by Mayor Bloom, to direct 

staff to adopt an interim policy permitting both commercial and noncommercial 

advertising on the Big Blue Bus vehicles until staff returns 

with a report to Council with an evaluation of policies. The motion failed 

by the following vote: 

AYES: Councilmembers O’Day, Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Mayor Bloom 

NOES: Councilmembers Shriver, O’Connor, Holbrook, McKeown 

ABSENT: None 

PUBLIC INPUT: 

Councilmember Shriver was 

excused at 11:27 p.m. 

Members of the public Denise Barton and Diane Dykema commented on 

various local issues. 

ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 11:33 

p.m., with Councilmember Shriver, absent. 

ATTEST: 

APPROVED: 

Denise Anderson-Warren 

Assistant City Clerk 

Richard Bloom 

Mayor 


City Council Report 

To: 

From: 

Subject: 

Mayor and City Council 

Rod Merl, Pier Manager 

City Council Meeting: November 27, 2012 

Agenda Item: 3-B 

Coin-Operated Telescopes and Binoculars on the Santa Monica Pier and 

Palisades Park 

Recommended Action 

Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and 

execute a License Agreement with Fare Share Enterprises, a New York-based 

company for the installation and maintenance of new coin-operated telescopes and 

binoculars on the Santa Monica Pier and Palisades Park. 

Executive Summary 

The availability of coin-operated telescopes provides the public with an opportunity to 

better view the panoramic vistas from the Pier and Palisades Park. Staff recommends 

the Council authorize a license agreement with Fare Share Enterprises for the 

installation, revenue collection, maintenance and repair of new coin-operated 

telescopes and binoculars. 

Background 

Coin-operated telescopes have been available to the public along the Santa Monica 

Pier since the 1940s. The current City vendor provides eight coin-operated telescopes 

on the Pier and one at Palisades Park. The cost for the public to use the telescopes is 

25 cents and the vendor pays the City 50 percent of the gross revenues. The current 

vendor’s license agreement expired in May 2012 and has been operating on a month to 

month extension. In May 2012 the City issued a Request for Proposal for services and 

received four responses. 

Discussion 

An evaluation panel comprised of staff from the Office of Pier Management, Economic 

Development, and Community and Cultural Services reviewed the four proposals 

received. Vendors were rated and ranked based on the evaluation criteria outlined in 

the RFP including 1) thoroughness and completeness of proposal; 2) experience and 

1

demonstrated capability; 3) references from parties that have received similar services; 

4) design and quality of viewers; and 5) economic return to the City. After reviewing all 

proposals and receiving feedback from references, Fare Share Enterprises was 

identified as the preferred firm. 

Fare Share Enterprises, based in New York, is an industry leader in the manufacture 

and operation of coin-operated telescopes and binoculars. Fare Share furnishes 

viewers at prominent locations across the United States and locally including the Griffith 

Park Observatory and Universal Studios. Fare Share Enterprises employs a local 

technician to service its viewers bi-weekly in order to ensure the telescopes and 

binoculars are operational, clean and attractive to the public. City staff conducted a site 

visit to the Griffith Park Observatory to confirm that Fare Share’s viewers were well 

maintained and offered excellent optics. 

Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a 

License in accordance with the following key conditions: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Term of three years with a month-to-month renewal option at the sole discretion 

of the City. 

Viewers provided by the Licensee will include ADA accessible telescopes and 

binoculars. 

Licensee will be responsible for the installation, revenue collection, maintenance 

and repair of the viewers; and all costs will be the responsibility of the Licensee. 

The recommended cost for the public to use the viewers will be 50 cents. 

Licensee will remit to the City 50 percent of gross revenues from viewers. 

Licensee will furnish the City with a written report showing meter readings for 

each viewer. 

2

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions 

Revenues will be deposited into Pier Vendor Rent Account 30626.401830. Anticipated 

revenues in the amount of $6,400 have been included in the FY 2013-14 proposed 

budget. 

Prepared by: Elana Buegoff, Sr. Development Analyst 

Approved: 

Forwarded to Council: 

Rod Merl, Pier Manager 

Office of Pier Management 

Rod Gould 

City Manager 

3



Agenda Item: 3-C 

To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director of Finance 

Citywide Custodial Supplies 


Staff recommends that the City Council award Bid No. 4035 to Clean Source, a 

California based company, Empire Cleaning Supply, a California based company, Royal 

Corporation, a California based company, and Staples, a Colorado based company for 

the purchase of custodial supplies in the cumulative annual amount of $405,000 with a 

not to exceed amount of $1,215,000 over a three year period. 


Staff recommends award of Bid No. 4035 to Clean Source, a California based company, 

Empire Cleaning Supply, a California based company, Royal Corporation, a California 

based company, and Staples, a Colorado based company for the purchase of custodial 

supplies. The City’s Central Warehouse previously supplied custodial supplies in 

conjunction with divisions’ individual custodial supply needs. In May 2012 the Central 

Warehouse was closed, resulting in a consolidated citywide bid for custodial supplies by 

which all City Divisions will have ability to purchase from the selected vendors. 

Discussion 

In anticipation of the Central Warehouse closure, City staff conducted extensive 

sampling and field testing of cleaning products resulting in a list of approved products 

for use within the City. The products have been reviewed and approved by the City’s 

Office of Sustainability and the Environment, meeting established City/Environmental 

guidelines and standards. The Custodial Division will now purchase and maintain its 

own inventory of custodial supplies. The amount requested is based on previous years’ 

expenses. Adequate supplies are needed to ensure uninterrupted operation and 

maintenance of the City’s buildings. 

1

Vendor Selection 

In October 2012, the City published Notices Inviting Bids to provide custodial supplies 

as required by various City departments in accordance with City specifications. The bid 

was posted on the City’s on-line bidding site, and notices were advertised in the Santa 

Monica Daily Press in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. 

There were 265 vendors who were notified and 57 vendors downloaded the bid. 19 

bids were received and publicly opened on October 3, 2012 per Attachment A. Staff 

coordinated with the user departments and evaluated bids based upon overall pricing 

and compliance with the bid specifications. The Office of Sustainability and the 

Environment confirmed that all products met evaluation criteria for these categories to 

include, among others, the presence of toxic ingredients, biodegradability, use of nonrenewable 

resources in deriving the product, the amount, type, and recyclability of 

packaging, and documentation of cruelty-free product testing. Clean Source, Empire 

Cleaning Supply, Royal Corporation and Staples are recommended as best bidders. 

Each vendor will be assigned specified items for which they provided competitive 

pricing, per Attachment B. 


The amount of purchase orders to be awarded to Clean Source, Empire Cleaning 

Supply, Royal Corporation and Staples will be entered as needed by required divisions 

with a combined total not to exceed $405,000 for the period starting on the date of 

award through June 30, 2013. Funds are included in the FY2012-2013 budget within 

Department budgets. Budget authority in subsequent years will be requested in each 

budget cycle for Council approval. Future funding is contingent upon Council approval. 

Prepared by: Regina Benavides, Senior Buyer 

Approved: 


Gigi Decavalles-Hughes 

Rod Gould 

Director of Finance 


Attachments: Attachment A – Pricing and Vendor Award for Citywide Custodial 

Supplies 

2

Bid No.: F4035 

Closing Date: 10/3/2012 

Description: FURNISH AND DELIVER VARIOUS CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES, AS REQUIRED BY 

VARIOUS CITY OF SANTA MONICA DIVISIONS FROM THE DATE OF AWARD THROUGH 

JUNE 30, 2013. 

# PRODUCT SPECIFICATION Approved Equal Unit 

CITYWIDE CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 

117 H2 Orange 

1 Concentrate 

2 Bleach 

3 Earth Friendly Hand Soap 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Price per 

Unit 

Envirox H2 Orange Concentrate 117 Cleaner, 

Degreaser, Sanitizer, Virucide, Orange Scent, Betco Green Earth 

Neutral Ph, Low Voc Hydrogen Peroxide 3.95% Peroxide, Cleaner #33604 Gal NO BID NO BID NO BID $13.00 

Clorox Germicidal Bleach 96 Oz Bottles, 

Sodium Hypochlorite 6.95% 

Royal #88263 Earth Friendly Liquid Soap, 

Coconut And Plant Derviced Surfacants, Earth 

Salts, Glycerin Preservative And Water 

Product Quoted 

Price 

per Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Betco Green Earth 

Peroxide Cleaner 33604 $37.00 As Spec $11.27 Betco Green Earth 33604 $11.20 

Gale Supply Company 

Los Angeles, CA 

Price 

per Product Quoted 

Unit 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Mission Enviropure 

Proxide Cleaner 4gal/cs NO BID $9.00 

Natural Solutions 

Inglewood, CA 

Price 


Unit 

P&R Paper Supply 

Redlands, CA 

Price 


Unit 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 


Multi-Purpose Cleaner 

& Degreaser 

N521071HO $11.78 Betco 33604 $20.81 Envirox Conc. 117 

Germicidal Bleach But 

Sodium Hypochlorite 

Needs To Be 6.95% Gal NO BID NO BID NO BID $2.20 Clorox Bleach $2.30 As Spec $2.06 Clorox Bleach 02490 $2.00 OCCS 4x1 $2.26 $3.02 As Spec $2.12 Clorox 02490 $2.59 Clorox Germicidal 

White Lanoline Based Hand 

Soap & Brighton 

Professional White Lotion 

Hand Soap Coconut Gal NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.38 CoCo CS#421540 $5.88 

Professional 

White Coconut 

Gen Labs 02000 Coco w/ 

Genlabs #3715 Coconut 

Hand Soap $4.28 Lanolin Soap $6.35 hand soap tres NO BID $7.50 

Elegante Genlabs Certi 

Green Citrus multi 

purpose cleaner NO BID $6.75 


Liquid Hard Soap 

N580071Ho $12.63 Royal 1220FT $10.23 

4 Groute Safe 

Envirox Grout Safe Cleaner, Water, Hydrogen 

Peroxide, Surfatants & Orange Oil Concentrate No Substitutes Gal NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID $17.10 As Spec NO BID $6.50 

Mop Heads Cotton, 

5.a. Rayon, And Steel 24 Oz Steel Head Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.75 $8.00 Unisan $3.98 $4.05 Full #2112424 $4.74 NO BID $7.44 ACS M8024S $4.78 Premier 


5.b. Rayon, And Steel 24 Oz Cotton Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.75 $8.00 Unisan $3.55 $2.85 Cotton #2322024 $3.90 $6.56 $7.44 ACS M8024S $3.52 Golden Star 


5.c. Rayon, And Steel 32 Oz Cotton Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.75 $8.00 Unisan $4.59 $4.68 Cotton #2323232 $4.89 $6.00 $7.44 ACS M8024S $4.74 Golden Star 


5.d. Rayon, And Steel 24 Oz Rayon Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.75 $8.00 Unisan $5.15 $5.30 Full #2092424 $4.46 $3.80 $7.44 ACS M8024S $7.19 Premier 

Genlabs 3715 

Coconut Soap 


Grout Cleaner 

S66G170 NO BID $12.35 Envirox Grout Safe 


5.e. Rayon, And Steel 32 Oz Rayon Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.75 $8.00 Unisan $6.68 $6.85 Rayon #2273232 $5.64 $7.00 $7.44 ACS M8024S $8.71 Premier 

Bay West 49300 Ecosoft Green Seal C-Fold 

Paper Towels, 100% Recycled (Up To 73% Post- 

Case Of 

Consumer), Natural White150 Sheets/Pack, 16 Kimberly Clark & Envision C- 2,400 

Kimberly Clark 

#25190 George Pacific 

6 Paper Towels C-Fold Packs/Case 

Fold 

Sheets NO BID $19.30 Duthey #P100 $21.00 2920 $16.57 $18.85 Kcc $16.48 Bay West Eco Soft 49300 $16.70 Envision $18.80 $31.88 As Spec $21.49 Kimberly Clark 2920 $32.75 Kimb. Clark G1510 

7 Paper Towels Wypall 

8 Toilet Seat Covers 

Trash Liners 33X39 1.5 

9 Mil 

10 Trash Liners 40X48 3 Mil 

Trash Liners 24X23 

11 0.35/0.7 Mil 

Kimberly-Clark Wypall X70 1300-50, White, 

12.5" X 16.8" Sheets Kimberly-Clark X80 

Cleanseat A2600 Toilet Seat Covers, Pre- 

Consumer 20%, Post-Consumer 80% 

Montebello Plastics Liner, Black, 3"X39", 1.5 

Mil Thickness, 90% Recycled Content, 10% 

Virgin Material 

Saniguard, Rochester 

Midland, Sanisafe, 

Harmony Soft, Georgia 

Pacific 

Case Of 152 

Sheets NO BID NO BID $18.16 

Case Of 

5,000 NO BID $32.60 


X80 41300 $18.72 $22.25 Kcc NO BID $17.90 #41300 Kimberly Clark NO BID $33.00 As Spec $18.87 

Rochester 

Mialand $22.90 Saniguard 203 $23.80 $24.15 Gp46901 $22.47 Sani Guard SG203 $23.85 

Brighton Professional, 

Fortune Plastics Case Of 250 $27.51 $32.00 Central Poly NO BID $28.25 $16.90 Not Approved $29.95 

Montebello Plastics Liner, Black, 40"X48", 3 Mil 

Thickness, 90% Recycled Content, 10% Virgin 

Material, Low Density And Linear Low Density Brighton Professional, 

Polyethylene 

Fortune Plastics Case Of 100 $36.48 $33.80 Central Poly NO BID $34.45 $44.00 Betco $35.26 


Or 0.70 Mil Thickness, 90% Recycled, 10% 

Virgin, Low Density And Linear Low Density 

Polyethylene 

All American 

Piscataway, NY 

Central Poly Corp 

Linden, NY 

Clean Sweep Supply 

Montebello, CA 

Rochester Midland 

Boardwalk Toilet Seat 

#50RA-A $26.26 Rochester $35.13 Covers K5000 $21.98 

Republic Bag 3339 - 1.5 

250/cs $26.45 Caltex NO BID $34.35 


41300 - X80 $27.51 

Rochester SORA - 

A5000 

Jaguar Plastics 

RePublic Bag 3339- 

Jacr3339H $29.96 15BR 

Republic Bag 4048 3 Mil 

Flexsol Packaging Ess 


(100/cs) $30.90 Caltex NO BID $35.21 Eco 60 Sxh $35.04 30BR 


Rebpublic Bag 2423 - .38 


Fortune Plastics Case Of 250 $9.94 $33.80 Central Poly NO BID $10.28 $21.00 Betco $9.80 (500/cs) $5.70 Caltex NO BID $15.60 Gen2Y2306 $9.36 0.3BBR 

American Sanitary #10002 

Cherry, Betco Flat Urnial 

Screens, Betco Urinal 

Screen With Enzymes Block Case Of 24 NO BID $19.20 Central Poly NO BID $15.45 

Clean Source 

Commerce, CA 

D2 Distributors, LLC 

San Diego, CA 

Empire Cleaning Supply 


Price 


Unit 

12 Urinal Ade 

State Mfg Urinal-Ade #54043 With Disposal 

"S" Screen, Blue 

Betco Flat U-Screens 

12/cs $15.00 Betco 11.85/dz 

American Sanitary 10002 

Urinal screen w/block 7.90/dz 

American Sanitaire 

#1002 12/cs NO BID $17.87 Krystal Kry Nus $16.74 

Blueseal #1114 Waterless Urinal Trap Liquid 

13 Blueseal Trap Liquid Quart Bottle No Substitutes Quart NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID $19.25 As Spec NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID $19.86 

Falcon Waterfree Urinal 

14 Cartridge Falcon Fs-1 Waterfree Urinal Cartridge No Substitutes Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID $35.82 $49.85 As Spec $36.23 Sloan/Falcon FS1/ WES150 NO BID NO BID $61.50 As Spec NO BID NO BID 

Hillyard 


Padre Janitorial 

San Diego, CA 

Kimb. Clark X70 

41300 

$24.64 Rochester Midland 

NO BID 

NO BID 

NO BID 

Rochester 

25168487 $50.63 Betco 24/Cs 

ATTACHMENT A 

15 Paper Towels Enmotion 

Enmotion 89460 Paper Towels 10"X 800' Rolls, 

White High Capacity Touchless Roll Towels 

No Substitutes 

Case Of 6 

Rolls NO BID NO BID NO BID $48.40 $72.00 As Spec $46.47 

Georgia Pacific 89460 

Towel NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 

Debs Aero Blue Foam 

16 Soap Deb 57226 No Substitutes 

BEACH AND PROMENADE CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 

Case Of 8 

Liters NO BID NO BID NO BID $48.45 $64.00 As Spec $46.88 

Debbs 57226 Aero Blue 

Foam 8/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID $47.82 Debs 57226 NO BID 

17 Toilet Paper 

18 Toilet Paper Dispensers 

Bay West #12990; Eco Soft Toilet Paper, 1Ply 

4X3.75 No Substitutes Case NO BID NO BID NO BID $36.50 $65.00 As Spec NO BID NO BID NO BID $50.90 Wav14800 NO BID NO BID 

Baywest Revolution Dispenser #80301, 3 Roll 

Dispenser No Substitutes Ea NO BID NO BID NO BID NO CHARGE $12.00 As Spec NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 

Highlighted cells indicate recommended bid award A-1

ATTACHMENT A 





JUNE 30, 2013. 


All American 

Piscataway, NY 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Central Poly Corp 

Linden, NY 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Clean Sweep Supply 

Montebello, CA 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Price per 

Unit 

Clean Source 

Commerce, CA 


D2 Distributors, LLC 

San Diego, CA 

Price 

per Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Empire Cleaning Supply 


Price 


Unit 

Gale Supply Company 


Price 


Unit 

Hillyard 


Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 


Inglewood, CA 

Price 


Unit 

P&R Paper Supply 

Redlands, CA 

Price 


Unit 

Space Spray & Odor 

19 Neutralizer 3009 Fresh Air Bamboo, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 NO BID NO BID - 32.90/cs 

CS#095102 bamboo 

deodorant 4x1gl/cs $68.00 As Spec 31.90/cs 

Gen Labs 6823 Bamboo 

freshener 12/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 


CS#090190 Spartan 

Gen Labs 8101 Citris 

20 Neutralizer 3032 Fresh Air Citrus, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 NO BID NO BID - 32.60/cs Airlift Tropical 12x1qt/cs $68.00 As Spec 20.98/cs Freshener 12/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 

4027 Air Aide Apple Total Release Odor 

CS#095140 Big D Apple 

Claire 05421 Apple 

21 Odor Controllant Controllant, 1 Dz No Substitutes Dz NO BID NO BID - 33.80/cs Deodorant 12/cs $59.00 As Spec 32.20/cs Metered 12/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 

Padre Janitorial 

San Diego, CA 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

22 Graffiti Remover 

23 Odor Eliminator 

1110/Off Vandalism Graffiti Remover, Case Of 

CS#090015 Betco Graffiti 

Chase-Vandalex 439-1105 

Claire Aerosol CL880 8oz. 

24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 NO BID NO BID - 60.50/cs Remover 12/cs $61.99 As Spec 36.96/cs 

12/cs $45.00 12/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID 

1155 Enza-Bac, Bio-Encyme/Alive Bacteria 

CS#023397 Spartan Bio- 

Gen Labs 8293 Enzymatic 

Total Odor Eliminator, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 NO BID NO BID - 41.30/cs Bowl 12qts/cs $168.00 As Spec 18.99/cs Deod 12/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 

24 Glass Cleaner 1058 Sparkle, Glass Cleaner, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 NO BID NO BID - 22.60/cs 

CS#141512 Clear view 

Glass Cleaner 12/cs $64.00 As Spec 15.80/cs 


25 Mil Can Liners 40X48 1.6 Mil Black, 100/Case No Substitutes Case Of 100 NO BID $22.40 Central Poly - $19.45 Montebello Plastics $38.00 As Spec 19.40/cs 

MISCELLANEOUS 

26 PAYMENT TERMS 

27 DISCOUNT OFF OF MFR'S PRICE LIST FOR RELATED MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 

28 YEAR 2 PRICE INCREASE 


1% NET 30 DAYS 

10% TO 30% 

Gen Labs 2060 Sparkle 

Glass Clnr 12/cs $18.95 Claire 10 oz. 12/cs NO BID NO BID NO BID 

Caltex 40x48 1.6 100/cs 

Republic Bag 4048-1.6 

100/cs 

1 year protection OR 

$18.06 17.55 30-day protection NO BID $19.87 

NET 30 

1% NET 30 

NET 30 

2% 20 NET 30 

NET 30 

NET 30 

NET 30 

0% 

- 

30% TO 40% 

10% TO 30% 

30% TO 33% 

30% TO 60% 

35% TO 45% 

NO RENEWAL OPTIONS 

10% 

9% 

OFFERED 

NO RENEWAL OPTIONS OFFERED 

0% 

NO RENEWALS OFFERED NO RENEWAL OPTION OFFERED 

0% 

0% 

NO RENEWAL OPTIONS 

10% 9% 

OFFERED 

NO RENEWAL OPTIONS OFFERED 

5% 

NO RENEWALS OFFERED NO RENEWAL OPTION OFFERED 

3% 

5% 

NET 30 

10% TO 20% 

Fortune Plastics 

4048 1.6 $19.56 Caltex 

NET 30 

25% TO 35% 

4-5% 

4-5% 

NET 30 

15% TO 40% 

3% 

3% 


ATTACHMENT A 





JUNE 30, 2013. 


CITYWIDE CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 

Pioneer Chemical 

Gardena, CA 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Quill Corporation 

Lincolnshire, IL 

Price 

Per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Royal Corporation 

Santa Fe Springs, CA 

Price 


Unit 

Select Industrial 


Price Product 

per Unit Quoted 

Share Corporation 

Milwaukee, WI 

Price per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Price per 

Unit 

Staples 

Broomfield, CO 


Superco Specialty 

Valencia, CA 

Price Product 


Waxie Sanitary Supply 

Ontario, CA 

Price 


Unit 

117 H2 Orange 

1 Concentrate 

2 Bleach 

3 Earth Friendly Hand Soap 

Envirox H2 Orange Concentrate 117 Cleaner, 

Degreaser, Sanitizer, Virucide, Orange Scent, Betco Green Earth 

Neutral Ph, Low Voc Hydrogen Peroxide 3.95% Peroxide, Cleaner #33604 

Clorox Germicidal Bleach 96 Oz Bottles, 

Sodium Hypochlorite 6.95% 

Royal #88263 Earth Friendly Liquid Soap, 

Coconut And Plant Derviced Surfacants, Earth 

Salts, Glycerin Preservative And Water 

Germicidal Bleach But 

Sodium Hypochlorite 

Needs To Be 6.95% 

White Lanoline Based Hand 

Soap & Brighton 

Professional White Lotion 

Hand Soap Coconut 

4 Groute Safe 

Envirox Grout Safe Cleaner, Water, Hydrogen 

Peroxide, Surfatants & Orange Oil Concentrate No Substitutes 

Gal 


5.a. Rayon, And Steel 24 Oz Steel Head Ea 


5.b. Rayon, And Steel 24 Oz Cotton Ea 


5.c. Rayon, And Steel 32 Oz Cotton Ea 


5.d. Rayon, And Steel 24 Oz Rayon Ea 


5.e. Rayon, And Steel 32 Oz Rayon Ea 

Bay West 49300 Ecosoft Green Seal C-Fold 

Paper Towels, 100% Recycled (Up To 73% Post- 

Case Of 

Consumer), Natural White150 Sheets/Pack, 16 Kimberly Clark & Envision C- 2,400 

6 Paper Towels C-Fold Packs/Case 

Fold 

Sheets 

7 Paper Towels Wypall 

Kimberly-Clark Wypall X70 1300-50, White, 

12.5" X 16.8" Sheets Kimberly-Clark X80 

Case Of 152 

Sheets 

8 Toilet Seat Covers 


9 Mil 

10 Trash Liners 40X48 3 Mil 

Trash Liners 24X23 

11 0.35/0.7 Mil 

Cleanseat A2600 Toilet Seat Covers, Pre- 

Consumer 20%, Post-Consumer 80% 


Mil Thickness, 90% Recycled Content, 10% 

Virgin Material 

Saniguard, Rochester 

Midland, Sanisafe, 

Harmony Soft, Georgia 

Pacific 

Gal 

Gal 

Gal 

Case Of 

5,000 


Fortune Plastics Case Of 250 

Montebello Plastics Liner, Black, 40"X48", 3 Mil 

Thickness, 90% Recycled Content, 10% Virgin 

Material, Low Density And Linear Low Density Brighton Professional, 

Polyethylene 



Or 0.70 Mil Thickness, 90% Recycled, 10% 

Virgin, Low Density And Linear Low Density 

Polyethylene 



American Sanitary #10002 

Cherry, Betco Flat Urnial 

12 Urinal Ade 

State Mfg Urinal-Ade #54043 With Disposal 

"S" Screen, Blue 

Screens, Betco Urinal 

Screen With Enzymes Block Case Of 24 

Blueseal #1114 Waterless Urinal Trap Liquid 

13 Blueseal Trap Liquid Quart Bottle No Substitutes Quart 

Falcon Waterfree Urinal 

14 Cartridge Falcon Fs-1 Waterfree Urinal Cartridge No Substitutes Ea 

15 Paper Towels Enmotion 

Enmotion 89460 Paper Towels 10"X 800' Rolls, 

White High Capacity Touchless Roll Towels 

No Substitutes 

Debs Aero Blue Foam 

16 Soap Deb 57226 No Substitutes 

BEACH AND PROMENADE CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 

Case Of 6 

Rolls 

Case Of 8 

Liters 

17 Toilet Paper 

Bay West #12990; Eco Soft Toilet Paper, 1Ply 

4X3.75 No Substitutes Case 

18 Toilet Paper Dispensers 

Baywest Revolution Dispenser #80301, 3 Roll 

Dispenser No Substitutes Ea 

NO BID NO BID $8.95 

NO BID NO BID $2.10 Clorox Bleach 02490 NO BID NO BID 


Betco Green Earth 

Alpha HP 930757 Dilutes 

Peroxide 33604 NO BID NO BID 60.86/5 Liter 1:64, 1:28, 1:25, 5 Liter NO BID NO BID 

Royal 88263 Earth 

Friendly NO BID 48.00/4 Gal $4.30 

1.75/Gal or Bleach - Pure Brite 511262, 

1.31/96 oz 4x1Gal/CT NO BID $2.19 

Current Brighton 

Professional white lotion 

hand soap 920350 NO BID $3.98 

NO BID NO BID $15.90 Envorox Grout Safe NO BID NO BID $18.30 

Sustainable Earth 

Washroom Cleaner. 

Dilutes 1:128 919494 NO BID NO BID 

$6.37 

Premier Rayon 

2092424 NO BID - NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.80 

$4.39 NO BID $2.60 Royal 24 NO BID NO BID NO BID $3.37 

$5.69 NO BID $3.15 Royal 32, Cotton NO BID NO BID NO BID $4.56 

$6.39 NO BID $2.95 Royal 24 NO BID NO BID NO BID $4.88 

$8.33 NO BID $3.15 Royal 32 Rayon NO BID NO BID NO BID $6.66 

NO BID $22.37 


Envision Bid 

Bay West 49300 Gs. 

25190 $16.50 Cfold NO BID NO BID $16.73 

X70 41300 Kc 

Wypall NO BID NO BID $13.09 

NO BID NO BID $22.00 Sanisafe T.S. Covers NO BID NO BID $23.53 

NO BID NO BID $25.00 1.5 Mil 250/Case NO BID NO BID $17.20 


NO BID $11.32 

Brighton Bid 

364786 

500/case $12.00 

40X48 3 Mil 

100/Case NO BID NO BID $21.35 

24X23 .4Mil 

250/Case NO BID NO BID $9.39 

Envision C-Fold 493463 

100% recycled ECO logo 

Clorox Germididal 

Bleach 

White Lanoline 

Based hand soap 

certified NO BID $16.84 

Envision C-Fold 

Towels 

Wypall X60 180/Box 


488050 NO BID $18.44 Wypall X70 

Toilet Seat cover 5M/CT 

796069 NO BID NO BID 

Brighton Professional Liner 

33x39 1.35 mil - 150/CT 


Brighton Professional 

Linter 40x4 1.8 Mil - 

100/CT 814891 NO BID NO BID 


Linter 24.23 .35 Mil - 

500/CT 364786 NO BID NO BID 

NO BID NO BID 

Betco Urinal Screen 

$4.50 With Enzyme Block NO BID $69.60 $8.94 

Urinal Screen 12/CT 


Blue Seal #1114 

NO BID NO BID $16.00 Waterless NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID $22.79 Blueseal #1114 

$37.93 

Sloan 1001556 Fits 

Fallon Urinal NO BID $39.50 Falcon Fs-1 NO BID NO BID $39.42 

Falcon Waterless Urinal 

Cartridge 898624 NO BID 

Falcon FS-1 

$37.69 waterfree cartridge 

NO BID $56.62 

Enmotion Bid 

89460 6 

rolls/case NO BID NO BID NO BID $45.45 EnMotion 10x800 647204 NO BID $52.91 Enmotion 89460 

$51.76 

Green or White 

Moving Plate in 

Dispenser NO BID $45.45 

Debs Aero Blue 

Foam 57226 NO BID NO BID $37.57 

Brighton Professional Clear 

Mid Hand Soap 2x1, 200 

Mil New dispenser 

required at no charge NO BID NO BID 

NO BID NO BID $44.00 12900 Bwest NO BID NO BID $46.14 

19376 Compac coreless 

95% recycled EPA CPG 

Cert. 1ply 2000 sheets x36 

rolls NO BID NO BID 


8030 Bwest 3Roll 

Dispenser NO BID NO BID N/C NO BID NO BID 


ATTACHMENT A 





JUNE 30, 2013. 



19 Neutralizer 3009 Fresh Air Bamboo, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 


20 Neutralizer 3032 Fresh Air Citrus, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 

21 Odor Controllant 

4027 Air Aide Apple Total Release Odor 

Controllant, 1 Dz No Substitutes Dz 

22 Graffiti Remover 

23 Odor Eliminator 

1110/Off Vandalism Graffiti Remover, Case Of 

24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 

1155 Enza-Bac, Bio-Encyme/Alive Bacteria 

Total Odor Eliminator, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 

24 Glass Cleaner 1058 Sparkle, Glass Cleaner, Case Of 24 No Substitutes Case Of 24 


25 Mil Can Liners 40X48 1.6 Mil Black, 100/Case No Substitutes Case Of 100 

MISCELLANEOUS 

26 PAYMENT TERMS 

27 DISCOUNT OFF OF MFR'S PRICE LIST FOR RELATED MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 

Pioneer Chemical 

Gardena, CA 

Price 

per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Quill Corporation 

Lincolnshire, IL 

Price 

Per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Royal Corporation 

Santa Fe Springs, CA 

Price 


Unit 

Select Industrial 


Price Product 


Share Corporation 

Milwaukee, WI 

Price per 

Unit 

Product 

Quoted 

Price per 

Unit 

- NO BID NO BID $260.00 NO BID 2.65/Ea 

Staples 

Broomfield, CO 


Superco Specialty 

Valencia, CA 

Price Product 


Cinnamon 10 oz can 

647506 $264.86 NO BID 

- NO BID NO BID $260.00 NO BID 2.65/Ea Mango 10 oz can $264.86 NO BID 

- NO BID NO BID $100.00 NO BID No Bid $108.13 NO BID 

- NO BID NO BID $300.00 NO BID 10.40/Qt 

Sustainable Earth Graffito 

Remover EPA DFE 

Approved 815063 $281.48 NO BID 

- NO BID NO BID $280.00 NO BID 3.52/Qt 


Enzyme plus Odor 

Eliminator 823367 $268.34 NO BID 

Brighton Professional glass 

- NO BID NO BID $220.00 NO BID 1.45/Ea & mirror cleaner 815086 $161.40 NO BID 

- NO BID $18.00 

NET 30 

- 

NET 30 

15% 

40481Bob (100/Cs) 

40X48 1.6 Black NO BID NO BID $21.35 

NET 30 

30% TO 45% 

NET 30 

- 

NET 30 


40x46 1.8 Mil 100/Ct 


NET 30 

PER NJPA PRICING 

NET 30 

- 

Waxie Sanitary Supply 

Ontario, CA 

Price 


Unit 

NET 30 

10% TO 40% 


0-12% 

PER MFR INCREASE 

0% 

0% to 5% 

5% 


0% 



0-12% 


5% 

0% to 5% 

5% 


3% 




To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-D 


Dean Kubani, Director – Office of Sustainability and the Environment 

Resolution for a Moratorium on Hydraulic Fracturing in California 


Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution that calls for a 

moratorium on hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in California until adequate regulatory 

safeguards are in place. 


Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is a controversial oil industry practice, currently being 

used in the Inglewood oil field east of Santa Monica, that has the potential to produce 

significant negative environmental and human health impacts. The cities of Culver City, 

West Hollywood and Los Angeles have all recently adopted resolutions calling for a 

statewide ban or moratorium on fracking until regulatory safeguards can be developed. 

These cities have asked Santa Monica to consider adopting a similar resolution. This 

report recommends the adoption of the attached resolution calling for a moratorium on 

fracking until adequate regulatory safeguards are in place. 

Background 

Hydraulic fracturing (commonly referred to as “fracking”) is a technique that is used to 

increase oil and gas production by injecting water and chemicals at high pressures into 

the ground to create fractures in subsurface rock in order to release petroleum or 

natural gas for extraction. As the use of fracking has greatly increased in recent years, 

so have concerns about its potential negative impacts. Fracking is a suspected source 

of polluted drinking water in Arkansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West 

Virginia and Wyoming and has been linked to seismic activity caused by the injection of 

fracking fluids and the re-injection of waste fluids into wells. Other concerns include 

potential impacts to air quality, generation of polluted wastewater, and excessive water 

use required by the fracking process. 

1

Fracking has been used in California for decades, primarily as an aid to oil extraction, 

however it remains largely unregulated. The California Department of Conservation, 

Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) regulates oil drilling in the 

state, however it does not currently regulate the practice of hydraulic fracturing. 

DOGGR has no records of the location or number of wells where fracking is taking 

place in the state, does not maintain records of the types and amounts of chemicals 

being injected into the ground, the amount of water used or the disposition of the 

wastewater generated by the practice. However, DORRG recently began a process of 

studying potential regulations on fracking. 

Fracking is currently being used to aid oil extraction in numerous wells in the Inglewood 

oil field, which is approximately 4 miles east of Santa Monica and located in the cities of 

Culver City, Baldwin Hills and Inglewood. As there are no known oil or natural gas 

deposits within the City of Santa Monica it is not likely that fracking would ever be used 

here. 

Discussion 

On July 2, 2012 the City Council of Culver City adopted a resolution urging DOGGR to 

place a statewide ban on fracking due to community concerns about its potential 

impacts on public health, safety and the environment. Citing similar concerns, the cities 

of Los Angeles and West Hollywood have both recently adopted resolutions calling for a 

moratorium on fracking until regulatory safeguards can be established. These cities 

have asked the City of Santa Monica to consider adopting a similar resolution. The 

Board of the Westside Cities Council of Governments will be discussing this issue and 

possibly voting on a resolution requesting either a moratorium or a ban on fracking at its 

Board meeting on November 29, 2012. 

Commission Action 

Santa Monica’s Task Force on the Environment discussed the known and potential 

environmental and human health impacts related to fracking at its meeting on August 

2

20, 2012. Following that discussion the Task Force unanimously adopted a motion 

recommending that City Council adopt a resolution that calls for: 

 

 

 

An immediate moratorium on hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in California until 

adequate regulatory safeguards including, but not limited to, air, water and soil 

disclosure and notification are in place. 

Requirements that the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources and the 

California State Water Resources Control Board expeditiously develop, approve 

and implement protective regulations within their existing authority, including 

disclosure reports. 

Incorporating hydraulic fracturing in Santa Monica’s Sustainability Bill of Rights 

The attached resolution addresses the points raised in the Task Force motion and 

recommends that DOGGR place a moratorium on fracking in California until regulatory 

safeguards are developed and adopted. 


There are no financial impacts or budget actions associated with the adoption of this 

resolution. 

Prepared by: Dean Kubani, Director – Office of Sustainability and the Environment 

Approved: 


Dean Kubani 

Director, Office of Sustainability and the 

Environment 

Rod Gould 


Attachments: 

Resolution 

3


Santa Monica, California 

RESOLUTION NUMBER _________ (CCS) 

(City Council Series) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN SUPPORT OF A MORATORIUM ON 

HYDRAULIC FRACTURING (FRACKING) 

WHEREAS, hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a type of resource 

extraction that potentially threatens the health of both the public, the region's water 

supply and the environment, and requires unconventional drilling techniques, vast 

quantities of water, and the use of toxic chemicals; and 

WHEREAS, the oil and gas industry has been granted exceptions to multiple 

laws and regulations, such as the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act, 

and employs potentially hundreds of unknown chemicals of concern; and 

WHEREAS, in a study of Pavillion, Wyoming, the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) recently documented water contamination from fracking chemicals; and 

WHEREAS, fracking wastewater may often be laced with hundreds of toxic 

chemicals, heavy metals, and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM); and 

WHEREAS, due to the volume and chemical complexity of fracking waste, 

treating such unknown waste is difficult, making the disposal of fracking wastewater a 

significant challenge; and that the disposal methods currently available in California 

1

have an imminent possibility of reaching local streams and rivers, which supply Los 

Angeles' regional drinking water; and 

WHEREAS, rivers, streams and wetlands across our state and particularly within 

the watersheds from which the region derives its water supply are vulnerable to 

pollution by fracking; and 

WHEREAS, fracking is currently causing serious local and regional air pollution 

problems across the country, including the release of such hazardous air pollutants as 

methanol, formaldehyde, and carbon disulfide; in addition to the release of volatile 

organic compounds, including benzene and toluene, and nitrogen oxides; and 

emissions from heavy-duty truck traffic, large generators and compressors at well sites 

which contribute to smog formation; and 

WHEREAS, emissions generated by producing, refining and burning shale oil, 

and drilling and fracking for shale oil can result in significant uncontrolled emissions of 

methane, a potent greenhouse gas often associated underground with oil; and 

WHEREAS, fracking in California may undermine the state's efforts to reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; and 

WHEREAS, much of the State of California and the Los Angeles region, in 

particular, is located on top of fault lines within one of the most active and potentially 

dangerous earthquake zones in the United States; and 

WHEREAS, Ohio has experienced a dozen unusual earthquakes, the most 

severe occurring on December 31, 2011, caused by a Class II injection well disposing of 

2

fracking wastewater, which resulted in a moratorium on injection wells in the 

Youngstown, Ohio, area; and 

WHEREAS, there have been thousands of recorded minor earthquakes clustered 

around fracking wastewater disposal wells in central Arkansas and Oklahoma, which 

the United States Geological Survey "almost certainly" attributes to fracking wastewater 

disposal activities, and a 5.6 quake in Oklahoma which "was possibly triggered by fluid 

injection" at nearby wastewater wells; and 

WHEREAS, numerous townships, cities, states, and countries have banned or 

issued moratoriums on horizontal hydraulic fracturing and waste injection wells, 

including the states of New Jersey, North Carolina, and New York; the cities of Buffalo, 

NY and Pittsburgh, PA; the Delaware River Gap; and, internationally, in the Canadian 

Province of Quebec, Germany, France and Bulgaria; and 

WHEREAS, the EPA is currently conducting a study, to be completed in 2015, to 

determine the risks associated with this new industry; and 

WHEREAS, the State of California's Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal 

Resources (DOGGR) reports that oil and gas companies are currently fracking in 

California and specifically, in the Inglewood Oil Field in Los Angeles County, in a region 

which also affects the residents of neighboring cities like Los Angeles, Culver City and 

Santa Monica, and that these companies have proposed future fracking activities; and 

WHEREAS, the State of California's Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal 

Resources (DOGGR) is not currently able to "identify where and how often hydraulic 

3

fracturing occurs within the state" and "has not yet developed regulations to address 

this activity." 

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA 

DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Monica urges the State of 

California's Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources to place a moratorium on 

hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") in California until adequate regulatory safeguards 

including, but not limited to, air, water and soil disclosure and notification, are in place. 

SECTION 2. The City Council also urges the State of California's Division of Oil, 

Gas & Geothermal Resources and the California State Water Resources Control Board 

to expeditiously develop, approve and implement protective regulations within their 

existing authority, including disclosure reports. 

SECTION 3. The City Council incorporates the moratorium on hydraulic 

fracturing in Santa Monica's Sustainability Bill of Rights. 

SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and 

thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. 

APPROVED AS TO FORM: 

_________________________ 

MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE 

City Attorney 

4


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-E 


Andy Agle, Director of Housing and Economic Development 

256 Santa Monica Pier Leasehold 



execute an Amended and Restated Lease Agreement with Hospitality Industry 

Management Group, LLC d.b.a. Rusty’s Surf Ranch for 256 Santa Monica Pier. 


This report recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and 

execute an Amended and Restated Lease Agreement with Hospitality Industry 

Management Group, LLC d.b.a. Rusty’s Surf Ranch to continue operation of a casual 

restaurant/nightclub with live music on the Santa Monica Pier. The proposed lease 

terms obligate the tenant to make both physical and operational upgrades to the 

premises. 

Background 

In the fall of 2011, the City issued a Request for Proposals to lease a 4,309-square foot 

restaurant/nightclub located at 256 Santa Monica Pier. On August 14, 2012, Council 

directed staff to enter into exclusive negotiations with Hospitality Industry Management 

Group, LLC d.b.a. Rusty’s Surf Ranch. 

The property at 256 Santa Monica Pier is located within a multi-tenant building known 

as the Billiard’s Building on the historic Santa Monica Pier. Rusty’s Surf Ranch 

(Rusty’s), a surf-themed restaurant/bar with live entertainment and dancing, has 

operated from the space since 1994. The other tenants in the building include Santa 

Monica Pier Seafood and Al Mare, a new restaurant that is currently under construction 

and is scheduled to open in late 2012. 

1

Rusty’s original lease expires on September 30, 2014; however, the new lease, when 

executed, would supersede the terms of the original lease. In order to allow the tenant 

to commence its improvements to the premises expeditiously, the parties intend that the 

new lease be executed within three months from Council’s authorization. 

Discussion 

The execution of the new lease would obligate Rusty’s to implement improvements to 

the premises that would expand customer capacity, improve operations and enhance 

aesthetics as illustrated in Attachments A and B. Proposed improvements to the front of 

the restaurant include a new façade, signage, and marque with a second-level dining 

balcony above the ground-floor patio. The rear patio would also include a second-floor 

dining deck to replace a large canvas awning, as well as a new patio enclosure, doors 

and windows. Rusty’s may also explore the possibility of a rooftop patio in lieu of the 

rear, second-floor dining deck. All proposed façade improvements would be subject to 

Landmarks Commission approval. Functional improvements include expanded cooking 

areas, restroom facilities, and HVAC systems, as well as remodeling of the entire 

interior space. Completion of the improvements would be done in two phases within the 

first two years of execution of the lease and in accordance with a detailed scope and 

performance schedule to be included in the lease. The lease would require Rusty’s to 

make systematic efforts to improve quality of food offerings, including regular review of 

the menu for adjustments. 

The following is a summary of the recommended business terms: 

 

The proposed term of the lease would be an initial 10-year term. The new term 

would commence upon execution of the lease and any unexpired portion of the 

original lease term would be added to the 10 years of the initial term. Provided 

that Rusty’s is in full compliance with the lease, Rusty’s may exercise one option 

to extend the term for an additional period of five years. 

 

The base rent schedule outlined in the original lease would be maintained from 

the execution of the lease through September 30, 2014 (the date Rusty’s original 

lease is to expire). After September 30, 2014, the base rent would be no less 

than $200,000, subject to an annual rent adjustment based on CIP of no less 

than three percent and no greater than five percent. Percentage rent would be 

six percent of all gross sales commencing upon the execution of the lease. To 

2

support the continued programing of live performances, gross revenues from 

ticket sales and cover charges would continue to be excluded from percentage 

rent. 

 

Rusty’s would make a minimum capital improvement investment in the remodel 

of the premises of not less than $500,000. The City would provide rent credit of 

50 percent of the tenant’s construction cost not to exceed $250,000 against rents 

due, to offset demonstrated expenditures on agreed-upon improvements. In 

addition, the City would allow a performance-based rent abatement during 

construction not to exceed $50,000 and Rusty’s would take responsibility for the 

expense and coordination of the roof repair in exchange for rent credit that would 

not to exceed $15,000. 


The base rent revenue for the FY 2012/13 budget for 256 Santa Monica Pier is 

$100,950 per year and would increase to $200,000 per year (adjusted by CPI) effective 

October 1, 2014 under the proposed Amended and Restated Lease. The base rent 

revenue would be reduced up to $315,000 over the next two years with the tenant’s 

application of tenant improvement rent credits. 

Prepared by: Elana Buegoff, Sr. Development Analyst 

Approved: 


Andy Agle, Director 

Housing and Economic Development 

Rod Gould 


Attachments: 

A. Scope of Work/Schedule of Performance 

B. Tenant’s Renderings 

3

Attachment A. 

Phase I construction 

Rusty’s Remodel 

Scope of Work – REVISED 10‐30‐12 

Front façade ‐ Patio enclosure, including creation of dining balcony above (without access for 

dining until Phase II), marquee and signage, and new deck. 

Kitchen remodel ‐ Expand hood; install 2 nd line position. 

HVAC – Install two new 5‐ton units; ducts to new mezzanine and rear; kitchen swamp cooler. 

Roof repair – Repairs as required on behalf of Landlord, as per Landlord’s inspection report (to 

be determined). 

Phase II construction (Start date November 2013 at earliest – January 2014 target date.) 

Restroom remodel ‐ Relocate and remodel; add one toilet and one sink to women’s and one 

urinal and one sink to men’s. (Low‐flow urinals, hands‐free lights, faucets and soap, air dry hand 

driers.) 

Kitchen remodel – relocate ice machine, create keg cooler, install new equipment, expand food 

pass‐through window. 

Create floor manager office on ground floor ‐ including secondary safe for cash check‐outs. 

Relocate stage ‐ Remove partial wall at ground floor, open ceiling to rafters above new stage 

location, rewire sound and lighting, R&M dining wall treatment, relocate sound booth. 

Relocate management offices from above stage‐ Demo and relocate existing office; create 

secondary kitchen/storage area/kitchen office at 2 nd floor. 

Create mezzanine ‐ Build out office and dining areas, add unisex toilet, and relocate sound 

booth, lighting and stage storage. 

Rebuild bar ‐ Demo existing to install columns and stairs. 

Misc. ‐ Roof vents for new/expanded kitchen exhaust; wall unit in office; fire bowls in columns; 

and new fireplaces; wall and floor surface treatments; internal A/V system. 

Back Patio – R&R back patio enclosure and cover, with covered dining terrace above. 

R&R doors and windows at front and rear façade – All new wood doors and windows to match 

Landmark’s recent approval of Al Mare.

Attachment A. 


Preliminary Timeline – REVISED 10‐30‐12 

Lease Agreement 

Business terms agreed November 1, 2012 

Council approval November 27, 2012 

Design and Engineering 

Design and engineering of both Phases has been underway since August 15, 2012. 

Submittals 

Phase I 

Construction 

Landmarks December 1, 2012 

Coastal December 1, 2012 

Health December 15, 2012 

Phase II 

CUP March 1, 2013 

Coastal March 1, 2013 

Health/ABC August 1, 2013 

Landmarks August 1, 2013 

Start Phase I January 14, 2013 

Completion Phase I March 15, 2013 (Easter Sunday is March 31) 

Start Phase II October 1, 2013 

Completion Phase II April 1, 2014 (Easter Sunday is April 20)

Attachment A. 


Preliminary Construction Budget* – REVISED 10‐30‐12 

Phase I 

Design, engineering and permits $ 50,000 

Leasehold improvements $ 150 – 250,000 

FF&E, Small wares, Signage $ 100,000 – 150,000 

Contingency $ 20,000 

________________ 

RUSTY’S EXPENDITURES, Phase I $ 320,000 – 470,000 

TI Allowance {$ 160,000 ‐ 235,000} 

Phase II 

Design, engineering and permits $ 50,000 ‐ 75,000 

Leasehold improvements $ 300,000 – 400,000 

FF&E, Small wares, Signage $ 50,000 – 75,000 

Contingency $ 50,000 

RUSTY’S EXPENDITURES, Phase II $ 450,000 ‐ 600,000 

TI Allowance {$90,000 ‐ 15,000} 

Total Rusty’s expenditures Phase I and II $ 770,000 – 1,070,000 

Tenant credits due 

Rent abatement $50,000 

TI allowance $250,000 

*Note: Figures shown do not include roof repairs to be undertaken by Tenant on Landlord’s 

behalf.


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-F 


Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works 

Bid Award for the Purchase of Asphalt Materials for Street Maintenance 


Staff recommends that the City Council award Bid #3098 for the purchase and delivery 

of asphalt materials to Vulcan Materials Company, an Alabama-based company, in the 

amount of $155,000 for FY 2012-13, with one additional one-year renewal option in the 

amount of $250,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $405,000 over a two-year 

period. 


The City must utilize asphalt materials in a variety of Street Maintenance projects. In 

October 2012, the City solicited bids for the purchase and delivery of asphalt materials. 

Only one bid was received. Staff recommends Vulcan Materials Company as qualified 

and sole bidder to provide asphalt materials for a total not to exceed amount of 

$405,000 over a two-year period. 

Discussion 

The cost of asphalt has increased steadily with the cost of oil (an underlying primary 

material). Additional project work (including refurbished alleys and a number of 

interdepartmental services) has generated higher than average expenditures for asphalt 

supplies to date, and it is anticipated that these expenditures will continue through fiscal 

years 2012/13 and 2013/14. In FY2011-12, Street Maintenance crews applied 564 

sidewalk patches, repaired 1,316 potholes, provided 61,406 square feet of asphalt 

maintenance repairs, and refurbished 12 asphalt alleys using approximately 3,529 tons 

of asphalt in various mixes. 


In October 2012, the City published a Notice Inviting Bids to furnish asphalt materials as 

required by Street & Fleet Services in accordance with City specifications. The bid was 

1

posted on the City’s on-line bidding website and notices were advertised in the Santa 

Monica Daily Press in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. 

There were 914 vendors notified and 16 vendors downloaded the bid. One bid was 

received and publicly opened on October 17, 2012 per Attachment A. The bid was 

evaluated based on price, product availability, selection, quality of material and 

compliance with City specifications. Street & Fleet Services has purchased asphalt 

supplies from Vulcan Materials Company in this and prior fiscal years and is satisfied 

with the vendor. The current vendor for asphalt supplies is Blue Diamond, who failed to 

bid. Based upon these criteria, staff recommends Vulcan Materials Company as 

qualified and sole bidder to provide asphalt materials in accordance with City 

specifications. 


The purchase order to be awarded to Vulcan Materials is $155,000 for the first year. 

Funds are included in the FY2012-13 budget in division 421 and in the FY 2012-13 

Capital Improvement Program budget. The purchase order will be charged to the 

following accounts: 

014212.544143 $35,000 

014212.544144 $90,000 

C010725.589000 $30,000 

TOTAL $155,000 

Budget authority for subsequent years will be requested in each budget cycle for 

Council approval. Future funding is contingent upon Council approval. 

Prepared by: Homa Mojtabai, Administrative Analyst 

Approved: 


Martin Pastucha 

Director of Public Works 

Rod Gould 


Attachments: 

A – Bid Summary 

2

ATTACHMENT A 

BID #: 3098 BID CLOSING DATE: 10/17/12 

BID DESCRIPTION: PROVIDE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING MIXES AS REQUIRED BY VARIOUS DIVISIONS. 

VULCAN MATERIALS 

PRICING YEAR 1 

IRWINDALE, CA 

SHEET MIX PER TON $86.80 

SCHOOL MIX PER TON $86.80 

3/8" MIX PER TON $71.34 

1/2" BASE MIX PER TON $71.34 

3/4" BIX PER TON $71.34 

BERM MIX PER TON $86.80 

EMULSION OIL* PER GALLON/ 5 GL BUCKET $45.00 

COST PER DELIVERY ENVIRONMENTAL FEE PER LOAD $3.00 

YEAR 2 

SHEET MIX PER TON $88.60 

SCHOOL MIX PER TON $88.60 

3/8" MIX PER TON $73.34 

1/2" BASE MIX PER TON $73.34 

3/4" BIX PER TON $73.34 

BERM MIX PER TON $88.60 

EMULSION OIL* PER GALLON/ 5 GL BUCKET $45.00 

COST PER DELIVERY ENVIRONMENTAL FEE PER LOAD $3.00 

* NOT INCLUDED: $3.00 + TAX ENVIRONMENTAL FEE, BASED ON AVAILABILITY


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-G 



Bid Award for Waterproofing Services at Various City Facilities 


Staff recommends that the City Council award Bid #4037 to Surfside Restoration & 

Waterproofing, a California-based company, as the primary contractor; and Allstate 

Engineering, a California-based company, as the secondary contractor, in a cumulative 

amount not to exceed $75,000 for FY 2012-13, with two one-year options to renew, for 

a cumulative not to exceed amount of $225,000 over a three-year period. 


The City contracts out waterproofing services to prevent leaks and associated water 

damage to buildings and concrete decking through the performance of water tests; 

application of coatings, grouts, sealants and membranes; and various repairs involving 

concrete, curbs/flashings, drainage modifications, drywall, metal and other work. In 

September 2012, the City solicited bids for such services. After reviewing the four bids 

received, staff recommends Surfside Restoration & Waterproofing as the primary 

contractor and Allstate Engineering as the secondary contractor to provide 

waterproofing services for a total not to exceed amount of $225,000 over a three-year 

period. Due to the number of work requests received, staff recommends awarding this 

bid to multiple contractors. 

Discussion 

The City contracts out waterproofing services at various facilities to prevent, detect, and 

repair water leaks in order to minimize damage to property and reduce the risk of mold. 

Contractors apply coatings, grouts/caulking, membranes and sealants; and perform 

various repairs involving concrete, curbs/flashings, drainage modifications, drywall, 

metal and other work to protect against water damage. Diagnostic water testing may 

also be performed to determine the source(s) of leaks and assess vulnerable areas in 

buildings and concrete decking. Approximately 20 waterproofing jobs are performed 

each year; therefore, awarding this bid to multiple contractors is recommended. A 

single contractor may not have the necessary resources to provide support on a timely 

basis to prevent water damage at City facilities. It is important for the City to have a 

1

second contractor in place that could commence work on short notice. 


In September 2012, the City published Notices Inviting Bids to provide waterproofing 

services. The bid was posted on the City’s online bidding site and notices were 

advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with the City Charter and 

Municipal Code provisions. Four bids were received and publicly opened on October 9, 

2012 as described in Attachment A. Bids were evaluated on price, response time, 

warranty on repair work, and compliance with City specifications. Based on these 

criteria, Surfside Restoration & Waterproofing (best per-person labor rate) is 

recommended as the primary contractor and Allstate Engineering (second best perperson 

labor rate) is recommended as the secondary contractor to provide 

waterproofing services as they are the lowest price bidders that are able to meet City 

specifications. 


The purchase orders to be awarded to Surfside Restoration & Waterproofing and 

Allstate Engineering will cumulatively not exceed $75,000. Payments will be made 

using the Facility Renewal Program account M010085.589000 and expenditures will be 

transferred to the divisions incurring the maintenance services. Funds are available in 

individual division FY 2012-13 operating budgets. Budget authority in subsequent years 

will be requested in each budget cycle for Council approval. Future funding is 

contingent upon Council approval. 

Prepared by: Kevin Nagata, Administrative Analyst 

Approved: 




Rod Gould 


Attachments: A – Bid Summary 

2

ATTACHMENT A 

BID # F4037 

CLOSING DATE: 10/9/2012 

DESCRIPTION: PROVIDE WATERPROOFING CONTRACTOR SERVICES AS REQUIRED BY FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 

Allstate Engineering Angelus Waterproofing & Restoration Howard Ridley Co. Inc. Surfside Restoration 

Los Angeles, CA Huntington Beach, CA Chino, CA Huntington Beach, CA 

Item Description Pricing Pricing Pricing Pricing 

1 Hourly Labor Rate $16.72/Hour $79.27/Hour $90.00/Hour $16.00/Hour 

2 OT/After‐Hours Hourly Labor Rate $25.08/Hour $100.10/Hour $110.00/Hour $21.00/Hour 

3 Days/Times Applicable to After‐Hours Rate 5PM ‐ 7AM, Saturdays & Sundays M‐F 3:30PM ‐ 7AM, Saturday Mon‐Fri 4PM ‐ 6AM, Saturday & Sunday, 

N/A 

Holidays (Christmas, Thanksgiving) 

4 Labor Clock Begins Upon Arrival at Customer Location Arrival at Customer Location Departure from Vendor Location Arrival at Customer Location 

5 Labor Clock Ends Upon Departure from Customer Location Departure from Customer Location Departure from Customer Location Departure from Customer Location 

6 % Discount/Mark‐up Offered on Materials 0% 15% overhead plus, 10% Mark‐up 20% Mark‐Up 15% to 20% 

7 Minimum Call‐Out Charge $100.00 $488.00 (4 Hours) $600.00 $500.00 

8 Overhead Margin 10% 15% 20% 15% 

9 Profit Margin 10% 10% 18% 15% 

10 Additional Fees & Charges Double‐Time for Holidays Equipment Rental 15% mark‐up, Double Time begins after 2PM on Sat&Sun 

N/A 

Consulting/Engineering TBD, Double Time 

(Over 12 hours in a given day & Sunday all 

day) $120.58/man hour 

until the end of the day. 

11 Years of Experience 7 29 62 22 

12 Contractors License Number & Types 883852; A, B, D12, C10 461100; C61, D51, B, C33, C39 304198; A, B, C39, C33, C61/D06, C61/D12 711566; A, B, C 

13 Warranty on Repair Work Repair Work ‐ 2 Years, Additional Years may 3 Year Labor and Material 1 Year 5 Years 

be added 

14 24/7 Services? Yes Yes Yes Yes 

15 Reponse Time for Short‐Notice Calls 8 Hours 24 Hours 4 Hours 1 Hour 

16 Year 2 Price Increase 2% 5% 5% 0% 

17 Year 3 Price Increase 2% No Renewal Option Offered 5% 0% 

18 Payment Terms 2% 0 Days, 1% 7 Days, Net 30 Days 2% 10 Days, Net 30 Days 2% Net 10 Days 3% Net 20 Days


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-H 



Request for Proposals for Bergamot Station Arts Center Development 


Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the project objectives listed in this report 

and authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to development teams led by 

Bergamot Station Ltd./Worthe Real Estate Group, Lionstone Group/Industry Ltd. and 

REthink Development/Kor Group for development of the City-owned property located at 

2525 Michigan Avenue, home to the Bergamot Station Arts Center. 


An evaluation panel has completed a review of qualifications submitted by five 

prospective development teams who responded to the Request for Qualifications for the 

opportunity to develop the 5.6-acre, City-owned site located at 2525 Michigan Avenue 

(“Site”). The evaluation panel recommends that three teams be invited to respond to a 

RFP. The recommended short-listed teams are led by Bergamot Station Ltd./Worthe 

Real Estate Group, Lionstone Group/Industry Ltd., and REthink Development/Kor 

Group. 

Background 

On March 20, 2012, the City Council endorsed the Bergamot Station Arts Center 

Preferred Concept and authorized the issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) 

for the purpose of soliciting development team qualifications for the City-owned, 

5.6 acre site located at 2525 Michigan Avenue, known as the “Bergamot Station Arts 

Center.” The Site was purchased by the City with transit funds in 1989 with the goal of 

serving future transit needs in Santa Monica and providing a source of revenue for the 

Big Blue Bus. 

The Expo Light Rail Line Phase II extension is currently under 

construction and will include a stop at Bergamot Station, due to open in 2016. 

1

The City currently leases the Site to Bergamot Station LLC for $603,797 a year. The 

lease expires on December 31, 2015. The Site contains five buildings totaling 76,020 

square feet and is occupied by approximately 30 small creative businesses including art 

galleries, product designers, a non-profit theatre company and a café. The lessee owns 

land adjacent to the City-owned property. This privately owned portion of Bergamot 

Station Arts Center is not included in the RFQ nor will it be included in the RFP. The 

Expo Light Rail Line will bring significant changes to the Site and overall area. 

The Bergamot Station Arts Center Preferred Concept is an overarching vision for the 

Site that was developed in accordance with the principles, policies and 

recommendations set forth in the LUCE and the City’s Creative Capital strategy. The 

Preferred Concept balances the City’s three primary goals for the Site: 1.) to support 

the arts, 2.) to deliver a transit-oriented development, and 3.) to maximize revenue for 

the Big Blue Bus operations. The concept emphasizes retaining the concentration of art 

galleries and other art uses, providing space for a museum, creating revenue-producing 

and visitor-serving uses, including a hotel and restaurants/bars, and delivering 

infrastructure improvements to compliment the arts center and new Expo station. The 

Preferred Concept was the result of eight months of community consultation that was 

started in July 2011 in order to create consensus for a community vision for the future of 

the Site within the larger context of the Bergamot Area Plan, which is currently in 

development. 

Discussion 

The RFQ was issued on May 21, 2012, with submittals due to staff on July 11, 2012. 

Five development teams submitted Statements of Qualifications (SOQ’s). An evaluation 

panel comprised of a City-retained real estate financial advisor and staff from the 

Community and Cultural Services, Planning and Community Development, Big Blue 

Bus, Public Works and Housing and Economic Development departments reviewed the 

SOQ’s. The RFQ evaluation criteria required that development teams have professional 

experience in successfully developing and managing high-quality, mixed-use projects 

2

that include a variety of uses, including hotels, as well as experience in managing and 

promoting cultural arts centers. Development teams were expected to demonstrate 

experience in deploying innovative strategies involving adaptive reuse of older 

buildings, the creation of transit-oriented urban infill developments, and the creation of 

vibrant, sustainable, cultural activity centers. 

The evaluation criteria also rated development teams’ successful experience with 

community involvement and similar public-private partnerships, as well as the ability to 

secure financing for complex, mixed-use developments. After reviewing the SOQs of 

the five teams, the evaluation panel selected four teams to present their experience and 

qualifications in person. The evaluation panel has completed its review and 

recommends that three teams be invited to respond to an RFP. The teams, as noted 

below, will be required to keep the lead, core development partners through the RFP 

process. Sub-consultants may be added or changed. 

Teams Recommended to Receive RFP 

A. The first recommended team includes Bergamot Station Ltd., Worthe Real Estate 

Group, Frederick Fisher and Partners, and Howard Robinson & Associates. 

 

Bergamot Station Ltd.’s founder Wayne Blank is an experienced art center 

developer/operator and an entrepreneurial arts advocate and dealer. Mr. Blank 

is the original developer of Bergamot Station and owns Shoshana Wayne 

Gallery. Along with Howard Robinson, Mr. Blank also developed CRAFTED at 

the Port of Los Angeles, an arts and crafts marketplace located in San Pedro. 

 

Jeffrey M. Worthe is a Principal of M. David Paul Ventures and President of 

Worthe Real Estate Group, headquartered in Santa Monica. The firm’s main 

focus is the acquisition and development of office, mixed-use, sound stage and 

warehouse projects in California. Currently, the firm owns over of five million 

square feet of properties. Mixed-use projects that are complete or under 

construction include the redevelopment of a former USPS sorting center 

warehouse into Warner Brothers studio broadcasting, creative office space, a 

health club and two-acre park, and The Pointe in Burbank, a ground-up building 

housing KCET Studios, creative office, park and underground parking structure 

with 1,400 spaces. Plans for a new hotel development in Santa Monica are 

underway. 

3

Frederick Fisher & Partners has over 29 years of experience in architecture and 

project management, leading the development of many large-scale institutional 

projects, including the Annenberg Center for Information Science and 

Technology at Caltech, PS1 Contemporary Arts Center, the Broad Art 

Foundation and Bergamot Station. 

Howard Robinson & Associates, LLC is a land-use consulting firm representing 

property and business owners, assisting clients through the planning entitlement 

process. Mr. Robinson has worked with Mr. Blank for many years and is a 

partner with Mr. Blank in CRAFTED. 

B. The second recommended team includes The Lionstone Group, Industry Ltd, 

Boulevard Partners, Lew Wolff, Marc Pally and Rios Clementi Hale Studios. 

 

The Lionstone Group, founded in 2001, is a privately owned real estate 

investment firm that currently owns approximately $2 billion of real estate 

investments across the U.S. Lionstone is an active participant in the Santa 

Monica office submarket with nearly one million square feet of creative 

office/mixed-use space in downtown and the Bergamot Transit Village Mixed Use 

Creative District. Lionstone has also completed 14 development projects of 

approximately 10 million square feet, including ground-up apartment projects. 

 

 

 

Industry Ltd, headquartered in Santa Monica, is a real estate development and 

construction management firm specializing in creative office and commercial 

space, adaptive reuse and historic renovation. Industry Ltd.’s subsidiary, 

Industry Partners, provides real estate sales, leasing and market research 

services and has a leasing portfolio in excess of three million square feet, 

including the Lantana Campus and 1630 Stewart/Penn Station in Santa Monica. 

Jim Jacobsen, founder of Industry Ltd. and founding partner of Industry Partners, 

has built a 20-year career specializing in creative and lifestyle work space on the 

Westside of Los Angeles. He has maintained long-term relationships with The 

Lionstone Group and a number of Santa Monica companies including Jerry 

Bruckheimer and POP Sound/Post. 

Boulevard Partners is an investment and development firm committed to urban 

infill and sustainable projects. Scott Ginsburg, Managing Partner at Boulevard, 

managed the redevelopment of the award-winning Lincoln and Rose Shopping 

Center in Venice, anchored by Whole Foods Market, a project with many 

sustainable initiatives and extensive community outreach. 

Lew Wolff, CEO of Wolff Urban Management Inc., a real estate acquisition, 

investment, development and management firm and also serves as Co-Chairman 

of Maritz, Wolff & Co, a privately held hotel investments group that manages toptier 

luxury hotels. Mr. Wolff entered the hotel business in the 1980s, with projects 

including the San Jose Holiday Inn and Burbank Airport Hilton. Recent hotel 

activities include the development and management of the Hyatt Place-Mesa AZ 

4

(154 rooms) and the acquisition, renovation and management of the Westin Saint 

Claire-Downtown San Jose (171 rooms). 

 

Marc Pally is a public art consultant with extensive experience in public art and 

cultural planning for civic, institution and private sector clients. He drafted and 

administered the Art in Public Places Policy for the CRA/LA in 1985 and has 

worked on large-scale, multi-phased public art projects including planning, artist 

selection, concept and development, installation and operations with recent 

clients including Macerich Company (for Santa Monica Place), Sony Pictures 

Entertainment in Culver City, and the City of San Francisco. Since 2006, he has 

been the Artistic Director of Glow in Santa Monica. 

 

Rios Celementi Hale Studios is a multi-disciplinary design firm that has 

collaborated extensively with Lionstone Development. Projects include W Hotel 

Metro Plaza in Hollywood, Paramount Studios Master Plan + Technicolor building 

renovations, Metro Lankershim Pedestrian Bridge, Activision Headquarters in 

Santa Monica, and Euclid Park, Douglas, Joslyn, Clover, Marine and Ozone Park 

Playgrounds in Santa Monica. 

C. The third recommended team includes REthink Development, Kor Group, David 

Hertz, FAIA-Studio of Environmental Architecture, Hornberger + Worstell, Lord 

Cultural Resources and Merry Norris Contemporary Art. 

 

REthink Development is headquartered in Santa Monica and specializes in 

sustainable, LEED-certified mixed-use infill development and adaptive reuse 

projects including Lofts at Cherokee Studios in Hollywood, a 22,000-square foot, 

mixed-use building with home recording studios, which was awarded the national 

AIA Top 10 Green Building Award. Principal and Co-Founder Greg Reitz is an 

expert on green building activities and sustainability programs. 

 

 

Kor Group is a fully integrated real estate investment, development and 

management firm based in Los Angeles. Since its inception in 1999, Kor has 

acquired and developed hospitality, residential and office assets valued in excess 

of $2 billion, including the Viceroy Hotel in Santa Monica, a 162-room hotel that 

Kor acquired and transitioned from a budget hotel to a contemporary boutique 

hotel, selected as “Top 100 Hotels in the US and Canada” by Travel + Leisure in 

2009. Prior to joining Kor, Brian De Lowe, Principal and lead partner on the 

team, was the Vice President of Business Development for Viceroy Hotel Group 

where he oversaw all aspects of the company’s acquisition and business 

development activities in North America and South America. While with Viceroy 

and Kor, he also served as Development Director, leading the acquisition, 

development and redevelopment of adaptive reuse and hotel projects in the U.S. 

and Latin America. 

David Hertz, FAIA Architects is headquartered in Santa Monica and specializes 

in sustainable design. The firm has been involved in several local adaptive reuse 

5

projects including the conversion of the historic Parkhurst Building on Main Street 

and Pier Avenue into a retail store, and the reuse of a restaurant and market on 

20th and Olympic into one of the highest rated LEED Platinum buildings in the 

country. The firm also designed the Abbot Kinney Hotel, an 82 room boutique 

hotel with 5 restaurants over a subterranean robotic 250 space parking garage, 

working with Rethink Development. 

 

 

 

Mark Hornberger of Hornberger + Worstell directs the firm’s master planning and 

design efforts with recently completed projects including the SFMOMA Parking 

Structure with rooftop sculpture terrace and event space and various projects 

involving hotels and adaptive reuse of older buildings. 

Lord Cultural Resources provides specialized planning services to the museum, 

cultural and heritage sectors, and has worked with over 1,900 cultural institutions 

in 50 countries. 

Merry Norris is an arts advocate, consultant and public art champion in Los 

Angeles, providing curatorial services to private collectors, public institutions, 

developers and boutique hotels since 1978. Ms. Norris assisted in the 

establishment of MOCA and serves as trustee for SCI-Arc, and Pasadena 

Museum of CA Art. She is a member of the City of LA’s Mayor Advisory Design 

Panel. 

RFP Project Objectives 

Staff requests authorization to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Site to the 

three recommended development teams. The RFP would request comprehensive and 

thorough development proposals to implement the City’s vision for the Site. To ensure 

that the RFP clearly states the City’s vision, goals, and objectives for the Site, staff 

recommends that Council adopt project objectives for inclusion in the RFP. The 

recommended objectives for development of the Site are: 

 

 

The development must include at least 75,000 square feet of arts-related space 

that is affordable to non-profit and arts organizations, with emphasis on retaining 

existing Bergamot Station Arts Center tenants and providing space for the Santa 

Monica Museum of Art. 

The development shall include open space, infrastructure and other amenities to 

support public access to the light rail station as well as improving the 

environment and functionality of the Site. 

6

The development shall maximize the preservation of existing buildings, where 

feasible. 

The development should incorporate additional uses which support the Site as a 

cultural destination, including evening and weekend activation and uses that help 

generate revenue for the Site. These uses should include a hotel, restaurant and 

bar and could also include other creative office and cultural uses that will 

maximize the market feasibility of the project. 

Parking for the development should consider LUCE parking approaches and 

shared parking considerations. Parking that is exclusively reserved for the future 

tenants should be minimized, while shared parking should be maximized for 

public availability. 

The development should maximize the amount of ground lease revenue to the 

City in order to support the operations of the Big Blue Bus. The development, at 

a minimum, must provide at least $610,000 per year in ground rent to the City. 

The development must exemplify exceptional architecture and sustainable 

design and construction as well as have a focused transit-oriented development 

approach. 

The development must exemplify the concepts identified in the Bergamot Transit 

Village and Mixed Use Creative District Area Plan process. Conceptualization 

and design of the Site must be coordinated with the specific planning process to 

ensure that each process informs the other. 

Financial issues 

 

 

 

Conveyance of the Site would be structured as a long-term ground lease. 

The development team would be required to submit an analysis that 

demonstrates the project’s financial feasibility. 

Within the context of the other guiding principles, maximization of the ground 

lease income and public revenue sources will be considered in the evaluation 

process. 

Next Steps 

At the conclusion of the Request for Proposal process, staff would recommend that 

Council authorize an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with a recommended 

development team during which time the development would be further refined, 

entitlements would be considered and business terms negotiated. 

7

Environmental Analysis 

Issuance of a Request for Proposal is not subject to the California Environmental 

Quality Act. Any proposed development would be subject ultimately to review pursuant 

to the California Environmental Quality Act. 

Public Outreach 

Public participation in the two community workshops, multiple focus groups with local 

gallery owners and regional cultural arts organizations and entrepreneurs, individual 

meetings with over 25 local stakeholders and feedback received from the Arts 

Commission, Planning Commission and City Council from July 2011 to March 2012 

provide the basis for the project objectives recommended to be included in the RFP and 

would provide a basis for reviewing the RFP. 


There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the 

recommended action. 

Prepared by: Jason Harris, Economic Development Manager 

Approved: 




Rod Gould 


8


To: 

From: 

Subject: 




Agenda Item: 3-I 

Contract Amendment for Geotechnical Testing Services for Civic Center 

Parks 



execute a first modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9395 (CCS) in an 

amount not to exceed $86,460 with Koury Engineering & Testing, a California-based 

company, to provide additional geotechnical testing services for the Civic Center Parks 

(Palisades Garden Walk and Ken Genser Square Project). This will result in a new 

agreement in the amount of $155,030. 


On January 24, 2012, Council approved a Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment to 

Design-Build Contract No. 9395 (CCS) in an amount not to exceed $47,014,773 

(includes an approximate 5% contractor contingency, 10% owner contingency and 

allowances) with W. E. O’Neil Construction Company, for construction services of the 

Palisades Garden Walk and Ken Genser Square (named Ken Genser Square by 

Council on October 2, 2012). That contract included a total allowance of $5,126,248 for 

third-party contracts including geotechnical testing and inspection, deputy inspection, 

hazardous material monitoring and abatement, utility connections, and other project 

related costs. 

During project scoping for inspection services, the Design Build team prepared a 

preliminary schedule to identify the anticipated timeframes needed for various 

inspection services. Additional tasks not included on the preliminary schedule have 

been identified which will require additional geotechnical inspection and testing 

services. These tasks include: trench compaction testing for subsurface drainage, 

lighting, and irrigation; and compaction testing of planting topsoil, base aggregate under 

concrete sidewalks, and subgrade work in Main Street. It is anticipated that additional 

full-time or part-time geotechnical inspection and testing services will be required 

throughout the duration of construction at a cost of $86,460. 

1

Background 

On June 28, 2011, Council approved Design-Build Contract No. 9395 (CCS) with W. E. 

O’Neil Construction Company (W. E. O’Neil) in the amount of $75,750, to provide 

preconstruction services for the Palisades Garden Walk and Ken Genser Square 

Project. 

On January 24, 2012, Council approved a Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment to 

Design-Build Contract No. 9395 (CCS) in an amount not to exceed $47,014,773 

(includes an approximate 5% contractor contingency, 10% owner contingency and 

allowances) with W. E. O’Neil Construction Company, for construction services of the 

Palisades Garden Walk and Ken Genser Square. This resulted in a new contract in the 

amount of $47,090,523, which included a total allowance of $5,126,248 for third-party 

contracts including geotechnical testing and inspection, deputy inspection, hazardous 

material monitoring and abatement, utility connections, and other project related costs. 

Discussion 

During project scoping for inspection services, the Design Build team prepared a 

preliminary schedule to identify the anticipated timeframes needed for various 

inspection services. Grading operations requiring geotechnical inspection and testing 

were identified with an anticipated schedule of approximately 90 days. This information 

was used during the scoping of Koury Engineering & Testing’s original contract. As the 

project schedule was revised and updated through the start of construction, it became 

clearer after construction began that the grading and earthwork operations would 

continue longer than identified in the initial schedule. This was based on additional 

work required due to site restrictions identified as the retaining walls were constructed. 

Additionally, tasks not included on the preliminary schedule were identified which would 

require geotechnical inspection and testing services. These tasks include: trench 

compaction testing for subsurface drainage, lighting, and irrigation; and compaction 

testing of planting topsoil, base aggregate under concrete sidewalks, and subgrade 

work in Main Street. It is anticipated that full-time or part-time geotechnical inspection 

and testing services will be required throughout the duration of construction. 

2

Geotechnical inspections services are provided as needed during construction and paid 

for at an approved hourly rate which will remain consistent with the rate proposed in 

their initial bid. 

Consultant Selection 

On July 22, 2011, the City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for geotechnical 

inspection and testing, deputy inspection, and material testing services for various City 

projects. The RFQ was published in the Santa Monica Daily Press and posted on the 

City’s online bidding website. A total of 21 firms responded to the RFQ. A selection 

committee comprised of Public Works staff reviewed the qualifications and developed a 

prequalification list of firms. In January 2012, four firms from the prequalified list were 

asked to provide proposals for geotechnical testing services for Palisades Garden Walk 

and Ken Genser Square. Upon reviewing the proposals and meeting with the firms, 

staff recommended Koury Engineering & Testing based on their proposal, competitive 

prices (hourly rates), experience, references, and qualifications of the proposed project 

inspection team. Subsequently, the City entered into Professional Services Agreement 

No. 9395 (CCS) with Koury Engineering & Testing for $68,570. 


The agreement modification to be awarded to Koury Engineering & Testing is $86,460, 

for an amended agreement total not to exceed $155,030. The January 24, 2012, 

Council-approved Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment to Design-Build Contract 

No. 9395 (CCS) with W.E. O’Neil Construction Company included a total allowance of 

$5,126,248 for third-party contracts, of which the Koury Engineering & Testing 

agreement is one. Funds in the amount of $86,460 for the third-party contracts have 

already been encumbered in the FY 2012-13 budget in account R01207117.589000. 

3

The agreement modification amount ($86,460) will be unencumbered from account 

R01207117.589000 and encumbered as a separate item in account 

R01207117.589600, under Design-Build Contract No. 9395 (CCS). 

Prepared by: Christopher Lamm, CIP Project Manager 

Approved: 




Rod Gould 


4



Agenda Item: 3-J 

To: 

From: 

Subject: 


David Martin, Director, Planning & Community Development 

New Mills Act Contract at 2009 La Mesa Drive. 


Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the 

City Manager to negotiate and execute a Historic Property Preservation Agreement 

(Mills Act Contract) between the City of Santa Monica and the property owner of the 

designated City Landmark at 2009 La Mesa Drive. 


The Mills Act is a state law that enables local governments to enter into contracts with 

owners of qualified historic properties to authorize a property tax reduction. The Mills 

Act is one of the few financial incentives available to owners of historic properties, and 

is an important tool for implementing the City’s Historic Preservation Element goals: to 

promote the designation and long-term preservation of historic resources through the 

provision of incentives and technical assistance. 

The City requires a Mills Act Contract applicant to provide a report prepared by a 

qualified architect describing the condition of the structure and its restoration and 

maintenance needs in order to ensure the resource’s historic integrity and structural 

stability. The recommendations in the architect’s report, if any, are reflected in the 

proposed 10-year restoration/rehabilitation plan, which details a methodology and a 

timeframe for addressing the identified issues. All contracts also include an on-going 

maintenance component as well. Both of these are attachments to the Mills Act 

Contract entered into between the City of Santa Monica and the property owners. Staff 

verifies the information contained in the report and may identify additional restoration 

and maintenance items as necessary. 

Execution of the pending Mills Act Contract would result in a reduction in the City’s 

share of property tax revenue estimated at $12,492 total for the 2012-2013 fiscal year. 

During the initial 10-year contract period, the City is expected to experience a revenue 

reduction estimated to be $124,920. 

1

Background 

In 1991, as part of a comprehensive revision to the City’s Landmarks Ordinance, the 

City Council authorized designated Structures of Merit, Landmarks, and contributing 

structures located in designated Historic Districts to be considered qualified historic 

properties eligible for historic property contracts submitted pursuant to the provisions of 

California Government Code Sections 50280-50290. As a result, property owners of 

such designated historic properties may file a Mills Act Contract application. Aside from 

other terms, the State enabling legislation specifies that a contract contain a provision 

for the preservation of the qualified historic property, and restoration and rehabilitation 

work only when necessary. The City is not obligated to enter into any contract with an 

owner of a qualified historic property; it is completely at the discretion of the City 

Council. 

Once approved, a Mills Act contract requires the County Tax Assessor’s office to 

determine the value of the historic property based upon its current net operating 

income, rather than upon the traditional assessed valuation method resulting, in most 

cases, in a property tax reduction. For residential or commercial structures that are 

rented, the net operating income is determined based on actual rents received. For 

residential and commercial structures that are owner-occupied, the net operating 

income is determined by the income the property would produce if rented. In exchange 

for a property tax reduction, the owner agrees to protect, maintain and, if necessary, 

restore the historic property. 

Under the traditional method of determining property taxes, properties are reassessed 

when sold. However, since Mills Act contracts run with the property, subsequent owners 

may realize greater tax benefits, as the assessed property value typically increases 

when the property is sold, resulting in an even greater difference between the property 

taxes under the assessed valuation method versus the property tax calculation 

permitted by the Mills Act contract. This can be a significant marketing feature for the 

property in terms of future sales and is considered an important historic preservation 

2

incentive because the property will be maintained. Similarly, the obligations and 

property tax reduction benefits associated with the Mills Act contract are also binding 

upon successive property owners during the contract term. 

The initial Mills Act contract term is a minimum 10-year period. Each year on the 

anniversary of the effective date of the agreement, also known as the renewal date, a 

year is automatically added to the initial 10-year term of the agreement. This effectively 

makes the term of the contract at least 10 years, but possibly indefinite unless the 

owner or City submits a notice of non-renewal. A notice of non-renewal could be 

initiated by the City if the property owner is not fulfilling the obligations (i.e. scheduled 

improvements or maintenance) specified within their contract with the City. If such a 

notice of non-renewal were submitted, the contract would remain in effect for the 

balance of the term remaining, either from its original date of execution if within the 

initial 10-year term, or from the date of the last one-year renewal of the agreement. 

Alternatively, the owner may petition the City to initiate an immediate cancellation, which 

would result in payment of a penalty equal to 12.5% of the property’s assessed current 

fair market value, as determined by the County Assessor as though the property were 

free of the contractual restriction. The City may also cancel the contract in the event of a 

breach of contract conditions, whereby the property owner would be subject to pay the 

same 12.5% penalty. 

The terms of the contract also state that the agreement may be amended, in whole or in 

part, if both the owner and the City agree to execute a recorded document to 

memorialize the contract amendment. 

Discussion 

Santa Monica Mills Act Contracts 

In addition to the certified architect’s report, financial data is also required as part of the 

Mills Act Contract application in order to estimate the potential tax reduction and provide 

guidance to the Landmarks Commission and Council in making a decision on Contract 

3

equests. The County Assessor will make a final determination of the taxes due when 

the approved Contract is submitted and recorded, and will continue to conduct property 

tax assessments on an annual basis. 

Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office data showed that for the 2011-2012 tax year, 

property value assessments for the 54 Santa Monica historic properties with executed 

Mills Acts contracts have been reduced between 11% and 82%, with the average 

reduction being 52%, when compared to their “Proposition 13” values. From these Mills 

Act contract property value assessments, correspondingly lower taxes have been levied 

on these properties. Each year, the County Assessor reassesses taxes due for 

properties with Mills Act Contracts. 

Property owners are required to obtain all applicable entitlements such as Certificates of 

Appropriateness, and all associated building permits, for work proposed in the 10-year 

restoration/maintenance plan. Furthermore, all work proposed in the 10-year 

restoration/maintenance plan must comply with “The Secretary of the Interior’s 

Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, 

Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings” (Weeks & Grimmer, 

1995). 

Property owners are also required to submit a report to the City on a biennial basis to 

demonstrate compliance with contract terms. In 2011, staff initiated and completed a 

contract monitoring effort for 48 of the 50 existing contracts and concluded that all are in 

compliance with the contractually agreed upon terms for improvements. In early 2013, 

staff will initiate its latest effort for the monitoring and reporting on all 54 existing 

contracts to ensure that terms and obligations are being fulfilled and the properties are 

appropriately maintained. 

Analysis 

There is only one new application for consideration in 2012, the property at 2009 La 

Mesa Drive. In addition to the specific restoration and repair obligations listed below for 

4

this property, its Mills Act Contract would include a standard requirement for ordinary 

maintenance and upkeep throughout the Contract’s term for work such as roof, 

plumbing, and electrical systems maintenance. 

2009 La Mesa Drive 

Known historically as the Kathryn Grayson estate, the house at 2009 La Mesa Drive is a 

two-story English Cottage/Tudor Revival styled residence. A Mills Act Contract 

application was filed on July 17, 2012. The existing single-family residence was 

designated a City Landmark on November 8, 2010 primarily based on its architectural 

significance, but also as the former residence of entertainer Kathryn Grayson. 

As part of the Mills Act application, an architect’s report was prepared by Robert Chattel 

Architecture. The report assesses the condition of the primary residence and identifies 

repair, restoration/rehabilitation and maintenance needs (Attachment A) along with a 

general schedule for completion of work. The subject property has been undergoing 

significant interior and exterior restoration and rehabilitation work since 2011, including 

the in-kind replacement of all stucco cladding, new roofing materials, repair of historic 

windows and other exterior features. All work has been subject to Certificate of 

Appropriateness review and found to be in conformance with the Secretary of Interiors 

standards. 

5

As discussed more fully in Attachment A, all of the identified issues have been 

addressed in the on-going restoration and rehabilitation work that has been completed 

on interior and exterior of the residence. The building is in excellent repair but, as with 

all historic properties, it will require on-going maintenance to ensure preservation of the 

landmark. 

Attachment A also contains the estimated financial analysis for the property at 2009 La 

Mesa Drive. 

Staff estimates that the new contract would result in an estimated property tax reduction 

of 86.6%. Most recently, the owner paid $90,204 in property taxes. 

Commission Action 

The Landmarks Commission reviewed the Mills Act Contract request at its September 

10, 2012, October 8, 2012 and November 12, 2012 meetings. The Commission 

discussed at length the completeness and appropriateness of this application, and the 

findings and recommendations contained within the architect’s report. Overall, the 

Commission recognized that the City’s current enabling legislation and application 

requirements are broad and do not place restrictions or limitations on Mills Act contract 

applicants, other than to be the owner of a designated landmark, structure of merit or 

contributing structure in a designated historic district. The Commission, however, 

expressed a belief that the intent of the Mills Act should be to provide an owner of a 

landmark property with financial relief that will help fund rehabilitation/restoration work 

that is critical to maintain the condition and integrity of the resource. The Commission 

felt that this specific request for 2009 La Mesa Drive, which involves a single-family 

residence that has been fully rehabilitated and restored in accordance with the 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, while technically eligible for contractual 

consideration, does not meet the commonly perceived intent of the Mills Act program to 

offset rehabilitation and restoration costs. After much discussion, the Commission 

voted unanimously to direct staff to forward a recommendation to the Council in 

6

opposition to the application. Despite the Commission’s recommendation, staff 

continues to support the applicant’s request for a Mills Act contract. The City’s Mills Act 

program was developed as a financial incentive to encourage owners to preserve and 

maintain historical properties. It does not mandate any current or future restoration 

and/or rehabilitation work to the historic resource. Since the property meets the City’s 

application requirements, staff continues to support the request. 


In general, this contract provides a subsidy to the property owner in exchange for 

maintaining an historic resource that is considered valuable to the City. If a Mills Act 

contract were not executed, the property tax obligations for the property are 

approximately $90,204, of which $14,433 would be earmarked as City revenue. 

Execution of this Mills Act Contract for 2009 La Mesa Drive is estimated to reduce the 

annual property tax obligation for the property to $12,127, with a reduction in revenue to 

the City from $14,433 to $1,940 (a net loss of $12,492) for the FY 2012-13 fiscal year. 

The combined value of this subsidy within the initial contract period of ten (10) years is 

approximately $124,920. 

The $12,492 of annual revenue loss is not significant in terms of total property tax 

revenues collected from all properties in the City and therefore, no budget actions will 

be taken to adjust revenue budgets. A summary financial analysis table is included as 

Attachment A. 

Prepared by: Scott Albright, AICP, Senior Planner 

Approved: 


David Martin, Director 

Planning and Community Development 

Rod Gould 


7

Attachments: 

A. 2009 La Mesa Drive: 

Draft Mills Act Resolution 

Draft Mills Act Contract 

Architect’s Report and Financial Analysis 

8

ATTACHMENT A 

2009 La Mesa Drive: 

Draft Mills Act Resolution, Draft Mills Act Contract, Architect’s Report and 

Financial Analysis 

Partial attachments are not available in electronic format. Entire document is available 

for review at the City Clerk’s office and the Libraries. 

9

City Council Meeting: 11/27/2012 


RESOLUTION NUMBER ___ (CCS) 


A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA 

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A HISTORICAL 

PROPERTY CONTRACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT 

CODE SECTION 50280 WITH THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY 

LOCATED AT 2009 LA MESA DRIVE, SANTA MONICA 

WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 50280 et seq. authorizes a city to enter 

into a historical property contract with the owner of any qualified historical property to 

restrict the use of such property so that it retains its historically significant characteristics 

in return for which the property owner obtains property tax relief; and 

WHEREAS, Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.36.270(g) provides that 

designated structures of merit, landmarks, and contributing structures located in historic 

districts that are privately owned shall be considered qualified historical properties 

eligible to enter into historical property contracts with the City upon resolution by the 

City Council; and 

WHEREAS, the property located at 2009 La Mesa Drive is a designated City 

Landmark and the owner of the property has filed an application to enter into a historical 

property contract with the City; and 

1

WHEREAS, the Landmarks Commission reviewed the owner’s application at its 

September 10, 2012, October 8, 2012 and November 12, 2012 meetings and directed 

City Staff to forward a recommendation to the City Council in support of the application; 

and 

WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate for the City to 

enter into a historical property contract with the owner of the property located 2009 La 

Mesa Drive. 

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA 

DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 

SECTION 1. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.36.270(g), the 

City Council authorizes the City Manager to enter into a historical property contract with 

the owner of the property located at 2009 La Mesa Drive, Santa Monica, California in 

accordance with Government Code Sections 50280 et seq. 

SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and 

thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. 


______________________________ 



2

Recording Requested By: 

City of Santa Monica 

Contract No. XXXX (CCS) 

When Recorded Mail To: 


1685 Main Street 

Santa Monica, California 90401 

Attention: City Attorney 

No Recording Fee Required 

Government Code Section 27383 

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT 

THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered in to this 27 th day of November, 2012 by 

and between the City of Santa Monica, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as 

the "City") and Brile Culotti Trust (hereinafter referred to as the "Owner"). 

R E C I T A L S: 

A. California Government Code Section 50280, et seq. authorizes cities to enter 

into contracts with the owners of qualified historical property, as defined in Government 

Code Section 90280.1, to provide for the use, maintenance and restoration of such 

historical property so to retain its characteristics as property of historical significance; 

B. Owner possesses fee title to certain real property, together with associated 

structures and improvements thereon, located at 2009 La Mesa Drive, Santa Monica, 

California, (hereinafter such property shall be referred to as the "Historic Property"). A legal 

description of the Historic Property is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and is 

incorporated herein by this reference; 

C. On November 8, 2010, the Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa 

Monica designated the Historic Property as a historic landmark pursuant to the terms and 

provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.36; and, 

D. On November 27, 2012 the City Council of the City of Santa Monica 

approved Resolution Number ____ authorizing the execution of this Agreement between 

the City of Santa Monica and the property owner of 2009 La Mesa Drive; and 

1

E. City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this 

Agreement both to protect and preserve the characteristics of historical significance of the 

Historic Property and to qualify the Historic Property for an assessment of valuation 

pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter 3, of Part 2, of Division 1 of the California Revenue 

and Taxation Code. 

NOW, THEREFORE, City and Owner, in consideration of the mutual covenants and 

conditions set forth herein, do hereby agree as follows: 

1. Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective 

and commence on January 1, 2013 and shall remain in effect for a term of ten (10) years 

thereafter. Each year upon the anniversary of the effective date, such initial term will 

automatically be extended as provided in paragraph 2, below. 

2. Renewal. Each year on the anniversary of the effective date of this 

Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "renewal date"), a year shall automatically be 

added to the initial term of this Agreement unless notice of nonrenewal is mailed as 

provided herein. If either Owner or City desires in any year not to renew the Agreement, 

Owner or City shall serve written notice of nonrenewal of the Agreement on the other party 

in advance of the annual renewal date of the Agreement. Unless such notice is served by 

Owner to City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by City to 

Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall 

automatically be added to the term of the Agreement. Upon receipt by the Owner of a 

notice of nonrenewal, Owner may make a written protest of the notice of nonrenewal. At 

any time prior to the renewal date, the City may withdraw its notice to Owner of nonrenewal. 

If either City or Owner serves notice to the other of nonrenewal in any year, the Agreement 

shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from its original 

execution or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply. 

3. Standards for Historical Property. During the term of this Agreement, the 

Historic Property shall be subject to the following conditions, requirements and restrictions: 

a. Owner shall preserve and maintain the Historic Property in accordance 

with the minimum standards and conditions for maintenance, use and preservation attached 

hereto as Exhibit "B", and incorporated herein by this reference. 

b. Owner shall make improvements to the Historic Property in 

accordance with the schedule of home improvements, drafted by the applicant and 

approved by the City Council, attached as Exhibit "C", and incorporated herein by this 

reference. 

c. In any restoration or rehabilitation of the property required by 

subsections (a) and (b) of this Section 3, the Owner shall restore and rehabilitate the 

property according to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the 

State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior's 

Standards for Rehabilitation, the State Historical Building Code, and the City of Santa 

Monica to the extent applicable. 

2

d. Owner shall allow reasonable periodic examinations, by prior 

appointment, of the interior and exterior of the Historic Property by representatives of the 

County Assessor, State Department of Parks and Recreation, State Board of Equalization, 

and City, as may be necessary to determine owner's compliance with the terms and 

provisions of this Agreement. 

e. Before undertaking the property maintenance required by subsection 

(a) of this Section 3 and the home improvements required by subsection (b) of this Section 

3, Owner shall obtain all necessary building and planning permits to the extent required by 

local law, including but not limited to, a Certificate of Appropriateness 

4. Provision of Information of Compliance. Owner hereby agrees to furnish City 

with any and all information requested by the City which may be necessary or advisable to 

determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement on an annual basis. 

5. Cancellation. City, following a duly noticed public hearing as set forth in 

California Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this Agreement if it determines that 

Owner breached any of the conditions of this Agreement (including the obligation to restore 

or rehabilitate the property in the manner specified in subparagraph 3 (c) of this 

Agreement), or has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets 

the standards for a qualified historic property set forth in Government Code Section 

50280.1. In the event of cancellation, Owner may be subject to payment of cancellation 

fees set forth in California Government Code Section 50286. 

6. Notice to Office of Historic Preservation. Within six (6) months of execution of 

this Agreement, the City shall send written notice of this Agreement, including a copy 

hereof, to the State Office of Historic Preservation. 

7. Enforcement of Agreement. In addition to the remedy provided in the 

cancellation provision of this Agreement, City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach 

of, the terms of this Agreement. 

The City does not waive any claim of Owner default if City does not enforce or 

cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise 

provided for in this Agreement or in Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapters 9.36 and 9.40 

are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No 

waiver by City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a 

waiver of any subsequent breach or default. 

8. Burden to Run With Property. The covenants and conditions herein 

contained shall apply to and bind the heirs, successors and assigns of all the parties hereto 

and shall run with and burden the subject property for the benefit of the surrounding 

landowners and the City of Santa Monica. Owner shall expressly make the conditions and 

covenants contained in this Agreement a part of any deed or other instrument conveying 

any interest in the property. 

3

9. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall 

be provided at the address of the parties as specified below or at any other address as may 

be later specified by the parties. 

To City: 


1685 Main Street, Room 212 

Santa Monica, CA 90401 

Attention: 

Department of Planning and Community 

Development 

To Owner: 

Brile Culotti Trust 

11715 San Vicente Boulevard 

Los Angeles, CA 90049 

10. No Joint Venture. None of the terms, provisions or conditions of this 

Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of 

their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions or conditions cause 

them to be considered joint venturers or members of any joint enterprise. 

11. Hold Harmless. As between the City and the Owner, the Owner is deemed to 

assume responsibility and liability for, and the Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless the 

City and its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, servants or employees 

from and against any and all claims, loss, damage, charge or expense, whether direct or 

indirect, to which the City or its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, 

servants or employees may be put or subjected, by reason of any damage, loss or injury of 

any kind or nature whatever to persons or property caused by or resulting from or in 

connection with any negligent act or action, or any neglect, omission or failure to act when 

under a duty to act, on the part of the Owner or any of its officers, agents, servants, 

employees or subcontractors in this or their performance hereunder. 

12. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute 

between the parties hereto, arising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereof, 

the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, 

attorneys' fees and costs. 

13. Severability. In the event any limitation, condition, restriction, covenant or 

provision contained in this Agreement is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable by any 

court or competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Agreement shall, nevertheless 

be and remain in full force and effect. 

14. Applicable Law. All questions pertaining to the validity and interpretation of 

this Agreement shall be determined in accordance with the laws of California applicable to 

contracts made to and to be performed within the state. 

15. Recordation. Within 20 days of execution, the parties shall cause this 

4

Agreement to be recorded in the official records of the County of Los Angeles. 

16. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended, in whole or in part, only by 

a written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto. 

17. Sale or Conversion of Property. In the event of sale or conversion of the 

Historic Property, the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (C. C. & R.'s) for the Historic 

Property, if required, shall incorporate by reference all obligations and duties of the parties 

created by this Agreement. 

18. Prohibition Against Discrimination. Owner agrees not to discriminate or 

impose any restrictions on the sale, lease, or occupancy of the Subject Property on the 

basis of sex, race, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, sexual preference, pregnancy, 

marital status, family composition, or the potential or actual occupancy of minor children. 

Owner further agrees to take affirmative action to ensure that no such person is 

discriminated against for any of the aforementioned reasons. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Owner have caused this Agreement to be 

executed as of the day and year first written above. 


A Municipal Corporation, 

By:_____________________________ 

ROD GOULD 



_____________________________ 



OWNER: 

By:_____________________________ 

BRILE CULOTTI TRUST 

ATTEST: 

______________________________ 

MARIA STEWART 

City Clerk 

5

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 

) ss. 

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 

On __________________before me, _______________________________ 

personally appeared _________________________, who proved to me on the basis of 

satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within 

instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their 

authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the 

person(s), or entity upon behalf on which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 

I certify under Penalty of Perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 

foregoing paragraph is true and correct. 

WITNESS my hand and official seal. 

SEAL 

_______________________________ 

Notary Public in and for said State 

Description of Instrument 

Title: 

Property location: 

Number of Pages: 

Historic Property Preservation Agreement 


5, plus Exhibits A, B, and C 

6


) ss. 


On __________________before me, _______________________________ 

personally appeared _________________________, who proved to me on the basis of 

satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within 

instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their 

authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the 

person(s), or entity upon behalf on which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 




SEAL 

_______________________________ 



Title: 






7


) ss. 


On __________________before me, _______________________________ 

personally appeared Rod Gould, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory 

evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument 

and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized 

capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or 

entity upon behalf on which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 




SEAL 

_______________________________ 



Title: 






8

EXHIBIT "A" 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

In the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of 

California: 

Parcel 1: 

Lots 10 and 11 of Tract No. 7233, in the City of Santa Monica, County 

of Los Angeles, State of California, as per map recorded in Book 77 

Page 5 of Maps, in the office of the Recorder of the County of Los 

Angeles, State of California. 

Parcel 2: 

Lot 10 of Tract No. 10163, in the City of Santa Monica, and partly 

within the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, State of 

California, as per map recorded in Book 142 Page 75 of Maps, in the 

office of the Recorder of the County of Los Angeles, State of 

California. 

Parcel 3: 

Lot 11 of Tract No. 10163, in the City of Santa Monica, and partly 

within the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, State of 

California, as per map recorded in Book 142 Page 75 of Maps, in the 

office of the Recorder of the County of Los Angeles, State of 

California. 

9

EXHIBIT "B" 


PROPERTY MAINTENANCE 


As required by Landmarks Ordinance Section 9.36.190, all designated landmarks and 

structures located within a historic district shall be maintained in good repair and preserved 

against deterioration through the prompt repair of any of the following: 

1. Facades which may fall and injure members of the public or property. 

2. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation, defective or deteriorated flooring or 

floor supports, deteriorated walls or other vertical structural supports. 

3. Members of ceilings, roofs, ceiling and roof supports or other horizontal 

members which age, split or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. 

4. Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, foundations 

or floors, including broken windows or doors. 

5. Defective or insufficient weather protection for exterior wall covering, 

including lack of paint or weathering due to lack of paint or other protective 

covering. 

6. Any fault or defect in the building which renders it not properly watertight or 

structurally unsafe. 

In addition, the following annual maintenance measures are also required for the subject 

property: 

1. Inspect roof and replace shingles as necessary; 

2. Clean and service all copper gutters and downspouts; repair/replace (in-kind) as 

necessary; 

3. Inspect all stucco exterior elevations and wood finishes for damage and repair as 

necessary; 

4. Inspect windows and frames, repaint as necessary ensuring strike surfaces remain 

unpainted for proper operation; 

5. Inspect wood details for termites, follow recommended courses of action 

6. Inspect chimney and clean when appropriate; and 

7. Inspect plumbing, mechanical and electrical systems 

**The property owner is required to obtain all necessary building permits and planning 

permits such as a Certificate of Appropriateness for the work specified herein.** 

10

EXHIBIT "C" 


PROPOSED HOME IMPROVEMENTS 

The following projects shall be completed by the property owner of 2009 La Mesa Drive 

over the initial ten (10) year term of the contract. 

Item Year 

Task 

1 2013 Complete new garage addition per approved plans 

2 2013 lnstall drip irrigation systems adjacent to building foundations. 

**The property owner is required to obtain all necessary building permits and 

planning permits such as a Certificate of Appropriateness for the work specified 

herein.** 

11

Architect’s Report and Financial Analysis


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-K 



Bid Award for Purchase of Three Bin Trucks 


Staff recommends that the City Council award Bid #F4028 for the purchase and delivery 

of three bin trucks to Wondries Fleet Group, a California-based company, in the amount 

of $127,183. 


The three bin trucks would replace one truck at the end of its useful life and expand the 

City fleet by acquiring two new trucks. In August 2012, the City solicited bids for the 

purchase of three bin trucks. After reviewing the two bids received, staff recommends 

Wondries Fleet Group as the best bidder for the purchase and delivery of three bin 

trucks in the amount of $127,183. 

Discussion 

The City replaces vehicles that have reached the end of their useful life through the 

vehicle replacement program. Additionally, the City adds vehicles to the fleet inventory 

to respond to changing needs. Since 2008, Resource Recovery and Recycling has 

added six collection routes and three bin truck routes related to the expansion of 

commercial solid waste collection and changes in route boundaries. Bin trucks are 

required in the collection of refuse and recyclable materials throughout the City. 


In August 2012, the City published a Notice Inviting Bids to furnish and deliver three 

new and unused bin trucks. The bid was posted on the City’s on-line bidding website 

and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with City 

Charter and Municipal Code provisions. Two bids were received and publicly opened 

on September 4, 2012 per Attachment A. The bids were evaluated based on price, 

1

ability to deliver, and quality of product. Based upon these criteria, Wondries Fleet 

Group is recommended as the best bidder for the purchase of these vehicles in 

accordance with City specifications. Fleet Management has purchased vehicles from 

Wondries Fleet group in prior fiscal years and has found their fleet selection and 

delivery timeliness to be acceptable. Although bids for small-size alternative fuel bin 

trucks were solicited, of the bids received, none included alternatively fueled platforms 

because a small-size alternative fuel pickup is not currently available in the industry. 

Larger alternative fuel pickup trucks are available, but these do not meet the needs of 

the Department as larger trucks do not fit in the smaller garages and areas where a bin 

truck is needed and used. The inventory of existing bin trucks use compressed natural 

gas (CNG). 


The purchase order amount to be awarded to Wondries Fleet Group is $127,183. 

Funds are available in the FY2012-13 Capital Improvement Program budget. The 

purchase order will be charged to the following accounts: 

C540167.589200 $42,394 

C540167.589100 $84,789 

TOTAL $127,183 

Prepared by: David Lasher, Administrative Analyst 

Approved: 




Rod Gould 


Attachments: A – Summary of Bids 

2

Attachment A - Pricing 

BID # F4028 BID CLOSING DATE: 9/4/12 

BID DESCRIPTION: FURNISH AND DELIVER THREE NEW AND UNUSED BIN TRUCKS FOR USE BY RRR 

Reynolds Buick, Inc. 

Wondries Fleet Group 

Covina, CA 

Alhambra, CA 

ITEM QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXTENDED PRICING PRICING 

1 3 Bin Truck $ 39,214.29 $ 117,642.87 $ 32,786.00 $ 98,358.00 

2 3 Operator's Instruction Manual $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

3 3 Lubrication Instructions $ - $ - $ 225.00 $ 225.00 

4 1 Shop Maintenance Manuals $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

5 1 Illustrated Parts Book $ - $ - $ 210.00 $ 210.00 

6 1 Electric Wiring Schematic $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

3 Scale $ 6,326.53 $ 18,979.59 $ 5,800.00 $ 17,400.00 

3 Frame Reinforcement $ 1,836.73 $ 5,510.19 $ - $ 

- 

Subtotal 

Sales Tax (9.25%) 

$ 

$ 

142,132.65 

13,147.27 

$ 

$ 

116,193.00 

10,747.85 

7 3 Warranty $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

8 3 Tire Fee $ - $ - $ 8.75 $ 26.25 

9 3 Delivery $ - $ - $ 72.00 $ 216.00 

10 Other $ - $ - $ 

- 

Grand Total $ 155,279.92 $ 

127,183.10 

DELIVERY (ARO) 

PAYMENT TERMS 

COMMENTS 

60 - 90 Days 

2%-30 Days 

Units being bid are in stock subject to prior 

sale. **Additional comments on P. 20-22. 

60 Days 

Net 30 Days 

(OTHER) Fee was for Electric Scale System. 

**Comments on P. 20-22


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Kathryn Vernez, Deputy City Manager 


Agenda Item: 3-L 

Amendment to Professional Services Agreement # 2206 with Fairbank, 

Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates for Bi-Annual Resident Survey for FY 

2012-13 



execute a first modification to professional services agreement #2206 in the amount of 

$30,495 with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3), a California public 

opinion research firm, to conduct the bi-annual resident survey for FY 2012-13. This will 

result in an agreement for conducting two bi-annual resident surveys in the amount of 

$60,990. 


The City of Santa Monica contracts with a public opinion research firm to conduct its biannual 

resident survey. Staff recommends extending the existing contract with FM3 for 

an additional survey period at a cost of $30,495, increasing the total contract amount to 

$60,990 for conducting two bi-annual resident surveys. 

Background 

The City of Santa Monica conducts a bi-annual telephone survey of Santa Monica 

residents to assess attitudes about City services and to identify changes in attitudes 

compared to similar studies conducted in previous years. A competitive Request for 

Quote/Proposals was issued in October, 2010. Proposals were evaluated by staff from 

the City Manager’s Office, Finance, and Community and Cultural Services, and 

interviews were conducted with five finalists. FM3 was selected based on strength of 

presentation, qualifications, experience, methodology, strategy and plan to accomplish 

survey goals.

While FM3 had provided public opinion research polling for separate contract services 

totaling $62,195, the 2011 survey was the first time the firm prepared the resident 

survey. The firm’s other contracts were entered into in January 2008 to conduct 

research on the modernization of the Utility Users Tax and June 2010 to determine 

needs and priorities, and examine the viability of a ballot measure to provide additional 

funding to maintain City services. With the amendment, the total amount authorized to 

FM3 for public opinion research will be $123,185 over the 4 year period. 

Discussion 

The 2011 Santa Monica Resident Survey included a number of questions asked in 

previous resident surveys conducted by other public opinion research firms. 

Comparisons were provided from previous years, where available, including 2002, 

2005, 2007 and 2009 studies. Additional questions were also asked to address new 

issues, meet the operational needs of the departments for more in-depth information, 

and to establish new benchmarks on key services. The survey instrument was 

redesigned to include new quality of life and satisfaction indices while maintaining 

benchmark indicators for City department programs and services. The results guided 

staff in identifying service priorities and developing work plans. The benefits of 

continuing to use using FM3 for the FY 2012/2013 survey are: 

 

 

 

 

Tracking relevant questions from previous surveys and providing analysis that 

places new findings in context with historical data; 

In-depth knowledge of the survey to continue to address the new issues of 

concern to the City; 

Maintaining the breadth of the survey’s reach to include additional departments, 

programs, services and policies; 

Utilizing the new analytical tool of the survey analysis – the importance and 

satisfaction matrix, which offers a comparative measure of the importance and 

satisfaction residents place on a variety of City services;

Providing detailed analysis by demographic and geographic subgroupings by key 

questions, which offers an ongoing reference for City staff throughout the period 

between surveys; 

Bringing a vast background of historical and current knowledge of the City, its 

residents and businesses that has been accumulated from past research 

conducted among City residents/voters on a variety of issues and for successful 

ballot measure campaigns. 

The amendment would maintain the 2011 price of $30,495, and includes a $2,000 value 

for increasing oversampling of cell-phone users. This is the same price as obtained 

through the initial competitive process. 

Contractor/Consultant Selection 

In October 2010, the City issued a request for quote/proposals to conduct the FY2010- 

11 resident survey. The request was posted on the City’s on-line bidding site. Twentythree 

proposals were received. The proposals were evaluated by staff from the City 

Manager’s Office, Finance, and Community and Cultural Services. The evaluations 

focused on: qualifications; structure of client team and experience; strategy and plan to 

accomplish the goals for conducting the survey; and reasonableness of the fee 

including the value/service for the proposed cost. Interviews were conducted with five 

finalists. FM3 was selected based on strength of presentation, qualifications, 

experience, methodology, strategy and plan to accomplish survey goals. Based on the 

performance of the 2011 survey, staff recommends a modification to professional 

services agreement #2206 in the amount of $30,495 with FM3 for preparation of the 

2012/13 resident survey.


The professional serviced agreement modification to be awarded to Fairbank, Maslin, 

Maullin, Metz & Associates is $30,495, for a modified professional service agreement 

total of $60,990 for conducting two resident surveys. Funds are included in the 

FY2011-13 budget at account 01207.578671. 

Prepared by: Kathryn Vernez, Deputy City Manager, Special projects 

Approved: 


Kathryn Vernez 

Deputy City Manager 

Rod Gould 

City Manager


To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Agenda Item: 3-M 


Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director of Finance 

Banking Services Agreement with Wells Fargo Bank 



execute a contract for banking services with Wells Fargo Bank, a California-based 

company, in an amount not to exceed $375,000 over a five year term. 


The City began using Bank of America for general banking services in 1999. The 

current contract with Bank of America has been in place since 2004 and expires March 

31, 2013. In preparation for the end of the current contract, staff issued a Request for 

Proposal for banking services in August 2012. Seven financial institutions submitted 

proposals. A panel of City staff subsequently evaluated each firm’s proposal. Based on 

this evaluation and review, staff recommends that the City negotiate and execute a five 

year contract with Wells Fargo Bank at an amount not-to-exceed $375,000, based on 

estimated annual costs and including a 10% contingency to cover any costs associated 

with optional services the City may choose in the future as well as any changes in City 

business practices that would increase service levels and costs. 

Background 

The City’s current banking relationship with Bank of America Merrill Lynch (BAML) 

began in September 1999. In 2004, after a Request for Proposals (RFP) selection 

process, Bank of America was again chosen to provide the City’s banking services. In 

2008, the City exercised an option to extend the contract to September 2012. On 

August 14, 2012 Council authorized a modification of the contract extending the term to 

March 31, 2013 to allow for completion of the RFP process for banking services. 

Discussion 

City bank deposits are approximately $600 million annually with a similar amount of 

payments issued to vendors. These deposits come from a variety of traditional sources, 

1

such as direct payment of checks, cash, and credit cards to the City for taxes and 

services, as well as other types of deposits such as on-line payments, payments by 

mobile device, and deposits from lockbox facilities. Payments to vendors are also made 

in several different ways. This high level of financial activity, the complexity of the City’s 

financial operations, and the need to provide a safe and prudent stewardship of 

taxpayer funds require a full service financial institution with experience providing 

banking services for large governmental entities. This full suite of services includes 

“positive pay” to limit fraudulent check activity; quick processing of City payroll; timely 

processing of all types of deposits; a sophisticated on-line banking system providing an 

array of reporting, reconciliation, and payment services; a purchasing card system; 

cutting edge technology increasing the efficiency of banking transactions such as the 

use of remote deposit scanners; and certain investment services. In addition, State 

legal guidelines regarding public funds, such as the requirement that all deposits in 

excess of FDIC insured amounts be collateralized, limits the pool of banks with 

sufficient capitalization to meet this requirement. 

The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to 

help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low- and 

moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound operations. Banks 

must have a Community Redevelopment Act (CRA) rating of “Satisfactory” or better to 

qualify for public funds deposits. 

Consultant Selection 

A Request for Proposal (RFP) for banking services was posted on the City’s online 

bidding website in August 2012. The following seven banks submitted proposals: 

Bank of America Merrill Lynch 

Bank of the West 

Comerica Bank 

J.P. Morgan Chase 

Union Bank 

U.S. Bank 

Wells Fargo Bank 

2

A panel composed of City Finance and Housing Division staff evaluated the proposals 

on the basis of the following criteria: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ability to meet legal and other qualifications. 

Completeness of proposal. 

Financial strength and capacity of the banking institution. 

Ability to provide required services and availability of optional services and/or 

additional services. 

Creative solutions that can reduce the cost of services while improving 

operational efficiencies and effectiveness. 

Local community involvement 

Total cost to the City of Santa Monica (through either compensating balances or 

direct fee payment). 

The panel evaluated the proposals and conducted interviews with the three most 

qualified firms (Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Union Bank, and Wells Fargo Bank). As 

a result of the interviews, the panel determined that Wells Fargo Bank is best able to 

provide the full range of services that meet the City’s banking needs. Specific decision 

factors were the superiority of Wells Fargo’s on-line banking system, a more effective 

purchasing card program, and a lower overall cost to the City over the term of the 

contract. Also included in this decision was the fact that Wells Fargo Bank currently 

maintains a CRA rating of “Outstanding”. 


The agreement to be awarded to Wells Fargo Bank is for an amount not to exceed 

$375,000 over the term of five years. Funds totaling $133,049 are available in the 

FY2012-13 budget in account object 522180 in various funds where banking fees are 

charged. Budget authority for subsequent years will be requested in each budget cycle 

for Council approval. 

Prepared by: David Carr, Treasury Administrator 

Approved: 


Gigi Decavalles-Hughes 

Director of Finance 

Rod Gould 


3


To: 



Agenda Item: 7-A 

From: 

Subject: 

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney 

Ordinance Approving the Development Agreement Between the City of 

Santa Monica, a Municipal Corporation, Village Trailer Park, LLC, a 

California Limited Liability Company, and Village Trailer Park Inc., a 

California Corporation 


Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance. 


At its meeting on November 14, 2012, the City Council introduced for first reading an 

ordinance approving the Development Agreement between the City of Santa Monica, a 

municipal corporation, Village Trailer Park, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, 

and Village Trailer Park Inc., a California Corporation. The ordinance is now presented 

to the City Council for adoption. 

Prepared by: 

Approved: 

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney 


Marsha Jones Moutrie 


Rod Gould 


1

City Council Meeting 11-27-12 


ORDINANCE NUMBER __________ (CCS) 


AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA 

APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF 

SANTA MONICA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VILLAGE TRAILER PARK LLC, A 

CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND VILLAGE TRAILER PARK INC., A 

CALIFORNIA CORPORATION 

WHEREAS, on June 25, 2007, Village Trailer Park LLC, a California Limited 

Liability Company, hereinafter "Developer," submitted an application for a development 

agreement for a mixed-use project that will include a mixed-use project consisting of 

438 residential units, up to 5,080 square feet of ground floor creative office, and 20,860 

square feet of ground floor neighborhood-serving retail; and 

WHEREAS, on August 13, 2012, Developer submitted revisions to the proposed 

mixed-use project, so that it will include 377 residential units, up to 4,250 square feet of 

ground floor creative office, and not less than 20,700 square feet of ground floor 

neighborhood-serving retail; and 

1

WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report dated October 2011, and a 

Final Environmental Impact Report dated April 2012 have been prepared analyzing the 

environmental effects of the development agreement; and 

WHEREAS, the revisions to the project plans submitted August 13, 2012, 

resulted in potentially significant impacts with respect to Aesthetics (Shade and 

Shadows) and, therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(a), a 

Recirculated EIR was prepared and recirculated for a 45-day public review period from 

August 31, 2012 to October 15, 2012; and 

WHEREAS, a Revised Final EIR was published on November 1, 2012, which 

contains all comments and responses to comments received during the comment period 

for the Recirculated EIR and analyzes the revised project; and 

WHEREAS, on November 14, 2012, the City Council adopted resolutions 

certifying the Final Environmental Report and adopting a statement of overriding 

considerations and mitigation monitoring plan; and 

WHEREAS, the development agreement is consistent with the objectives, 

policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan, as described 

below, and as detailed in the accompanying City Council staff report prepared for this 

proposed project and the exhibits thereto, including but not limited to: 

(a) 

Consistent with LUCE Goal D24 and Policy D24.1, the Project’s location, 

mix of uses, and design, capitalizes on the Expo Light Rail station at Bergamot Arts 

2

Center by contributing towards creating a mixed‐use 17 hours per day, 7 days per week 

neighborhood with a diverse mix of creative arts facilities, local-serving uses, and 

residential types that provides a quality transition to residential neighborhoods to the 

north, east and south. 

(b) 

Consistent with LUCE Goal LUCE D25 and Policy 25.1, two new streets 

that include a portion of Pennsylvania Avenue between Stewart and Stanford Streets 

and New Road will enhance the circulation and transportation in the Mixed‐Use Creative 

District with pedestrian, vehicular and transit improvements that form an interconnected 

grid of vehicle and pedestrian streets and bicycle paths to facilitate circulation in the 

district. 

(c) 

The Project provides for the donation of land and the development of 

parking spaces for future affordable housing and the provision of16 affordable housing 

units within the proposed project, of which 7 will be affordable to extremely low income 

households and 9 for very low income households, consistent with Policy LU 2.4, which 

calls for the creation of diverse housing options along the transit corridors and in the 

activity centers, replacing some commercial potential with additional affordable and 

workforce housing, and encouraging affordable workforce housing near the transit 

stations. 

(d) 

The Project is a mixed-use project that complies with the general land use 

parameters encouraged in the Mixed Use Creative land use designation and complies 

with the requirements of the City’s Rent Control Charter Amendment, consistent with 

3

LUCE Policy D24.13, which states “retain the Village Trailer Park to the extent feasible, 

and permit recycling to other uses that are consistent with the MUCD and in compliance 

with the City’s Rent Control Charter Amendment and sections of the California 

Government Code applicable to recycling mobile home parks.” 

(e) 

The new streets in the Project will be designed as complete streets to 

accommodate pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles, consistent with LUCE Goal LU 19 

and Policy LU19.2, which requires the design and operations of streets with all users in 

mind including bicyclists, transit users, drivers and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. 

(f) 

The Project is designed with significant setbacks and stepbacks, provides 

ground-floor neighborhood serving retail on Colorado Avenue, and provides significant 

building articulation and skyline variation, particularly on the upper floors, throughout the 

project, consistent with LUCE Policy B12.1, which encourages local-serving retail and 

residential uses along the avenue and stepping down the mass of buildings to provide 

transitions to the adjacent lower-scale residential areas. 

(g) 

The implementation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan 

in efforts to reduce vehicle trips in the area and reduce associated parking demand 

consistent with LUCE Circulation Policy T19.2, which seeks appropriate TDM 

requirements for new development. 

(h) 

The project is consistent with the LUCE’s overall land use policies by 

providing community benefits for the area, including but not limited to, two new streets 

(Pennsylvania Avenue and New Road) that will be dedicated to the City as surface 

4

easements; payment of a transportation infrastructure fee; contributions to childcare; 

contributions to services for seniors, disabled persons, and families with minor children; 

ground floor open space; a local hiring program for construction and permanent 

employment; reserved space to accommodate bicycle and car sharing; contribution 

towards the start-up costs for a district-wide transportation management association; 

and a TDM plan that provides for bicycle parking and facilities for a variety of on-site 

users and transit subsidies for residents and employees. 

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA 

DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 

SECTION 1. The Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and 

incorporated herein by reference by and between the City of Santa Monica, a municipal 

corporation, Village Trailer Park LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, and Village 

Trailer Park Inc., a California corporation, is hereby approved. 

SECTION 2. Each and every term and condition of the Development Agreement 

approved in Section 1 of this Ordinance shall be and is made a part of the Santa Monica 

Municipal Code and any appendices thereto. The City Council of the City of Santa 

Monica finds that public necessity, public convenience, and general welfare require that 

any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent 

with the provisions of this Development Agreement, to the extent of such 

inconsistencies and no further, be repealed or modified to that extent necessary to 

make fully effective the provisions of this Development Agreement. 

5

SECTION 3. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices 

thereto, inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such 

inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary 

to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. 

SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this 

Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any 

court of any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the 

remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would 

have passed this Ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, 

or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion 

of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. 

SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage 

of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the 

official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall be effective 

30 days from its adoption. 


______________________________ 



6

EXHIBIT 1 

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 

7

Recording Requested By: 




Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office 

1685 Main Street, Third Floor 


Attention: Senior Land Use Attorney 

________________________________________________________________________ 

Space Above Line For Recorder’s Use 

No Recording Fee Required 

California Government Code Section 27383 


BETWEEN 


AND 

VILLAGE TRAILER PARK, LLC 

AND 

VILLAGE TRAILER PARK 

(as Tenants in Common) 

__________________, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Recitals ........................................................................................................................................... 1 

Article 1 Definitions.............................................................................................................. 6 

Article 2 Description of the Project ...................................................................................... 8 

2.1 General Description ............................................................................................... 8 

2.2 Principal Components of the Project ..................................................................... 8 

2.3 No Obligation to Develop .................................................................................... 11 

2.4 Vested Rights ....................................................................................................... 11 

2.5 Permitted Uses ..................................................................................................... 13 

2.6 Significant Project Features and LUCE Community Benefits ............................ 15 

2.7 Parking ................................................................................................................. 30 

2.8 Design ................................................................................................................. 30 

2.9 Tract Map ............................................................................................................. 31 

2.10 Parking Easement in Favor of Residual Parcel .................................................... 31 

2.11 Contract With City .................................................................................................... 31 

Article 3 Construction ......................................................................................................... 32 

3.1 Construction Mitigation Plan ............................................................................... 32 

3.2 Construction Hours .............................................................................................. 32 

3.3 Outside Building Permit Issuance Date ............................................................... 32 

3.4 Construction Period ............................................................................................. 33 

3.5 Damage or Destruction ........................................................................................ 33 

Article 4 Project Fees, Exactions, Mitigation Measures and Conditions ............................ 33 

4.1 Fees, Exactions, Mitigation Measures and Conditions ........................................ 33 

4.2 Conditions on Modifications................................................................................ 33

4.3 Implementation of Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval ................ 33 

Article 5 Effect of Agreement on City Laws and Regulations ........................................... 34 

5.1 Development Standards for the Property; Existing Regulations ......................... 34 

5.2 Permitted Subsequent Code Changes .................................................................. 35 

5.3 Common Set of Existing Regulations .................................................................. 36 

5.4 Conflicting Enactments ........................................................................................ 36 

5.5 Timing of Development ....................................................................................... 37 

5.6 Process for Closure of Village Trailer Park ......................................................... 37 

Article 6 Architectural Review Board ................................................................................ 38 

6.1 Architectural Review Board Approval ................................................................ 38 

Article 7 City Technical Permits ......................................................................................... 38 

7.1 Definitions............................................................................................................ 38 

7.2 Diligent Action by City ........................................................................................ 39 

7.3 Conditions for Diligent Action by the City .......................................................... 39 

7.4 Duration of Technical City Permits ..................................................................... 40 

Article 8 Amendment and Modification ............................................................................. 40 

8.1 Amendment and Modification of Development Agreement ............................... 40 

Article 9 Term ..................................................................................................................... 41 

9.1 Effective Date ...................................................................................................... 41 

9.2 Term ..................................................................................................................... 41 

Article 10 Periodic Review of Compliance ................................................................................ 41 

10.1 City Review ......................................................................................................... 41 

10.2 Evidence of Good Faith Compliance ................................................................... 41 

10.3 Information to be Provided to Developer ............................................................ 42 

10.4 Notice of Breach; Cure Rights ............................................................................. 42

10.5 Failure of Periodic Review .................................................................................. 42 

10.6 Termination of Development Agreement ............................................................ 42 

10.7 City Cost Recovery .............................................................................................. 42 

Article 11 Default.................................................................................................................. 43 

11.1 Notice and Cure ................................................................................................... 43 

11.2 Remedies for Monetary Default ........................................................................... 43 

11.3 Remedies for Non-Monetary Default .................................................................. 44 

11.4 Modification or Termination Agreement by City ................................................ 46 

11.5 Cessation of Rights and Obligations .................................................................... 47 

11.6 Completion of Improvements .............................................................................. 47 

Article 12 Mortgagees ........................................................................................................... 47 

12.1 Encumbrances on the Property ............................................................................ 47 

Article 13 Transfers and Assignments .................................................................................. 49 

13.1 Transfers and Assignments .................................................................................. 49 

13.2 Release Upon Transfer ......................................................................................... 49 

Article 14 Indemnity to City ................................................................................................. 50 

14.1 Indemnity ............................................................................................................. 50 

14.2 City’s Right to Defense ........................................................................................ 50 

Article 15 General Provisions ............................................................................................... 51 

15.1 Notices ................................................................................................................. 51 

15.2 Entire Agreement; Conflicts ................................................................................ 51 

15.3 Binding Effect ...................................................................................................... 52 

15.4 Agreement Not for Benefit of Third Parties ........................................................ 52 

15.5 No Partnership or Joint Venture .......................................................................... 52 

15.6 Estoppel Certificates ............................................................................................ 52

15.7 Time ..................................................................................................................... 53 

15.8 Excusable Delays ................................................................................................. 53 

15.9 Governing Law .................................................................................................... 54 

15.10 Cooperation in Event of Legal Challenge to Agreement ..................................... 54 

15.11 Attorneys’ Fees .................................................................................................... 54 

15.12 Recordation .......................................................................................................... 54 

15.13 No Waiver ............................................................................................................ 54 

15.14 Construction of this Agreement ........................................................................... 55 

15.15 Other Governmental Approvals ........................................................................... 55 

15.16 Venue .................................................................................................................. 56 

15.17 Exhibits ................................................................................................................ 56 

15.18 Counterpart Signatures ......................................................................................... 57 

15.19 Certificate of Performance ................................................................................... 57 

15.20 Interest of Developer ............................................................................................ 57 

15.21 Operating Memoranda ......................................................................................... 57 

15.22 Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurance on the Part of Developer ......... 58 

15.23 Not a Public Dedication ....................................................................................... 58 

15.24 Other Agreements ................................................................................................ 58 

15.25 Severability and Termination ............................................................................... 58 

Exhibit “A” 

Exhibit “B” 

Exhibit “C” 

Exhibit “D” 

Exhibit “E” 

Exhibit “F-1” 


Exhibit “G-1” 



Legal Description of Property 

Project Plans 

Permitted Fees and Exactions 

Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval 

SMMC Article 9 (Planning and Zoning) 

Local Hiring Program for Construction 

Local Hiring Program for Permanent Employment 

Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area 

New Road Easement Area 

Public Use Areas

Exhibit “H” 

Exhibit “I” 

Exhibit “J” 

Exhibit “K” 

Exhibit “L” 

Exhibit “M” 

Santa Monica Sign Code 

Construction Mitigation Plan 

Assignment and Assumption Agreement 

VTP Resident Relocation Program 

Tract Map 

Exceptions to Title to Residual Parcel


This Development Agreement (“Agreement”), dated for reference purposes 

_________________, 2012, (“Effective Date”) is entered into by and between 

VILLAGE TRAILER PARK, LLC, a California limited liability company, and 

VILLAGE TRAILER PARK, a California corporation (as Tenants in Common, 

collectively, “Developer”), and the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal 

corporation organized and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of California and the 

Charter of the City of Santa Monica (the “City”), with reference to the following facts: 

RECITALS 

A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864 et seq., 

Chapter 9.48 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and Santa Monica Interim Ordinance 

No. 2356 (collectively, the “Development Agreement Statutes”), the City is authorized 

to enter into binding development agreements with persons or entities having a legal or 

equitable interest in real property for the development of such real property. 

B. Developer is the owner of approximately 3.85 acres of land located in the 

City of Santa Monica, State of California, commonly known as 2930 Colorado Avenue, 

as more particularly described in Exhibit ”A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by 

this reference (the “Property”). The Property is currently developed with the following 

improvements: 

(1) Trailer park with 109 rent-controlled pads, of which 59 were 

occupied by units as of the date of publishing of the Tenant Impact Report; and 

(2) Accessory improvements including: one-story manager’s 

residence; community building containing office, clubhouse, library, and restrooms; 

swimming pool; and laundry building. 

C. The City has included the Property within the “Mixed-Use Creative” land 

use designation under the City’s recently adopted Land Use and Circulation Element of 

its General Plan (the “LUCE”). The Property is located within the Residential Mobile 

Home Park District (R-MH) according to Section 9.04.08.06.010 of the City’s Zoning 

Ordinance. To aid in the redevelopment of the Property, the City and Developer desire to 

allow Developer to construct new buildings, subterranean parking, and related facilities. 

D. On June 25, 2007, Developer filed an application for a Development 

Agreement, pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (“SMMC”) Section 9.48.020 

(the “Development Application”). The Development Application was designated by the 

City as Application No. 07-DEV005. The Development Application was for the closure 

of the entire trailer park for redevelopment into a mixed use residential, production office 

and retail project. 

E. To facilitate financing and development of the Property, Developer filed 

an application for a tentative tract map (the “Initially Filed Tract Map”), that would 

have created one ground parcel and two airspace parcels (including one airspace parcel 

1

elow grade for the subterranean parking garage), that would have allowed for the future 

buildings and a common area lot which includes surface and subterranean parking, 

driveways and drive aisles, landscaping and hardscape and other common improvements. 

The application for the Initially Filed Tract Map was designated by the City as Tentative 

Tract Map No. 71974. 

F. On August 13, 2012, Developer submitted revisions to the proposed 

project to be developed under this Agreement. The revised plan is for the closure of 99 

rent-controlled pads and redevelopment into a mixed use residential, production office 

and retail project that is more fully described in this Agreement. At the same time, 

Developer modified the Initially Filed Tract Map such that the modified tentative tract 

map (the “Tract Map”) will create two ground parcels and two airspace parcels; 

including one airspace parcel below grade for the subterranean parking garage and one 

airspace parcel above grade for Building C, that will allow for the future buildings and a 

common area lot which includes surface and subterranean parking, driveways and drive 

aisles, landscaping and hardscape and other common improvements. A copy of the Tract 

Map is attached as Exhibit “L” to this Agreement. 

G. The Tract Map will include (a) Ground Parcel 1 on which there will be the 

option to include up to 216 condominium units and on which will be allowed the future 

buildings and a common area lot which includes surface and subterranean parking, 

driveways and drive aisles, landscaping and hardscape and other common improvements 

and (b) the two airspace parcels described in Recital F above (collectively, the “Project 

Property Ground Parcel [2] on the Tract Map will preserve ten (10) existing Trailer park 

pads on such Ground Parcel [2] (the “Residual Parcel”). 

H. On November 27, 2007, Village Trailer Park, LLC, on behalf of 

Developer, and the City executed that certain Memorandum of Understanding 

(the “MOU”). Prior to execution of the MOU, on October 27, 2006, Developer delivered 

written notice (the “Closure Notice”) to the then-residents of the Property, which 

superseded a previous closure notice dated July 10, 2006, with the intention that the 

Closure Notice constituted the twelve month advance notice required by Section 798 

subsection (g)(2) of the Mobilehome Residency Law (Civil Code §798 et seq.). 

I. As described in the MOU, Developer and the City did not agree whether 

Developer was required to obtain a so-called “removal permit” from the Santa Monica 

Rent Control Board prior to issuing the Closure Notice. Developer agreed in the MOU to 

pursue approval of this Agreement, while at the same time preserving Developer’s claim 

that the Closure Notice was a valid and effective notice that conformed to the 

requirements of Section 798.56 subsection (g)(2) of the Mobilehome Residency Law. 

During the period between the execution of the MOU and the execution of this 

Agreement, the City has determined that each and every VTP Resident has received 

adequate notice of the pending change of use of the Property and that the public hearing 

preceding the execution of this Agreement constitute full compliance by Developer with 

the notification requirements for a change of use of the Property set forth in the 

Mobilehome Residency Law, including without limitation, Civil Code Section 798.56, 

and Government Code Sections 65863.7 and 65863.8. 

2

J. In accordance with Government Code Sections 65863.8, the City has 

informed Developer of Developer’s obligation to provide notices to the residents of the 

Property pursuant to Section 798.56 of the Civil Code. The City finds that Developer has 

complied in all respects with the City’s requirements regarding notices to the residents of 

the Property of the pending closure of the mobilehome park. The City also finds that, 

prior to the date the City held a hearing on the Development Application, Developer has 

verified to the City’s satisfaction that the residents and trailer or mobilehome owners at 

the Property have been so notified, in the manner prescribed by law and has thus 

complied with the requirements of Government Code Section 65863.8. 

K. City has prepared a report on the impact of the closure of the mobilehome 

park on the Property upon the residents of the mobilehome park to be displaced (the 

“Tenant Impact Report”). In accordance with Government Code Section 65863.7 

subsection (a), the City finds that the Tenant Impact Report adequately addresses the 

availability of adequate replacement housing in mobilehome parks and relocation costs. 

L. The City finds that a copy of the Tenant Impact Report has been provided 

to a resident of each trailer or mobilehome in the mobilehome park at least 15 days prior 

to the date of the hearing to consider this Agreement, in accordance with Government 

Code Section 65863.7 subsection (b). 

M. The City has reviewed the Tenant Impact Report and, based upon the 

information in the Tenant Impact Report finds that the VTP Resident Relocation Plan set 

forth in Exhibit “K” attached hereto constitutes adequate mitigation of all adverse 

impacts of the closure of the mobilehome park on the Property, including the impacts on 

the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate housing in a 

mobilehome park. 

N. On February 8, 2011, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance Number 

2345 (“IZO”) establishing interim development procedures pending implementation of 

the LUCE through a revised Zoning Ordinance. On April 26, 2011, the City Council 

adopted Ordinance No. 2356 extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345. On 

February 28, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2394, further extending 

and amending Ordinance Number 2345. On August 28, 2012, the City Council adopted 

Ordinance Number 2407, further extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345. The 

IZO prohibits the issuance of permits for development projects which would constitute a 

Tier 2 or Tier 3 project as established pursuant to LUCE Chapter 2.1 or which would 

exceed 32 feet in height in the Mixed-Use Creative District as delineated in the Land Use 

Designation Map approved by the City Council on July 6, 2010 unless developed 

pursuant to a development agreement adopted in accordance with SMMC Chapter 9.48. 

Adoption of this Agreement will allow for the issuance of permits for the Project. 

O. Developer has paid all necessary costs and fees associated with the City’s 

processing of the Development Application and this Agreement. 

P. The primary purpose of the Project is to provide the Mixed-Use Creative 

District with needed market rate and affordable residential units, including apartments 

3

and condominiums or townhomes, as well as commercial space that will be developed as 

either creative office and/or production space and retail uses. The Parties desire to enter 

into this Agreement in conformance with the Development Agreement Statutes in order 

to achieve the development of the Project on the Project Property. 

Q. The City Council has determined that a development agreement is 

appropriate for the proposed development of the Project Property and to require the 

Developer to take steps to mitigate the adverse impacts of the mobilehome park closure 

pursuant to Government Code Section 65863.7(e). This Agreement will (1) eliminate 

uncertainty in planning for the Project and result in the orderly development of the 

Project Property, (2) assure installation of necessary improvements on the Project 

Property, (3) result in infrastructure improvements to the retained 10-unit mobilehome 

park on the Residual Parcel, (4) provide for public infrastructure and services appropriate 

to development of the Project, (5) preserve substantial City discretion in reviewing 

subsequent development of the Project Property, (6) secure for the City improvements 

that benefit the public, and (7) otherwise achieve the goals and purposes for which the 

Development Agreement Statutes were enacted. 

R. This Agreement is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare 

needs of the residents of the City and the surrounding region. The City has specifically 

considered and approved the impact and benefits of the development of the Project on the 

Project Property in accordance with this Agreement upon the welfare of the region. The 

Project will provide a number of significant project features, including without limitation 

the following: (1) providing 377 dwelling units that will maximize housing opportunities 

near the future Metro Exposition Light Rail Line station, consisting of (a) 161 apartment 

units (99 shall be rent-controlled units) of which 9 shall be deed-restricted for Very Low 

Income units, and 7 shall be Extremely Low Income units; (b) 216 condominium units 

comprised of (i) 88 studio condominium units; (ii) 83 one-bedroom condominium units; 

(iii) 41 two-bedroom condominium units; and (iv) 4 three-bedroom condominium units; 

(c) up to 4,250 square feet of creative office / production space (that may be converted to 

retail space depending upon market conditions); (2) not less than 20,700 square feet of 

retail space; (3) improving traffic circulation through the construction of an extension to 

Pennsylvania Avenue and the construction of a new road on the Project Property; (4) 

increased on-street public parking spaces along the new road and along the Pennsylvania 

Avenue extension; (5) on-site, publically accessible courtyard/plaza areas and a 

pedestrian paseo that would connect through the site; (6) co-locate jobs, neighborhood 

serving commercial and housing on the same site to reduce vehicle trips; (7) add to the 

entry-level housing stock in the City by constructing for-sale, smaller ‘affordable by 

design’ residential units; and (8) improving the aesthetics of the Project Property through 

the construction of new, well-designed buildings and enhanced landscaping. All of the 

for-sale units will be sold at market rates. 

S. The City Council has found that the provisions of this Development 

Agreement are consistent with the relevant provisions of City’s General Plan, including 

the LUCE. 

4

T. On May 23, 2012, May 30, 2012, and on June 20, 2012, the City’s 

Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the Development Agreement. 

The Commission recommended that the City Council certify the environmental impact 

report for the Project and approve the Development Agreement subject to 

recommendations regarding the relocation plan, project design, and community benefits. 

U. On July 24, 2012, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on 

the Development Agreement and at such hearing the City considered the environmental 

impact report for the Project, this Agreement (as modified pursuant to recommendations 

by the Planning Commission), took public comment on the proposed project and 

instructed staff to consider certain issues regarding the proposed project, and continued 

the public hearing to a future date. 

V. In response, on August 8, 2012, Developer requested a continuance in 

order to consider project reconfiguration. 

W. On August 13, 2012, Developer submitted revised project plans. As a 

result, the City recirculated portion of the Final Environmental Impact report pursuant to 

CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. 

X. On November 13, 2012, the City Council held a duly noticed public 

hearing on the Development Agreement and at such hearing the City considered the 

environmental impact report for the Project, this Agreement (as modified pursuant to the 

amendment to the Development Application and the Tract Map), took public comment on 

the proposed project and requested that staff provide more information on certain issues 

regarding the proposed project, and continued the public hearing to November 14, 2012. 

Y. On November 14, 2012, the City Council held a duly noticed public 

hearing on the Development Agreement and at such hearing the City certified the 

environmental impact report for the Project, this Agreement (as modified pursuant to the 

amendment to the Development Application and the Tract Map), adopted resolutions 

adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding 

Considerations, and introduced Ordinance No. ________ for first reading, approving this 

Agreement. 

Z. On November 27, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 

_________, approving this Agreement. 

5

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration for the covenants and conditions hereinafter set 

forth, the Parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 

ARTICLE 1 

DEFINITIONS 

The terms defined below have the meanings in this Agreement as set forth below 

unless the context otherwise requires: 

1.1 “Affordable Units” means all Very Low Income Units, and all Extremely 

Low Income Units in the Project. 

1.2 “Agreement” means this Development Agreement entered into between 

the City and Developer as of the Effective Date. 

1.3 “AMI” means the area median income published from time to time by the 

City’s Department of Housing and Economic Development, based on the United States 

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimate of income for a fourperson 

household in for the Los Angeles-Long Beach Primary Metropolitan Statistical 

Area, as adjusted for the household size of the unit in question. 

1.4 “ARB” means the City’s Architectural Review Board. 

1.5 “Building” means any of the four new buildings to be constructed as part 

of the project. 

1.6 “City Council” means the City Council of the City of Santa Monica, or its 

designee. 

1.7 “City General Plan” or “General Plan” means the General Plan of the 

City of Santa Monica, and all elements thereof including the LUCE, as of the Effective 

Date unless otherwise indicated in this Agreement. 

1.8 “Discretionary Approvals” are actions which require the exercise of 

judgment or a discretionary decision, and which contemplate and authorize the 

imposition of revisions or additional conditions, by the City, including any board, 

commission, or department of the City and any officer or employee of the City. 

Discretionary Approvals do not include Ministerial Approvals. 

1.9 “Effective Date” has the meaning set forth in Section 9.1 below. 

1.10 “Extremely Low Income Units” mean units set aside for Extremely Low 

Income households, as defined by the California Department of Housing and Community 

Development. 

1.11 “Floor Area” has the meaning given that term in Section 9.04.02.030.315 

of the Zoning Ordinance; provided that subterranean space occupied by common rooms 

6

and other amenities available only to the residential tenants and owners of the Project, 

and storage areas shall not be included in the calculation of Floor Area, including without 

limitation for the purposes of determining whether improvements comply with the 

Maximum Floor Area limitation and in calculating Floor Area Ratio. The Parties 

acknowledge that the City is in the process of updating the Zoning Ordinance, and the 

Parties agree that, upon the City’s adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance, the Developer 

may make a one-time election whether to have the definition of Floor Area have the 

meaning as contained in this Agreement or as contained in the City’s new Zoning 

Ordinance. 

1.12 “Floor Area Ratio” and FAR” means floor area ratio as defined in 

Section 9.04.02.030.320 of the Zoning Ordinance. 

1.13 “Including” means “including, but not limited to.” 

1.14 “LEED® Rating System” means the Leadership in Energy and 

Environmental Design (LEED®) Green Building rating System for New Construction & 

Major Renovations adopted by the U.S. Green Building Council. 

1.15 “Legal Action” means any action in law or equity. 

1.16 “Maximum Floor Area” means 341,290 square feet of Floor Area. 

1.17 “Ministerial Approvals” mean any action which merely requires the City 

(including any board, commission, or department of the City and any officer or employee 

of the City), in the process of approving or disapproving a permit or other entitlement, to 

determine whether there has been compliance with applicable statutes, ordinances, 

regulations, or conditions of approval. 

1.18 “Parties” mean both the City and Developer and “Party” means either 

the City or Developer, as applicable. 

1.19 “Pedestrian-Oriented Design” has the meaning as defined in 


1.20 “Pedestrian-Oriented Use” has the meaning as defined in 


1.21 “Planning Director” means the Planning Director of the City of Santa 

Monica, or his or her designee. 

1.22 “Project Plans” mean the plans for the Project that are attached to this 

Agreement as Exhibit “B.” 

1.23 “Project Property” means that portion of the Property to be developed 

pursuant to this Development Agreement as defined in Recital G. 

7

1.24 “Very Low Income Units” mean units set aside for Very Low Income 

households, as defined by SMMC, Section 9.56.020. 

1.25 “VTP Resident” is a person who has a tenancy in the Property under a 

rental agreement as provided in California Civil Code Section 798.9. 

1.26 “Zoning Ordinance” means the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive 

Land Use and Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 9.04 of the SMMC) and any applicable Interim 

Zoning Ordinance as the same are in effect on the Effective Date, is set forth in its 

entirety in Exhibit “E” (Planning and Zoning). 

ARTICLE 2 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 

2.1 General Description. The Project includes all aspects of the proposed 

development of the Property as more particularly described in this Agreement and on the 

Project Plans. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between the text of this Agreement 

and the Project Plans, the Project Plans will prevail; provide, however, that omissions 

from the Project Plans shall not constitute a conflict or inconsistency with the text of this 

Agreement. 

2.2 Principal Components of the Project. The Project consists of the 

following principal components: 

2.2.1 Building A. Building A would contain approximately 48,570 

gross square feet with a height from 46.5 to 57 feet. The ground floor would include 

approximately 7,280 square feet of commercial space. Portions of the ground floor and the 

second through fourth floors of Building A would be comprised of 46 residential 

condominium units containing, in the aggregate, approximately 41,300 square feet of 

space. Building A will also include a rooftop deck with a pool, a gym and restroom 

facilities to serve as common area amenities for the residents of Buildings A, B and C. 

2.2.2 Building B. Building B would contain approximately 167,290 

gross square feet and range in height from 36 to 57 feet. The ground floor would include 

approximately 13,420 square feet of commercial space. Portions of the ground floor and 

the second through fifth floors of Building B would be comprised of 170 residential 

condominium units containing, in the aggregate, approximately 153,880 square feet of 

space. Building B will also include a rooftop deck with multiple seating areas to serve as 

common area amenities for the residents of Buildings A, B and C. 

2.2.3 Building C – Initial Construction. Building C would contain 

approximately 125,420 gross square feet and range in height from 36 to 57 feet. The 

ground floor would include approximately 4,250 square feet of commercial space. Portions 

of the ground floor and the second through fifth floors of Building C would be comprised 

of 161 for-rent residential apartment units (the “Rental Housing Units”), of which 99 units 

8

will be rent-controlled, containing, in the aggregate, approximately 121,170 square feet of 

space. Building C will also include a rooftop terrace overlooking Pennsylvania Avenue to 

serve as common area amenities for the residents of Buildings A, B and C. As set forth in 

the conditions of approval for the project (Exhibit “D”), no certificate of occupancy may be 

issued for Buildings A or B unless and until the construction of Building C is completed 

and Building C is issued a certificate of occupancy. 

2.2.4 Building C – Additional Construction. The Building C described 

in Section 2.2.3 may be enlarged to include an additional 1,770 square feet of commercial 

space on the ground floor; provided that the roadway that includes the New Road (defined 

below in Section 2.6.2d)) is integrated with an expansion of the New Road to be 

constructed on the Adjacent Property (defined below in Section 2.6.2d)). 

2.2.5 Commercial Space. The Project will contain, in the aggregate, 

approximately 24,940 square feet of non-residential, commercial space that will be 

comprised of 4,250 square feet of creative office/production space (provided that such 

space could be converted to retail space, depending on market conditions) and not less than 

20,700 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail. 9,260 square feet of the neighborhoodserving 

retail space will front Colorado Avenue. 

2.2.6 For-Rent Residential Units. The Rental Housing Units would 

include 161 total apartment units, comprised of the following: (a) 145 apartment units 

would be market-rate apartments and (b) 16 apartment units would be Affordable Units. 

The 16 Affordable Units that are for-rent apartments will be comprised of 9 units that 

would be deed restricted as Very Low Income Units; and 7 units that would be deed 

restricted as Extremely Low Income Units. The maximum allowable rents for the Very 

Low Income Units shall be as established annually by the City for all such affordable 

housing units in the City. The maximum allowable rents for Extremely Low Income Units 

shall be 60% of maximum allowable rents for Very Low Income Households as established 

annually by the City. Affordable Units shall comply with the requirements of SMMC 

Chapter 9.56, except that some of the Affordable Units may not be as large as the minimum 

square feet requirements for such Affordable Units set forth in SMMC Chapter 9.56. 

2.2.7 Condominium Residential Units. In addition to the Rental 

Housing Units, the Project will include 216 condominium units (the “Condominium 

Units”). It is Developer’s intention to offer the Condominium Units for sale, but based 

upon market conditions at the time the Condominium Units are completed, Developer may 

offer one or more of the Condominium Units as rental units, at market rates. The 

Condominium Units that will be constructed as part of the project include the following: 

(a) 88 studio units; (b) 83 one-bedroom units; (c) 41 two-bedroom units; and (d) 4 threebedroom 

units. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary elsewhere in this Agreement, all 

of the Condominium Units may be sold or leased by Developer at market prices or rents, as 

applicable. The Condominium Units, if leased to tenants, shall not be deemed to be Rental 

Housing Units for any purpose under this Agreement. 

9

2.2.8 Parking. A two-level, subterranean parking garage would contain 

no less than the number of parking spaces required by the Bergamot Area Plan, if adopted 

by the City prior to the date Developer submits an application for a building permit for the 

Project, or 635 spaces otherwise, and would contain no more than 799 spaces. The garage 

would be a single, integrated parking garage, serving the entire Project and providing some 

parking spaces for the benefit of the Residual Parcel (in accordance with the terms of this 

Agreement). Each residential unit in the Project (whether a Condominium Unit or an 

apartment unit) shall be offered at least one designated parking space in the Project, at the 

time the residential unit is leased or sold unless unbundled in accordance with 

Section 2.6.2(m)(i)(9) of this Agreement. The parking garage may include tandem parking 

spaces on the lower level of the parking garage to serve all of the residential units in the 

Project, such that two parking stalls may be arranged as tandem stalls, as generally depicted 

on the Project Plans. The P1 parking level shall not be permitted to have any tandem 

parking spaces. If the New Road is expanded pursuant to Section 2.6.2(d) below, then the 

New Road may include on-street public parking spaces to be located on the western 

boundary of the site. The Pennsylvania Avenue Extension may also include on-street 

public parking spaces. The public street parking spaces in the New Road or in the 

Pennsylvania Avenue Extension shall not be included in the Project’s parking count. 40 of 

the subterranean parking spaces shall be subject to the easement in favor of the Residual 

Parcel required by Section 2.10 of this Agreement. 

2.2.9 Plaza Areas. Courtyard/plaza areas and a pedestrian paseo will be 

provided within the Property. 

2.2.10 Pennsylvania Avenue Extension. A portion of the Property will be 

improved with an extension of Pennsylvania Avenue that would be oriented east-west 

across the Property from Stanford Street to the westerly edge of the Property. This 

extension of Pennsylvania Avenue will be dedicated to the City in accordance with the 

terms of this Agreement. 

2.2.11 New Road. A portion of the Property will be improved with a new 

road area that would be oriented north-south across the Property along the western border 

of the Property, from Colorado Avenue to the southerly edge of the Property. This road 

area will be dedicated to the City in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 

2.2.12 Transfer of Residual Parcel to the City or Its Designee. Developer 

shall convey to the City or to any entity designated by the City fee title to the Residual 

Parcel, pursuant to the requirements of Section 2.6.2(n) below. 

2.2.13 Resident Relocation Benefits. Prior to issuance of a building 

permit for the Project, Developer shall comply with those requirements of the VTP 

Resident Relocation Program set forth in Exhibit “K” attached hereto that can be completed 

prior to commencement of construction of the Project. Developer shall comply with the 

remaining elements of the VTP Resident Relocation Program in accordance with the 

milestones set forth for such elements in Exhibit “K” attached hereto. 

10

2.3 No Obligation to Develop. 

2.3.1 Except as specifically provided herein: 

a) Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require 

Developer to proceed with the construction of the Project or any portion thereof. 

b) The decision to proceed or to forbear or delay in 

proceeding with construction of the Project or any portion thereof shall be in Developer’s 

sole discretion. 

c) Failure by Developer to proceed with construction of the 

Project or any portion thereof shall not give rise to any liability, claim for damages or 

cause of action against Developer, except as may arise pursuant to a nuisance abatement 

proceeding under SMMC Chapter 8.96, or any successor legislation. 

2.3.2 Failure by Developer to proceed with construction of the Project or 

any portion thereof shall not result in any loss or diminution of development rights, 

except upon expiration of Developer’s vested rights pursuant to this Agreement, or the 

termination of this Agreement. 

2.3.3 Notwithstanding any provision of this Section 2.3 to the contrary, 

Developer shall be required to implement all mitigation measures and conditions required 

under this Agreement in accordance with Exhibit “D” and the Tenant Relocation Plan set 

forth on Exhibit “K”. 

2.4 Vested Rights. 

2.4.1 Approval of Project Plans. The City hereby approves the Project 

Plans. The City shall maintain a complete copy of the Project Plans, stamped 

“Approved” by the City, in the Office of the City Clerk, and Developer shall maintain a 

complete copy of the Project Plans, stamped “Approved” by the City, in its offices or at 

the Project site. The Project Plans to be maintained by the City and Developer shall be in 

a half-size set. Further detailed plans for the construction of the Building and 

improvements, including, without limitation, structural plans and working drawings shall 

be prepared by Developer subsequent to the Effective Date based upon the Project Plans. 

2.4.2 Minor Modifications to Project. Developer with the approval of 

the Planning Director, may make minor changes to the Project or Project Plans 

(“Minor Modifications”) without amending this Agreement; provided that the Planning 

Director makes the following specific findings that the Minor Modifications: (i) are 

consistent with the Project’s approvals as approved by the City Council; (ii) are 

consistent with the provisions, purposes and goals of this Agreement; (iii) are not 

detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience or general welfare; and (iv) will not 

significantly and adversely affect the public benefits associated with the Project. The 

Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission in writing of any Minor 

Modifications approved pursuant to this Section 2.4.2. 

11

2.4.3 Modifications Requiring Amendment to this Agreement. 

Developer shall not make any “Major Modifications” (defined below) to the Project 

without first amending this Agreement to permit such Major Modifications. 

A “Major Modification” means the following: 

a) Reduction of any setback of the Project, as depicted on the 

Project Plans, if by such reduction the applicable setback would be less than is permitted 

in the applicable zoning district under the Zoning Ordinance in effect on the date such 

modification is applied for by more than twenty percent (20%) of the dimension of such 

setback; 

b) Any change in use not consistent with the permitted uses 

defined in Section 2.5 below; 

c) Any increase in the number of residential dwelling units in 

excess of 377 dwelling units; 

d) Any reduction in the number of Affordable Units that are 

part of the Rental Housing Units; 

e) Any decrease in the neighborhood-serving retail component 

of the project below 20,700 square feet. 

f) Any decrease in the number of parking spaces such that the 

aggregate number of parking spaces in the Project, after such reduction, would be less 

than the minimum number of spaces established by the Bergamot Area Plan, if adopted 

by the City by the date Developer requests such Major Modification, or 635 otherwise. 

Additionally, any such request shall (i) be supported by a Developer-prepared written 

report that demonstrates that the proposed, reduced number of parking spaces will meet 

the Project’s peak parking demand and (ii) Developer shall obtain the Planning Director’s 

approval of such report. 

parking spaces; 

g) Any increase in the number of parking spaces above 799 

h) Any material change in the number or location of curb cuts 

shown on the Project Plans; 

i) Any variation in the design, massing or building 

configuration, including but not limited to, floor area and building height, that renders 

such aspects out of substantial compliance with the Project Plans after ARB Approval; 

and 

j) Any change that would materially reduce the community 

benefits as set forth in Section 2.6. 

12

If a proposed modification does not exceed the Major Modification 

thresholds established above, then the proposed modification may be reviewed in 

accordance with Section 2.4.2. 

2.4.4 City Consent to Modification. If the City’s consent is required for 

a Minor Modification, the Planning Director shall not unreasonably withhold, condition, 

or delay its approval of a request for such Minor Modification. The City may impose 

fees, exactions, conditions, and mitigation measures in connection with its approval of a 

Minor or Major Modification, subject to any applicable law. Notwithstanding anything 

to the contrary herein or in the Existing Regulations, if the Planning Director approves a 

Minor Modification or if the City approves a Major Modification (and the corresponding 

amendment to this Agreement for such Major Modification), as the case may be, 

Developer shall not be required to obtain any other Discretionary Approvals for such 

modification, except for ARB approval, in the case of certain Major Modifications. 

2.4.5 Right to Develop. Subject to the provisions of Section 3.3 below, 

during the Term (as defined in Section 9.2 below) of this Development Agreement, 

Developer shall have the vested rights (the “Vested Rights”) to (a) develop and construct 

the Project in accordance with the following: (i) the Project Plans (as the same may be 

modified from time to time in accordance with this Agreement); (ii) any Minor 

Modifications approved in accordance with Section 2.4.2; (iii) any Major Modifications 

which are approved pursuant to Section 2.4.3 above; (iv) a tentative and final tract map 

that is prepared and approved at any time during the Term of this Agreement in 

accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9.20 of the Zoning Ordinance as the same 

exist on the date of this Agreement, provided that such tentative and final tract map is 

otherwise in substantial compliance with the development standards established by this 

Agreement; and (v) the requirements and obligations of Developer related to the 

improvements which are specifically set forth in this Agreement, and (b) use and occupy 

the Project for the permitted uses set forth in Section 2.5. Except for any required 

approvals from the ARB pursuant to Section 6.1 of this Agreement, the City shall have 

no further discretion over the elements of the Project which have been delineated in the 

Project Plans (as the same may be modified from time to time in accordance with this 

Agreement). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Zoning Ordinance, the Tract 

Map shall remain valid for the Term of this Agreement, until final tract maps are 

recorded for the Property in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 9.20 of the 

Zoning Ordinance. 

2.4.6 Foundation Only Building Permit. Section 8.08.070(b) of the 

Zoning Code allows for issuance of partial permits for portions of a structure. Developer 

may submit an application for a Foundation Only Permit, which application shall be 

processed according to the Division of Building and Safety’s Foundation Only Permit 

policy (PT-05-03). 

2.5 Permitted Uses. The Parties acknowledge that the City is in the process of 

updating the Zoning Ordinance, and the Parties agree that, upon the City’s adoption of 

the new Zoning Ordinance, the Developer may make a one-time election whether to have 

the Permitted Uses as contained in this Agreement or as identified in the zoning district 

13

where the Project is located in the City’s new zoning ordinance. Pursuant to this 

Agreement, Permitted Uses in the Project shall be as specified below: 

a) Residential uses, both for-rent and for-sale; 

b) Enclosed entertainment-related facilities including, without 

limitation, movie studios and production facilities, distribution facilities, editing facilities, 

catering facilities, printing facilities, post-production facilities, set construction facilities, 

sound studios, special effects facilities and other entertainment-related production 

operations; 

c) Broadcasting/communications, telecommunications facilities, and 

ancillary facilities customarily associated with and incidental to such production 

facilities, including, without limitation, facilities for broadcasting, transmitting, 

distributing, recording, receiving, editing, and creating broadcast/communications and 

telecommunications; 

d) On-site production facilities for advertising purposes; 

e) All uses customary or incidental to the production or distribution 

of motion pictures, electronic games, and all other forms of aural, audio/visual and/or 

multi-media products; 

f) Software and other computer-related production facilities; 

g) Internet and/or “web” based businesses such as internet service 

providers, search engine companies, social media companies, and the like; 

h) Neighborhood serving businesses such as restaurants, sidewalk 

cafes, yoga studios, fitness centers, and other activity-based businesses; and 

i) Small-scale general or specialty stores that furnish goods and 

services primarily to residents of the neighborhood; provided that the aggregate Floor 

Area for all retail uses does not exceed 24,940 square feet. 

j) Uses that are directly related to, supportive of, and ancillary to a 

permitted use (“ancillary uses”), including without limitation storage areas for use by 

residential tenants or owners, administrative office, production management, marketing, 

promotion, licensing, acquisition, sales, leasing, financing, accounting, legal, professional 

services, creative services, transmission facilities, catering offices and kitchens; and 

subterranean parking for primary and ancillary uses. The Project may include up to 50% 

ancillary uses associated with primary permitted uses. General office uses that are not 

directly related to, or ancillary uses to a primary use of a building or suite, are prohibited. 

2.5.1 Ground Floor Uses. Ground floor uses facing Colorado Avenue 

and New Road shall be Pedestrian-Oriented Uses. Ground floor uses facing 

Pennsylvania Avenue shall be Pedestrian-Oriented Uses or may be designed with 

Pedestrian-Oriented Design. 

14

2.6 Significant Project Features and LUCE Community Benefits. This 

Agreement provides assurances that the significant project features and LUCE 

community benefits identified below in this Section 2.6 will be achieved and developed 

in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 

2.6.1 Significant Project Features. Set forth below in this Section 2.6.1 

are the project features that will be provided to the City, including without limitation: 

a) Increasing the supply of affordable housing units in the 

City through the inclusion of 16 Affordable Units in the Project, provisions for the land 

donation and affordable deed restriction of the Residual Parcel, all of which in the 

aggregate are intended to be the equivalent of compliance with the requirements of the 

City’s Affordable Housing Production Program (except for certain unit size 

requirements); 

b) Increased tax revenues; 

c) Enhancing the Mixed Use Creative district with a welldesigned 

mixed-use project; 

jobs within the City; 

d) An estimated 976 new, temporary, design and construction 

e) Reducing vehicle trips by implementing a TDM program 

that takes advantage of the future completion of the Expo Line and other modes of 

transportation that are alternatives to the automobile; 

f) Sustainable Design Features. Developer shall retain the 

services of an accredited professional to consult with Developer regarding inclusion of 

sustainable design features for the Project. Developer shall design the Project so that the 

Project shall achieve LEED® certification at a minimum “Silver” level under the 

LEED® Rating System (the “Sustainable Design Status”) from the Green Building 

Certification Institute (GBCI). The Project may achieve LEED® certification through 

any LEED® rating system for which the Project is eligible as determined by the GCBI, 

including LEED-New Construction, LEED-Core and Shell, LEED-Commercial Interiors, 

LEED-Homes, or LEED-Schools, but excluding LEED-Existing Buildings, Operations & 

Maintenance. The Project shall register for the LEED® rating system in effect at the 

time of application for review by the Architectural Review Board. 

i) Developer shall confirm to the City that the design 

for the Project has achieved the Sustainable Design Status in accordance with the 

following requirements of this Section 2.6.1(f)(i): 

1) Prior to the submission of plans for ARB 

review, Developer shall submit a preliminary checklist of anticipated LEED® credits 

(that shall be prepared by the LEED® accredited professional) for review by the City of 

Santa Monica Green Building Program Advisor. The Developer shall retain the services 

of a third party, independent individual designated to organize, lead, and review the 

15

completion of the process of verifying and documenting that a building and all of its 

systems and assemblies are planned, designed, installed, and tested to meet the owner’s 

project requirements (the “Commissioning Authority”). Prior to issuance of a building 

permit, the Developer shall have the Commissioning Authority review the Owner’s 

Project Requirements, the Basis of Design, and the Design Documents. 

2) Prior to issuance of a final Certificate of 

Occupancy for the Project, the Developer shall demonstrate that the Project has achieved 

the Sustainable Design Status. 

3) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the 

Developer has not yet demonstrated that the constructed Project has achieved the 

Sustainable Design Status, the City shall nonetheless issue a temporary Certificate of 

Occupancy for the Project (assuming that the Project is otherwise entitled to receive a 

temporary Certificate of Occupancy). The temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be 

converted to a final Certificate of Occupancy once the Project has achieved the 

Sustainable Design Status. 

ii) Approximately 1,500 square feet in the aggregate of 

photovoltaic panels shall be located on the roof of Building A, as well as the roofs of the 

gym and cabana structures that are part of Building A in accordance with the Project 

Plans. 

g) Shared Parking. In furtherance of the LUCE’s shared 

parking policies, the Project shall implement the following provisions regarding shared 

parking spaces. At all times during the operation of the Project, Developer shall cause 

162 of the parking spaces (the “Unreserved Spaces”) provided in the Project to be 

shared among (i) commercial visitors, all guests for residential units, and any commercial 

tenants and their employees and (ii) any residential occupant of the Project who desires to 

lease additional unreserved parking spaces in connection with his or her residential unit. 

The Unreserved Spaces shall be shared on a first-come, first-served basis. 30 of the 

spaces that are part of the parking easement in favor of the Residual Parcel, pursuant to 

Section 2.10 of this Agreement, may also be included in the Unreserved Spaces. 

However, any leases for those 30 spaces shall be terminated with 1-week written notice 

from the Developer prior to the date that the Residual Parcel is developed with a 

residential project that requires off-site parking spaces. So long as there are a sufficient 

number of on-site parking spaces for residents, commercial tenants, and their respective 

guests and visitors, Developer may lease any unused on-site parking spaces from the 

Unreserved Spaces and the Residential Unbundled Spaces (“Excess Spaces”) to third 

parties in need of parking. Parking shall be charged at market rental rates established by 

Developer from time-to-time and in accordance with the following pricing parameters: 

hourly, daily, and monthly rates shall be noncompetitive with the price of comparable 

public transit fares and/or passes and ii) the City shall ensure compliance with this 

provision as part of the annual compliance report required as part of this Agreement. 

Prior to making any Excess Spaces available to third parties, (i) Developer shall obtain a 

written report by a traffic and parking engineering firm that demonstrates that Excess 

Spaces are not required to meet the Project’s peak parking demand, and (ii) Developer 

16

shall obtain the Planning Director’s approval of such report. Alternatively, Developer 

may seek City approval for any type of proposed shared parking arrangement in 

accordance with any City procedure in effect at the time Developer requests approval for 

a shared parking arrangement. 

h) Electrical Vehicle Conduit. Developer shall cause one of 

the subterranean levels of the parking garage in the Project to include electric panel 

capacity, conduit and stub-outs that will accept electric wiring to provide power to not 

less than 30 parking spaces. The panel capacity, conduit size and stub-outs shall be 

designed to allow for the simultaneous charging of 208/240 V 40 amp grounded AC 

electrical outlets to a minimum of 30 parking spaces. Until the Planning Director makes 

a determination, based on demonstrated demand by drivers of such vehicles, that some or 

all of the 30 parking spaces be restricted for electric or other alternative fueled vehicle 

use, the spaces may be utilized without regard to vehicle type at the Developer’s sole and 

absolute discretion. 

i) Subjecting 99 Rental Housing Units (but none of the 

Condominium Units) in Building C to the City’s Rent Control Law (Article XVIII of the 

City Charter), including the Affordable Units. Developer shall comply with all 

applicable rent control rules and regulations established from time to time by the City’s 

Rent Control Board, with respect to 99 of the Rental Housing Units in Building C. 

2.6.2 LUCE Community Benefits. Set forth below in this Section 2.6.2 

are the additional community benefits that will be provided by the Project. 

a) Enhanced Plaza Areas and Enhanced Walkway Areas. 

Developer shall construct the plaza areas and the walkway areas with enhanced 

landscaping throughout the Project that are identified on the Project Plans as either 

‘Residential Open Space’ (the “Residential Open Space”) or ‘General Open Space’ (the 

“General Open Space”), all as depicted on “Exhibit G-3” attached hereto. The 

Residential Open Space and the General Open Space are sometimes collectively referred 

to as the “Public Use Areas.” Developer, at its option, may also include in the Project a 

walking or jogging pathway through portions of the Project that may connect to similar 

paths on adjacent properties (the “Exercise Paths”). If and to the extent that the Exercise 

Paths are constructed as part of the Project, the Exercise Paths shall be considered part of 

the Public Use Areas. Developer shall make the Residential Open Space accessible to the 

public from 7:00 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. each day. Developer shall make the General 

Open Space accessible to the public from 7:00 a.m. through 10:00 p.m. each day. 

Developer shall make the Accessible Green Space accessible to the public from 7:00 a.m. 

through 7:00 p.m. each day. Except as approved by the Planning Director, which 

approval will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, no physical or visual barrier shall 

be used to limit access to Public Use Areas during the time periods designated for public 

access. The public use of the Public Use Areas shall be: (i) consistent with the terms and 

conditions of this Agreement; (ii) solely for pedestrian access to and passive use of the 

Public Use Areas by the public including walking, strolling, reading and other similar 

activity (with no obligation to buy any goods or services during such hours); and (iii) 

compatible with Developer’s development, use and enjoyment of the Project. No use 

17

other than pedestrian access to and passive use of the Public Use Areas by the public 

shall be permitted on the Public Use Areas. Developer shall have the right to impose and 

enforce reasonable rules and regulations regarding the use of the Public Use Areas by the 

public (the “Public Use Rules”); provided that the Planning Director may approve the 

Public Use Rules, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or 

delayed. Developer may exclude individuals from the Public Use Areas who do not 

comply with such rules and regulations. The City agrees that the Public Use Areas and 

other open space set forth in the Project Plans satisfies the City’s requirements for both 

public and private open space. If there are any inconsistencies between the Zoning Code 

and the open space requirements set forth in this Agreement, the open space requirements 

established by this Agreement shall prevail. 

b) Prohibited Activities on the Public Use Areas. The Public 

Use Rules may prohibit certain uses incompatible with the Project, including without 

limitation any of the following: (i) cooking, dispensing or preparing food; (ii) selling any 

item or engaging in the solicitation of money, signatures, or other goods or services; (iii) 

sleeping or staying overnight; (iv) using sound amplifying equipment; or (v) engaging in 

any illegal, dangerous or other activity that Developer reasonably deems to be 

inconsistent with other uses in the Project or with the use of the Public Use Areas by 

other members of the public for the permitted purposes, such as excessive noise or 

boisterous activity, bicycle or skateboard riding, skating or similar activity, being 

intoxicated, having offensive bodily hygiene, having shopping carts or other wheeled 

conveyances (except for wheelchairs and baby strollers/carriages), and Developer shall 

retain the right to cause persons engaging in such conduct to be removed from the 

Project. Should any such persons refuse to leave the Project, they shall be deemed to be 

trespassing and be subject to arrest in accordance with applicable law. Developer shall 

be entitled to establish and post rules and regulations for use of the Public Use Areas 

consistent with the foregoing, which shall be subject to approval by the Planning 

Director, and which approval will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Nothing in 

this Agreement or in the Project Plans shall be deemed to mean that the Public Use Areas 

are public parks or are subject to legal requirements applicable to a public park or other 

public space. The Public Use Areas shall remain the private property of Developer with 

members of the public having only a license to occupy and use the Public Use Areas in a 

manner consistent with this Section 2.6.2(a) and (b). 

c) Pennsylvania Avenue Extension. Prior to issuance of a 

certificate of occupancy, Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, dedicate, improve 

and complete construction of public street, from the easterly boundary of the Property to 

the westerly boundary of the Property, that would be the easterly extension of 

Pennsylvania Avenue (the “Pennsylvania Avenue Extension”), containing 

approximately 20,290 square feet as depicted on Exhibit “G-1” attached hereto (such land 

area being referred to as the “Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area”). The 

roadway width will be sixty-two feet (62’) wide for approximately the 238 lineal feet 

(238’) of westerly most portion of the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension and the roadway 

will be forty-nine feet five inches (49’ 5”) wide for the remaining portion of the 

Pennsylvania Avenue Extension, as depicted on Exhibit “G-1”. For that portion of the 

Pennsylvania Avenue Extension that will be sixty-two feet wide, Developer shall 

18

complete such portion including but not limited to all curbs, gutters and sidewalks in 

accordance with streetscape standards as established in the Bergamot Area Plan on both 

sides of such street. For that portion of the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension that will be 

forty-six and one-half feet wide, Developer shall complete such portion including but not 

limited to all curbs, gutters and sidewalks in accordance with streetscape standards as 

established in the Bergamot Area Plan on both sides of such street. The Pennsylvania 

Avenue Extension shall be dedicated, constructed, and completed in accordance with 

Condition of Approval No. 80 in Section B of Exhibit “D” to this Agreement and in 

accordance with the current regulations and codes governing the construction of public 

streets in the City. Developer shall dedicate to the City (i) the surface area of the 

Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area for public street purposes and (ii) the 

Pennsylvania Avenue Utility Corridors (as defined in Condition of Approval No. 80 in 

Section B of Exhibit “D” to this Agreement), while expressly reserving to Developer all 

other subterranean rights. The dedication of the surface portion of the Property contained 

within the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area shall give the City the ability 

to install parking meters, fire hydrants, maintain street signage, and repair and maintain 

the roadway in accordance with applicable road maintenance standards within the City. 

Other than the City’s right to use the Pennsylvania Avenue Utility Corridor, the 

dedication of the portion of the Property contained within the Pennsylvania Avenue 

Extension Easement Area shall not grant to the City any other rights below the surface of 

the street for the installation, repair or maintenance of any utility equipment or facilities, 

such as storm water, sewer, electricity, telephone or other uses. Following City’s 

acceptance of the dedication of the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area, 

Developer’s subterranean use of the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area 

shall not materially impact or interfere with the City’s use of the surface of such area as a 

public street or the City’s use of the Pennsylvania Avenue Utility Corridor. Prior to such 

acceptance, Developer shall have the exclusive right to use the Pennsylvania Avenue 

Extension Easement Area. If the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area ever 

ceases to be used as a public street, the ownership of the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension 

Easement Area shall revert to Developer. 

d) New Road. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 

Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, dedicate, improve and complete 

construction of a twenty-two foot (22’) wide roadway on the western border of the 

Property from Colorado Avenue to the southeasterly Property line (the “New Road”). 

The New Road would be comprised of one travel lane (from Colorado Boulevard 

southeasterly toward the southeasterly boundary of the Property) and sidewalks, but no 

parking lanes, and the New Road would provide access into the Property, all as depicted 

on Exhibit “G-2” (the “Primary Access Plan”) attached hereto. The twenty-two foot 

(22’) wide land area that contains approximately 14,080 square feet is referred to as the 

“New Road Easement Area”. The New Road Easement Area shall be completed by 

Developer constructing a roadway that will be approximately twenty-two (22’) wide (that 

may include curbs, gutters and sidewalk) on the northeasterly side of the New Road, as 

generally depicted on the Primary Access Plan. The New Road also shall be constructed, 

and completed in accordance with Condition of Approval No. 81 in Section B of 

Exhibit “D” to this Agreement and in accordance with the current regulations and codes 

governing the construction of public streets in the City. Developer shall dedicate to the 

19

City (i) the surface area of the New Road Easement Area for public street purposes and 

(ii) the New Road Utility Corridors (as defined in Condition of Approval No. 81 in 

Section B of Exhibit “D” to this Agreement), while expressly reserving to Developer all 

other subterranean rights. The dedication of the surface portion of the Property contained 

within the New Road Easement Area shall give the City the ability to maintain street 

signage and repair and maintain the roadway in accordance with applicable road 

maintenance standards within the City. Other than the City’s right to use the New Road 

Utility Corridor, the dedication of the portion of the Property contained within the New 

Road Easement Area shall not grant to the City any other rights below the surface of the 

street for the installation, repair or maintenance of any utility equipment or facilities, such 

as storm water, sewer, electricity, telephone or other uses. Following City’s acceptance 

of the dedication of the New Road Easement Area, Developer’s subterranean use of the 

New Road Easement Area shall not materially impact or interfere with the City’s use of 

the surface of such area as a public street or the City’s use of the New Road Utility 

Corridor. Prior to such acceptance, Developer shall have the exclusive right to use the 

New Road Easement Area. If the New Road Easement Area ever ceases to be used as a 

public street, the ownership of the New Road Easement Area shall revert to Developer. 

e) New Road – Cooperation with Adjacent Property. The 

property located at 2848-2912 Colorado Avenue, situated directly to the southwest of the 

Property (the “Adjacent Property”) is under consideration for redevelopment. The 

proposed development for the Adjacent Property may also include the development of an 

extension of Pennsylvania Avenue through the Adjacent Property as well as a north-south 

roadway expansion of the New Road that would be developed as an integrated roadway 

together with the New Road. If Developer commences construction of the Project after 

the project on the Adjacent Property has completed construction of a roadway that is 

adjacent to the New Road Easement Area, then Developer shall cooperate with the City 

and the owner of the Adjacent Property to cause the construction of the expanded New 

Road to become part of the adjacent roadway improvements on the Adjacent Property, so 

that the two combined roadway improvement areas are up to sixty-two (62’) wide from 

the north property line to the south property line; provided that the New Road Easement 

Area shall not be wider than twenty-two feet (22’). In addition, if such widening of the 

New Road occurs, the City shall work with the Adjacent Property owner to try and cause 

the Adjacent Property Owner to cooperate with Developer (at no cost or expense to 

Developer) so that Developer may improve and complete construction of New Road in 

accordance with streetscape standards adopted as part of the Bergamot Area Plan together 

with any roadway repair that may also be required at such time on the New Road 

Easement Area as may be required by the City. If Developer commences construction of 

the Project after the project on the Adjacent Property has completed construction of a 

roadway that is adjacent to the New Road Easement Area, then Developer shall be 

obligated to do the following at no cost to Adjacent Property owner: (i) construct, and 

complete such roadway improvements on the Adjacent Property that are necessary to 

integrate the New Road with the other previously completed roadway improvements, all 

in accordance with Condition of Approval No. 81 in Section B of Exhibit “D” to this 

Agreement and in accordance with the then-current regulations and codes governing the 

construction of public streets in the City, and (ii) make any repairs that may be required 

20

to the project constructed on the Adjacent Property that may be required after completion 

of the Developer’s roadway work. 

If owner of the Adjacent Property commences construction of an expanded street that 

would integrate the New Road after Developer has completed construction of the New 

Road, then Developer shall cooperate with the City and the owner of the Adjacent 

Property to cause the construction of the New Road to become part of the adjacent 

roadway improvements on the Adjacent Property, so that the two combined roadway 

improvement areas could be up to sixty-two feet (62’) wide from the north property line 

to the south property line. In addition, if such widening of the New Road occurs, 

Developer shall provide any cooperation required (at no cost or expense to Developer) to 

allow the Adjacent Property owner to improve and complete construction of New Road 

in accordance with streetscape standards adopted as part of the Bergamot Area Plan 

together with any roadway repair that may also be required at such time on the New Road 

Easement Area as may be required by the City. The City shall cause the Adjacent 

Property owner to dedicate, construct, and complete roadway improvements on the 

Adjacent Property that will integrate the New Road in accordance with Condition of 

Approval No. 81 in Section B of Exhibit “D” to this Agreement and in accordance with 

the then-current regulations and codes governing the construction of public streets in the 

City. The City shall also cause the Adjacent Property owner, at no cost to Developer, to 

make any repairs that may be required to the Project as a result of such roadway work. 

f) Childcare Subsidy. Prior to issuance of Certificate of 

Occupancy for the first building in the Project, Developer shall create a separate, interestbearing 

trust fund and make a contribution in the amount of $179,000. The required 

childcare linkage fee that would otherwise be payable in accordance with Chapter 9.72 of 

the Zoning Ordinance is $174,000 is being voluntarily applied by the Developer towards 

the childcare subsidy. The contribution shall be made and distributed in accordance with 

an application process to be approved by the Planning Director. The contribution shall be 

used exclusively to provide subsidies to persons using childcare services in the City. 

When awarding childcare grants or subsidies, first priority should be given to low-income 

households with consideration given to family size, income and need. Subject to the 

foregoing, preference should be given to Pico Neighborhood residents. 

g) Contribution for Services for Senior and Disabled Persons 

and Families with Minor Children. Prior to the date on which Developer delivers the 

closure notice pursuant to Section 5.6.2 below, Developer shall create a separate, interestbearing 

trust fund and make a contribution in the amount of $350,000. The contribution 

available in this trust fund shall be used exclusively to provide subsidies to entities 

providing services in the City to seniors, disabled persons, and to families with minor 

children. The contribution available in this trust fund shall be distributed in accordance 

with a process, to be established by the Planning Director, whereby those entities that can 

provide services to persons entitled to relocation assistance under the Relocation Plan 

attached to this Agreement as Exhibit “K” (which persons are also seniors, disabled 

persons, and/or families with minor children), may make an application to receive 

distribution of the trust funds. When awarding grants or subsidies to the approved 

entities providing services, first priority should be given to entities that will provide the 

21

oadest range of services to address the needs of seniors, disabled persons, and families 

with minor children residing within the Village Trailer Park. 

h) Transportation Infrastructure Fee. On or before issuance of 

a building permit for the Project, Developer shall make a contribution to the City in the 

amount of $1,650,000, to be used by the City within five years thereafter, subject to 

extensions authorized pursuant to applicable law, for the purposes of helping fund capital 

improvements to transportation infrastructure that may include but not be limited to 

pedestrian network completion, bicycle facilities as guided by the Bicycle Action Plan, 

transit improvements, and automobile network improvements. 

i) Local Hiring. A local hiring program shall be provided in 

accordance with Exhibits “F-1” and “F-2”. 

j) Bicycle Sharing Area. Developer shall provide a 

reasonable amount of space in the Public Use Area, not to exceed ten (10) feet in depth 

and twenty-five (25) feet in width, at a visible and accessible location on-site which is 

compatible with the operation of the Project, for a bicycle sharing program station in 

conjunction with any bicycle sharing program instituted by the City or another operator. 

Developer shall have the right to relocate the area made available for such bicycle sharing 

station from time to time so long as the new location continues to be visible from the 

street and of a similar size given the requirements of the bicycle sharing program. Any 

changes to size and location will require approval by the Planning Director. Developer 

shall have no obligation to fund or operate any such program or to keep any space 

available if no bicycle sharing system is implemented by the City or other operator. If 

the City requests that Developer install a bicycle sharing program station, such station 

may replace no more than 7 publically accessible bicycle rack spaces required in the 

“TDM Plan” (defined below in Section 2.6.2(m)); provided that Developer shall use its 

commercially reasonable efforts to relocate the publically accessible bicycle racks to 

another location on the Property. If relocation of the publically accessible bicycle racks 

on the Property is not feasible, then Developer shall cooperate with the City to install 

bicycle racks in the portions of the City’s public right of way designated by the City. In 

such case, Developer shall be responsible to purchase and install bicycle racks in the 

public right of way, in a number equal to the publically accessible bicycle racks that were 

removed to accommodate the bicycle sharing program station. 

k) Car Sharing Service. Developer shall, in the subterranean 

parking garage, make a car sharing service available within the Project with a minimum 

of two shared-use cars, if such a service is available from a third party provider on 

commercially reasonable terms including the rental rate to be paid to Developer for use of 

the parking spaces. Required parking spaces may be used for carshare vehicles. 

Developer shall propose a signage system to notify people of the location and availability 

of the carshare vehicles; the City Transportation Manager shall consider such request and 

may authorize the posting of signs within the public right-of-way to guide pedestrian and 

vehicular traffic to the carshare parking location. Location of carshare vehicles shall be 

determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Developer, at such time as 

the carshare service provider has been selected. 

22

l) Parking District Management. The City intends to develop 

a parking district management program for the neighborhood surrounding the Property to 

allow for the shared use of parking spaces in the Project and on other properties. If the 

City implements a parking district management program that includes the Project site, 

Developer will participate in such program in a commercially reasonable manner and 

commensurate with the participation of the other projects that are within the parking 

district. 

m) Enhanced TDM Elements. The Transportation Demand 

Management Plan (the “TDM Plan”) set forth below includes elements of a 

transportation demand management plan required by the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, 

Developer shall provide those elements which exceed the requirements of the Zoning 

Ordinance. During operation of the Project, Developer shall comply with the 

requirements of the TDM Plan and shall make the TDM Plan available in the on-site 

information required in Section 2.6.2(m)(i)(6). 

i) TDM Measures Applicable to the Entire Project. 

1) Peak Hour Trip Requirements. The Project 

shall take steps to generate not more than 111 AM weekday peak hour trips and more 

than 140 PM weekday peak hour trips (the “Peak Daily Trips”), as estimated for the 

Project in the Recirculated EIR. Developer’s failure to achieve the Peak Hour Trip 

Requirements shall not constitute a default under this Agreement. 

2) Annual Status Report. Developer shall, 

beginning with the first annual reporting date assigned by the City, report on the TDM 

Plan. The report shall be submitted in accordance with a format established by the City 

and shall include information sufficient to determine compliance with all aspects of the 

TDM Plan required by this Section 2.6.2(m). 

3) Annual Peak Daily Trips Monitoring. 

Developer shall, at least once each calendar year (commencing during the second 

calendar year following the year in which the final certificate of occupancy for the 

Project is issued), conduct a two-day trip count survey at the Project, counting the 

number of vehicles entering and exiting the Project driveways, together with observation 

of vehicles picking up and/or dropping off persons entering or leaving the Project. At the 

same time that trip count survey occurs, Developer shall also conduct a one-day cordon 

count that positively counts all persons arriving to the project by foot, bicycle, and 

automobile. The counts shall be conducted by an independent third party, reasonably 

approved by the City. If any annual trip count report shows that the actual average daily 

am peak trips and/or pm peak trips exceed the Peak Daily Trips, then Developer shall 

propose modifications to the TDM program that Developer considers likely to allow the 

Project to achieve actual average daily trip counts that are less than the Peak Daily Trips 

by the date of the next annual trip count survey. Any such modifications to the TDM 

shall be subject to the reasonable approval by the City’s Planning Director as a Minor 

Modification. The actual average daily AM peak trips and/or PM peak trips for the 

Project shall be monitored each year during the term of this Agreement. Develop may 

23

also elect to have the City conduct the monitoring required by this Section 2.6.2(m)(i)(3) 

and shall reimburse City for all reasonable costs associated with such monitoring. 

4) Trip Generation Measurement. Developer 

shall implement a key card entry system for on-site parking that will differentiate 

between residential, commercial, and off-site users. PM peak trip generation shall be 

measured by counting the number of parking users that use a residential or commercial 

key card to exit the garage during PM peak hours. In an effort to encourage shared 

parking, off-site users exiting during peak hours will not be counted towards peak trip 

generation. Vehicles exiting that area part of a car-sharing service will not be counted 

towards peak trip generation counts. Peak trip generation shall be measured over a 

normal consecutive two-day period (excluding weekends or holidays). The two-day 

average PM peak period counts shall be compared against the Trip Generation Reduction 

Target 

5) Transportation Demand Management 

Association. Developer and building tenants shall participate in a Transportation 

Demand Management Association (TMA). As part of the LUCE Update process, the 

City has identified that a TMA should be established for the Bergamot area. TMAs 

would provide employees, businesses, visitors and residents of an area with resources to 

increase the amount of trips taken by transit, walking, bicycling, and ridesharing. The 

property owner shall attend organizational meetings, provide traffic demand data to the 

TMA, and make available information to its tenants relative to the services provided by 

the TMA. Developer shall make a one-time contribution prior to issuance of Certificate 

of Occupancy for the first building on-site in the amount of $50,000 towards the 

formation of the TMA. Developer will pay annual dues applied proportionally to all 

members of the TMA. At the discretion of the Developer to be approved by the Planning 

Director, elements incorporated under this TDM Plan may be incorporated into the TMA. 

6) Transportation Information Center. 

Developer shall provide on-site information for employees, residents, and visitors about 

transportation reduction alternatives available to occupants of the project, such as the 

following: (i) guidance on public transit routes (including bus lines, light rail lines, bus 

fare programs, ride share programs, and shuttles) to and from the Project and bicycle 

facilities (including routes, rental and sales locations, on-site bicycle racks and showers 

for use by tenants of the Project); (ii) walking and biking maps for visitors, which shall 

include but not be limited to information about local services and restaurants within 

walking distance of the Project; (iii) information regarding local rental housing agencies; 

(iv) coordination of vanpool and carpool formation; (v) the existence of any Citysponsored 

programs such as ride-to-work-week, ride share events, pit stop programs, and 

the like; and (vi) the availability at the time of such meeting of third party car-sharing 

services such as Nu-ride and Zim-ride. Developer may elect to provide this information 

on a website or other electronic media. 

7) TDM Plan Coordinator. A TDM Plan 

Coordinator shall be designated for this Project by the Developer. The TDM Plan 

Coordinator shall manage all aspects of this TDM Plan and participate in City-sponsored 

24

workshops and information roundtables. As the Project is expected to be occupied by 

multiple users, including a large residential component, Developer shall participate in the 

Bergamot area TMA to encourage the implementation of TDM strategies for all 

occupants of the Project. The TDM Coordinator shall be responsible for making 

available information materials on options for alternative transportation modes and 

opportunities. In addition, transit fare media and day/month passes will be made 

available through the TDM Coordinator to employees, visitors, and residents during 

typical business hours. Developer shall inform residential tenants leasing units in Rental 

Housing Units (but not to owners or tenants of the Condominium Units) that they may 

elect to forego their parking space in exchange for a subsidized transit pass. 

8) Unbundled Parking – Commercial Tenants. 

Developer shall offer to lease the Unreserved Parking Spaces in the Project to 

commercial tenants separately from the commercial space. All commercial tenants of the 

Project may, at their option, enter into leases with limited or no parking spaces as part of 

their respective leases. If commercial tenants desire to lease parking, parking shall either 

be leased pursuant to a separate agreement or shown as a separate line item in the lease. 

Such parking shall be leased at market rates established by Developer from time-to-time. 

Not less frequently than once each calendar quarter, Developer shall deliver to the City’s 

Transportation Management Office a list of those commercial tenants of the Project who 

occupy the Project under leases with reduced or no parking spaces. In order to reduce the 

potential for any parking impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, all commercial tenant 

occupants of the Project shall not be permitted to obtain Preferential Parking Permits 

from the City. 

9) Unbundled Parking – Residential Tenants. 

All residential tenants of the Project shall be offered at least one parking space. 

Residential tenants leasing Rental Housing Units (but not owners or tenants of the 

Condominium Units or the Affordable Units) may, at their option, enter into leases 

without a parking space as part of their respective leases. Parking shall be shown as a 

separate line item in the leases for Rental Housing Units. Each parking space leased to a 

residential tenant of a Rental Housing Unit shall be leased at market rates established by 

the Developer from time-to-time in accordance with Section 2.6.1(g). The calculation of 

monthly rent for Rental Housing Units shall be decreased by the line item amount for a 

parking space if a residential tenant declines a parking space in exchange for the 

subsidized transit pass required pursuant to Section 2.6.2(m)(iii)(1). Any parking spaces 

that are not leased by residential tenants (“Residential Unbundled Spaces”) may be 

leased pursuant to Section 2.6.1(g) of this Agreement. Not less frequently than once each 

calendar quarter, Developer shall deliver to the City’s Transportation Management Office 

a list of those residential tenants of the Project who occupy the Project under leases with 

reduced or no parking spaces. In order to reduce the potential for any parking impacts on 

surrounding neighborhoods, all residential tenant occupants of the Project shall not be 

permitted to obtain Preferential Parking Permits from the City with the exception for oneday 

guest parking passes. 

10) Pedestrian Wayfinding. The Developer 

shall provide and maintain a pedestrian wayfinding program directing employees, 

25

visitors, and residents to/from the project site and public bus transit, rail transit lines, and 

bicycle facilities. 

11) Visitor Accessible Bicycle Racks. 

Developer shall provide short-term bicycle parking for 64 bikes for visitors of the Project. 

This guest bike parking shall be located on the ground floor of the Project and may be 

relocated from time to time as long as the bicycle parking remains on the ground floor. If 

short-term bicycle parking cannot be located on the ground floor, it may be located in the 

subterranean garage in a convenient location approved by the Planning Director. 

12) Secure Bicycle Storage for Employees. 

Developer shall provide secure long-term bicycle storage for employees in a secure 

convenient location approved by the Planning Director. This shall have a capacity for a 

minimum of 5 bicycles. For the purposes of this requirement, secure bicycle parking 

shall mean bicycle lockers, an attended cage, or a secure parking area. 

13) Secure Bicycle Storage for Residential 

Tenants and Residential Owners. Developer shall provide secure long-term bicycle 

storage for residential tenants and owners in a secure convenient location approved by the 

Planning Director. This shall have a capacity for a minimum of 377 bicycles, which 

racks and storage areas shall be for the exclusive use of the residential tenants occupying 

the Rental Housing Units and owners and tenants occupying the Condominium Units. 

Developer shall provide at least one bicycle storage space for each Rental Housing Unit 

and for each Condominium Unit in the Project. The bicycle storage racks and spaces 

shall be available to the occupants of the Rental Housing Units even if such occupants do 

not lease a parking space pursuant to the unbundled parking element of the TDM Plan set 

forth above in Section 2.6.2(m)(i)(9). Developer shall also provide a “fix-it” station in 

the Project that occupants of the Project may use to repair and maintain their bicycles. 

14) On-Site Shower and Locker Facilities. A 

minimum of two showers and locker facilities (one for each gender) shall be provided for 

employees of commercial uses on site who bicycle or use another active means, powered 

by human propulsion, of getting to work or who exercise during the work day. 

component only. 

ii) 

TDM Measures applicable to the commercial 

1) AVR Requirements. With respect only to 

the tenants of the commercial space in the Project (and their respective employees) (the 

“Commercial Occupants”), Developer shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to 

achieve an average vehicle ridership (“AVR”) for the Commercial Occupants of at least 

1.5 (the “AVR Goal”) by the second year after issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy 

for the Project. Chapter 9.16 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code shall govern how the 

AVR is calculated for the Commercial Occupants. Within six months after the 

Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the Project, Developer shall conduct a baseline 

survey of the AVR for the Project. Developer shall submit such baseline survey to the 

City at the time of submittal of the first annual compliance report for this Agreement, 

26

following the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, unless an alternative submittal 

date is approved by the Planning Director. Thereafter, the City shall monitor the TDM 

Plan performance as part of the City’s Periodic Review for the Project. If, during any 

annual evaluation of the Project’s employee trip reduction plan, the AVR Goal has not 

been achieved for the Project, then Developer shall propose modifications to the TDM 

Plan that Developer considers likely to achieve the AVR Goal by the date of the next 

annual evaluation of the Project’s employee trip reduction plan. In addition, the City’s 

Planning Director may recommend feasible modifications to the TDM Plan. Developer’s 

failure to achieve the AVR Goal shall not constitute a default under this Agreement so 

long as Developer is working cooperatively with the City to achieve compliance. 

2) Annual AVR Monitoring. Developer shall 

conduct a baseline survey of the AVR for the Project, which shall be submitted to the 

City at the time of submittal of the first annual compliance report following the issuance 

of the Certificate of Occupancy, unless an alternative submittal date is approved by the 

Planning Director. Thereafter, the City shall monitor the TDM plan performance as part 

of the City’s Periodic Review for the Project. If, during any annual evaluation of the 

Project’s employee trip reduction plan, the proposed AVR is not obtained by the Project, 

then Developer shall propose modifications to the TDM program that Developer 

considers likely to achieve the proposed AVR by the date of the next annual evaluation of 

the Project’s employee trip reduction plan. In addition, the City’s Planning Director may 

recommend feasible modifications to the TDM. Developer’s failure to achieve the 

applicable AVR standard will not constitute a breach or default under this Agreement and 

shall not give rise to the right of the City to terminate this Agreement; provided that 

Developer shall work cooperatively with the City to achieve compliance with the 

applicable AVR standard. Any of the modifications to the TDM proposed by Developer 

(or proposed by the Planning Director and agreed to by the Developer) to help the Project 

achieve the applicable AVR standard shall be subject to the reasonable approval by the 

City’s Planning Director as a Minor Modification. The AVR for the Project shall be 

monitored each year during the term of this Agreement. 

3) Transit Pass Subsidy for Commercial 

Tenants. All commercial tenants of the Project may, at their option, enter into leases with 

reduced employee parking spaces. The number of employee parking spaces may be 

reduced by as much as fifty percent (50%) of the code required parking space for the 

applicable commercial space; provided that the commercial tenant provides fully 

subsidized monthly transit passes to the same percentage of employees as the percentage 

by which the parking spaces are reduced, and such passes are provided for the entire lease 

period during which reduced parking applies. For example, if the number of employee 

parking spaces is reduced by 25%, then the commercial tenant shall provide fully 

subsidized monthly transit passes to 25% of their employees for the entire period. 

component only. 

iii) 

TDM Measures applicable to the residential 

1) Transit Pass Subsidy for Rental Housing 

Units. Developer shall offer, in all lease or rental agreements with residential tenants in 

27

the Rental Housing Units, each tenant the option to receive from Developer a 50% 

subsidy for purchase of a transit pass in consideration for such tenant relinquishing a 

parking space otherwise assigned and designated for his or her residential unit. 

Developer shall provide a 50% subsidized transit pass to a tenant for the same period of 

time that the tenant relinquishes its parking space in the Project. This requirement shall 

also apply to any residential Condominium Units that are leased to third parties by the 

Developer prior to initial date of sale except that in the case of tandem parking spaces, 

residents shall be required to relinquish both tandem spaces. 

2) Transit Pass Subsidy for Residential 

Condominiums. Developer shall offer to all purchasers of residential Condominium 

Units a free transit pass (e.g. Metro EZ Pass, Big Blue Bus TAP Pass) for the first six 

months of their residency. 

3) Transit Welcome Package for Residents. 

Developer shall provide all new residents of the residential component of the Project site 

with a Resident Transit Welcome Package (RTWP) on a per-unit basis. The RTWP at a 

minimum will include bus/rail transit route and bicycle facility information. 

4) Workforce Housing Preference. In 

furtherance of the City’s objective to improve the jobs/housing balance and to reduce 

total trip generation in the immediate area, the Developer shall implement a local 

preference marketing and housing sales program wherein preferential sales and/or leasing 

of residential units shall occur. Preference for available units shall be given first to 

employees within a reasonable walking distance (one-half mile) of the Project, second to 

first responders, such as firefighters, police officers, EMTs, nurses and other hospital 

workers, as well as teachers and other community serving employees, and third to 

employees that currently work within Santa Monica. A 5% discount off the market 

prices of the Condominium Units may be offered to the preference groups identified in 

this subsection, at the Developer’s sole and absolute discretion. 

iv) Changes to TDM Plan. Any of the modifications to 

the TDM Plan proposed by Developer (or proposed by the Planning Director and agreed 

to by the Developer) to help the Project achieve the Peak Trip targets and AVR Goal 

shall be subject to the reasonable approval by the City’s Planning Director as a Minor 

Modification. 

n) Transfer of Title to the City of the Residual Parcel. Upon 

issuance of a building permit for the Project, Developer hereby grants the City or its 

designee the exclusive option to take fee title to the Residual Parcel and shall convey to 

the City or its designee, for no additional consideration, fee title to the Residual Parcel in 

accordance with the requirements of this Section 2.6.2(n). 

i) Utility Connection Date. Prior to the issuance of a 

building permit for the Project, Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, commence 

the following: (a) construction of any improvements and facilities required to cause , 

electric, water, gas and sewer utility connections for service of a trailer or mobilehome to 

28

e stubbed to each of the 10 pads on the Residual Parcel, which utility connections shall 

be approved by the City’s Division of Building and Safety as meeting all applicable code 

requirements; and (b) repair, reconstruct, alter or otherwise improve the retained 

mobilehome park on the Residual Parcel so that the retained park complies with all 

applicable life safety codes and regulations to the satisfaction of the City’s Building 

Official. The utility connections and life safety improvements described above must be 

completed and approved by the City’s Division of Building and Safety and the Building 

Official before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for Building C. The date on 

which the utility connections are approved by the City’s Division of Building and Safety 

and the Building Official has certified that the retained trailer park satisfies all applicable 

life safety codes and regulations shall be the “Utility Connection Date.” 

ii) Park Transfer Date. Developer may, at its option 

and at any time, deliver written notice (the “Transfer Notice”) of Developer’s intention 

to convey the Residual Parcel to the City or its designee. The Transfer Notice shall state 

the proposed date on which Developer intends to convey the Residual Parcel to the City 

or its designee (the “Park Transfer Date”); provided that the Park Transfer Date shall 

not be before the latest to occur of the following: (A) 180 days after the date of the 

Transfer Notice; (B) 15 full calendar months after the Effective Date of this Agreement; 

(C) 90 days after the Utility Connection Date; and (D) compliance with the condition of 

title required by Section 2.6.2(n)(ix) below. If the Park Transfer Date has not occurred 

within 20 years of the effective date of this Agreement due to Developer’s inability to 

deliver clear title pursuant to Section 2.6.2(n)(ix) below, then after such date, the 

Developer shall convey the Residual Parcel to the City or its designee. 

iii) Designation of Entity to Obtain Fee Title. 60 days 

before the Park Transfer Date, the City shall deliver written notice to Developer of the 

entity (the “New Park Owner”) that will be the grantee under the grant deed for the 

Residual Parcel. 

iv) Affordable Housing Deed Restriction. Prior to the 

issuance of a certificate of occupancy for Building C, Developer shall execute and record 

against the Residual Parcel a deed restriction acceptable to the City restricting the use of 

the Residual Parcel to affordable housing effective only after the Residual Parcel ceases 

to be operated as a mobilehome park and is developed with a residential project. 

v) Grant Deed. Developer shall execute and deliver to 

the City for recording a grant deed for the Residual Parcel, with a grantee to be the New 

Park Owner. 

vi) FIRPTA. Developer shall deliver to the City a 

federal “FIRPTA” Affidavit executed by Developer and California's Real Estate 

Withholding Exemption Certificate Form 593 C. 

vii) Title. Developer shall deliver to the City a title 

commitment from a title company reasonably acceptable to the City, showing fee title in 

the Residual Parcel to be vested in the New Park Owner, in an amount to be determined 

29

y the City, subject to no exceptions to title except for (a) all exceptions approved in 

writing by the City, (b) the title exceptions listed on Exhibit M, (c) tenancies for trailer 

pads on the Residual Parcel governed by the California Mobilehome Residency Law , 

and (d) any other exceptions to title that are created by Developer after the date of this 

Agreement, pursuant to and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The New 

Park Owner shall pay any title premium that may be required for the title policy. 

viii) No Representations. Developer shall make no 

representations or warranties regarding the Residual Parcel and the New Park Owner 

shall accept title to the Residual Parcel in its then “as-is, where-is” condition. 

ix) Condition of Title. Except for tenancies for trailer 

pads on the Residual Parcel governed by the California Mobilehome Residency Law and 

any contracts approved by the City in writing or constituting a permitted exception to 

title, before the Park Transfer Date may occur, there shall not exist any leases, contracts, 

judgments, court orders, or rights of occupancy or other agreements or contracts with 

respect to the Residual Parcel that would survive the transfer of title to the New Park 

Owner. 

2.7 Parking. The number of parking spaces provided in the Project shall be 

799, including up to forty percent (40%) compact parking spaces. This Agreement and 

the Project Plans set forth the exclusive off-street parking requirements for the Project 

and supersede all other minimum space parking requirements under the Existing 

Regulations, including without limitation Part 9.04.10.08 of the Zoning Ordinance. 

2.8 Design. 

a) Setbacks. Developer shall maintain the setbacks, if any, for 

the Project as set shown on the Project Plans. In the event that any inconsistencies exist 

between the Zoning Ordinance and the setbacks established by this Agreement, then the 

setbacks required by this Agreement shall prevail. 

b) Building Height. The maximum height of the building 

shall be as set forth on the Project Plans. In the event that any inconsistencies exist 

between the Zoning Ordinance and the building height allowed by this Agreement, then 

the building height allowed by this Agreement shall prevail. 

c) Stepbacks. Developer shall maintain the stepbacks, if any, 

for the Project as set forth on the Project Plans. In the event that any inconsistencies exist 

between the Zoning Ordinance and the stepbacks required by this Agreement, then the 

stepbacks established by this Agreement shall prevail. 

d) Permitted Projections. Projections shall be permitted as 

reflected on the Project Plans. In the event that any inconsistencies exist between the 

Zoning Ordinance and the projections permitted by this Agreement, then the projections 

permitted by this Agreement shall prevail. 

30

e) Signage. The location, size, materials, and color of any 

signage shall be reviewed by the ARB (or the Planning Commission on appeal) in 

accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 6.1 of this Agreement. All signs on 

the Project Property shall be subject to Chapter 9.52 of the SMMC (Santa Monica Sign 

Code) in effect as of the Effective Date, a copy of which is set forth in its entirety in 

Exhibit ”H”. Directional signs for vehicles shall be located at approaches to driveways as 

required by the City’s Strategic Transportation Planning Division. 

the Project Plans. 

f) Balconies. Balconies shall be provided in accordance with 

2.9 Tract Map. The Tract Map will create the Project Property (Parcel 1) and 

the Residual Parcel (Parcel 2) as two land parcels and two airspace parcels; including one 

airspace parcel below grade of Parcel 1 for the subterranean parking garage and one 

airspace parcel above grade for Building C, that will allow for the future buildings and a 

common area lot which includes surface and subterranean parking, driveways and drive 

aisles, landscaping and hardscape and other common improvements as described in 

Recital F above. Ground Parcel 2 on the Tract Map will preserve ten (10) existing trailer 

park pads on the Residual Parcel. The land area of the Project Property shall be used to 

determine compliance with development standards, including, but not limited to Floor 

Area Ratio, setbacks, emergency access/egress and yards. The Tract Map will result in 

airspace subdivision with required parking, access, emergency egress and utilities to the 

proposed buildings and subterranean garage (airspace Lots 2 and 3) being provided 

within and across the land of Parcel 1. Consequently, Developer shall record or cause to 

be recorded a covenant and reciprocal easement agreement in the form approved by the 

City Attorney that will assure that sufficient parking, necessary access and utilities will at 

all times be provided for each building on the Property in accordance with this 

Development Agreement. Parcel 1, Parcel 2, and airspace Lots 2 and 3 will become 

separate legal parcels following recordation of the final Tract Map. 

2.10 Parking Easement in Favor of the Residual Parcel. Concurrently with the 

recordation of the final Tract Map, Developer shall record a parking easement against so 

much of the Property as may be required to grant a perpetual parking easement for 40 

parking spaces for the benefit of the Residual Parcel. Such parking easement shall be in a 

form determined by Developer and reasonably acceptable to the Director. Such easement 

shall provide that 10 parking spaces are required to be made available under the easement 

prior to the date the Residual Parcel is developed with a residential project that requires 

off-site parking spaces. 

2.11 Contract With City. Developer hereby acknowledges that in issuing 

approving this Development Agreement for the Project, the City is waiving fees and taxes 

and modifying development standards otherwise applicable to the Project such as 

increasing unit density, reducing parking standards, and other property development 

standards. In exchange for such forms of assistance from the City, which are of financial 

benefit to the Developer, Developer has entered into this contract with the City and 

agreed to the other conditions of the Development Agreement, including the requirement 

included in this Agreement to provide and maintain 16 Affordable Units on the Project 

31

Property for occupancy by income qualified households. The parties agree and 

acknowledge that this is a contract providing forms of assistance to the Developer within 

the meaning of Civil Code Section 1954.52 (b) and Government Code Section 65915 et 

seq. 

ARTICLE 3 

CONSTRUCTION 

3.1 Construction Mitigation Plan. During the construction phase of the 

Project, Developer shall comply with the Construction Mitigation Plan attached as 

Exhibit “I” hereto. 

3.2 Construction Hours. Developer shall be permitted to perform construction 

between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 

5:00 p.m. Saturday; provided that interior construction work which does not generate 

noise of more than thirty (30) decibels beyond the Property line may also be performed 

between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through 

Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday. Notwithstanding 

the foregoing, pursuant to SMMC Section 4.12.110(e), Developer has the right to seek a 

permit from the City authorizing construction activity during the times otherwise 

prohibited by this Section. The Parties acknowledge and agree that, among other things, 

afterhours construction permits can be granted for concrete pours. 

3.3 Outside Building Permit Issuance Date. If Developer has not been issued 

a building permit for the Project by the “Outside Building Permit Issuance Date” (defined 

below), then on the day after the Outside Building Permit Issuance Date, without any 

further action by either Party, this Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no 

further force or effect. For purposes of clarity, if Developer has not been issued a 

building permit for the Project by the Outside Building Permit Issuance Date, the City 

shall not be required to pursue its remedies under Section 11.4 of this Agreement, and 

this Agreement shall, instead, automatically terminate. “Outside Building Permit 

Issuance Date” means the date that is the last day of the forty eighth (48 th ) full calendar 

month after the Effective Date; provided that the Outside Building Permit Issuance Date 

may be extended by applicable Excusable Delays and otherwise in accordance with the 

remainder of this paragraph. If the approval by the ARB of the Project design does not 

occur within four (4) months of the submittal by Developer to the ARB of the Project 

design, then the Outside Building Permit Issuance Date shall be extended one month for 

each additional month greater than four that the final ARB approval is delayed. At any 

time after the last day of the forty second (42 nd ) full calendar month after the Effective 

Date (the “Extension Notice Date”), Developer may deliver written notice to the 

Planning Director, requesting an extension of the Outside Building Permit Issuance Date 

for an additional twelve (12) months. The Outside Building Permit Issuance Date may be 

administratively extended not more than one time. The Planning Director may grant such 

extension if Developer can demonstrate substantial progress has been made towards 

32

obtaining a building permit and show reasonable cause why Developer will not be able to 

obtain the building permit for the Project by the initial Outside Building Permit Issuance 

Date and can demonstrate that: (a) the condition of the Property will not adversely affect 

public health or safety and (b) the continued delay will not create any unreasonable visual 

or physical detriment to the neighborhood. 

3.4 Construction Period. Construction of the Project shall be subject to the 

provisions of SMMC Section 8.08.070. 

3.5 Damage or Destruction. If the Project, or any part thereof, is damaged or 

destroyed during the term of this Agreement, Developer shall be entitled to reconstruct 

the Project in accordance with this Agreement if: (a) Developer obtains a building permit 

for this reconstruction prior to the expiration of this Agreement and (b) the Project is 

found to be consistent with the City’s General Plan in effect at the time of obtaining the 

building permit. 

ARTICLE 4 

PROJECT FEES, EXACTIONS, MITIGATION MEASURES 

AND CONDITIONS 

4.1 Fees, Exactions, Mitigation Measures and Conditions. Except as 

expressly set forth in Section 2.6.2 (relating to Community Benefits) above, and in 

Section 4.2 (relating to modifications), and Section 5.2 (relating to Subsequent Code 

Changes) below, the City shall charge and impose only those fees, exactions, mitigation 

measures, conditions, and standards of construction set forth in this Agreement, 

including Exhibits ”C”, “D” and “I” attached hereto, and no others. If any of the 

mitigation measures or conditions set forth on Exhibit ”D” is satisfied by others, 

Developer shall be deemed to have satisfied such measures or conditions. The City 

waives any right it may have to collect any fees or charges pursuant to Government Code 

Sections 65863.7 subdivision (g). 

4.2 Conditions on Modifications. The City may impose fees, exactions, 

mitigation measures and conditions in connection with its approval of Minor or Major 

Modifications, provided that all fees, exactions, mitigation measures and conditions shall 

be in accordance with any applicable law. 

4.3 Implementation of Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval. 

4.3.1 Compliance with Mitigation Measures and Conditions of 

Approval. Developer shall be responsible for implementing the mitigation measures set 

forth in Section A of Exhibit ”D” attached hereto, and Developer shall be responsible to 

adhere to the conditions of approval set forth in Section B of Exhibit ”D” in accordance 

with the timelines established in Exhibit ”D”. 

33

4.3.2 Survival of Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval. If 

Developer proceeds with the construction of the Project, except as otherwise expressly 

limited in this Agreement, the obligations and requirements imposed by the mitigation 

measures and conditions of approval set forth in the attached Exhibit “D” and the tenant 

relocation plan set forth in the attached Exhibit “K” shall survive the expiration of the 

Term of this Agreement and shall remain binding on Developer, its successors and 

assigns, and shall continue in effect for the life of the Project. Notwithstanding the 

above, the obligations set forth in Exhibit “K” shall survive the expiration or termination 

of this Agreement, even if the Developer does not proceed with construction of the 

Project, and shall remain binding on Developer, its successors and assigns. 

ARTICLE 5 

EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ON CITY LAWS AND REGULATIONS 

5.1 Development Standards for the Property; Existing Regulations. The 

following development standards and restrictions set forth in this Section 5.1 govern the 

use and development of the Project and shall constitute the Existing Regulations, except 

as otherwise expressly required by this Agreement. 

forth below: 

5.1.1 Defined Terms. The following terms shall have the meanings set 

a) “Existing Regulations” collectively means all of the 

following which are in force and effect as of the Effective Date: (i) the General Plan 

(including, without limitation, the LUCE); (ii) the Zoning Ordinance except as modified 

herein; (iii) the IZO; (iv) any and all ordinances, rules, regulations, standards, 

specifications and official policies of the City governing, regulating or affecting the 

demolition, grading, design, development, building, construction, occupancy or use of 

buildings and improvements or any exactions therefore, except as amended by this 

Agreement; and (v) the development standards and procedures in ARTICLE 2 of this 

Agreement. 

b) “Subsequent Code Changes” collectively means all of the 

following which are adopted or approved subsequent to the Effective Date, whether such 

adoption or approval is by the City Council, any department, division, office, board, 

commission or other agency of the City, by the people of the City through charter 

amendment, referendum, initiative or other ballot measure, or by any other method or 

procedure: (i) any amendments, revisions, additions or deletions to the Existing 

Regulations; or (ii) new codes, ordinances, rules, regulations, standards, specifications 

and official policies of the City governing or affecting the grading, design, development, 

construction, occupancy or use of buildings or improvements or any exactions therefor. 

“Subsequent Code Changes” includes, without limitation, any amendments, revisions or 

additions to the Existing Regulations imposing or requiring the payment of any fee, 

special assessment or tax. 

34

5.1.2 Existing Regulations Govern the Project. Except as provided in 

Section 5.2, development of the Buildings and improvements that will comprise the 

Project, including without limitation, the development standards for the demolition, 

grading, design, development, construction, occupancy or use of such Buildings and 

improvements, and any exactions therefor, shall be governed by the Existing Regulations. 

The City agrees that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, including the 

LUCE, as more fully described in the Recitals. Any provisions of the Existing 

Regulations inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, to the extent of such 

inconsistencies and not further are hereby deemed modified to that extent necessary to 

effectuate the provisions of this Agreement. The Project shall be exempt from: (a) all 

Discretionary Approvals or review by the City or any agency or body thereof, other than 

the matters of architectural review by the ARB as specified in Section 6.1 and review of 

modifications to the Project as expressly set forth in Section 2.4.2 and Section 2.4.3 

above; (b) the application of any subsequent local development or building moratoria, 

development or building rationing systems or other restrictions on development which 

would adversely affect the rate, timing, or phasing of construction of the Project, and 

(c) Subsequent Code Changes which are inconsistent with this Agreement. 

5.2 Permitted Subsequent Code Changes. 

5.2.1 Applicable Subsequent Code Changes. Notwithstanding the terms 

of Section 5.1, this Agreement shall not prevent the City from applying to the Project the 

following Subsequent Code Changes set forth below in this Section 5.2.1. 

a) Processing fees and charges imposed by the City to cover 

the estimated actual costs to City of processing applications for development approvals 

including: (i) all application, permit, and processing fees incurred for the processing of 

this Agreement, any administrative approval of a Minor Modification, or any amendment 

of this Agreement in connection with a Major Modification; (ii) all building plan check 

and building inspection fees for work on the Property in effect at the time an application 

for a grading permit or building permit is applied for; and (iii) the public works plan 

check fee and public works inspection fee for public improvements constructed and 

installed by Developer and (iv) fees for monitoring compliance with any development 

approvals, or any environmental impact mitigation measures; provided that such fees and 

charges are uniformly imposed by the City at similar stages of project development on all 

similar applications and for all similar monitoring. 

b) General or special taxes, including, but not limited to, 

property taxes, sales taxes, parcel taxes, transient occupancy taxes, business taxes, which 

may be applied to the Property or to businesses occupying the Property; provided that 

(i) the tax is of general applicability City-wide and does not burden the Property 

disproportionately to other similar developments within the City; and (ii) the tax is not a 

levy, assessment, fee or tax imposed for the purpose of funding public or private 

improvements on other property located within the Mixed-Use Creative District (as 

defined in the City’s General Plan as of the Effective Date). 

35

c) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, 

applications, notices, documentation of findings, records, manner in which hearings are 

conducted, reports, recommendations, initiation of appeals, and any other matters of 

procedure; provided such regulations are uniformly imposed by the City on all matters, 

do not result in any unreasonable decision-making delays and do not affect the 

substantive findings by the City in approving this Agreement or as otherwise established 

in this Agreement. 

d) Regulations governing construction standards and 

specifications which are of general application that establish standards for the 

construction and installation of structures and associated improvements, including, 

without limitation, the City’s Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, 

Electrical Code and Fire Code; provided that such construction standards and 

specifications are applied on a City-wide basis and do not otherwise limit or impair the 

Project approvals granted in this Agreement unless adopted to meet health and safety 

concerns. 

writing. 

e) Any City regulations to which Developer has consented in 

f) Collection of such fees or exactions as are imposed and set 

by governmental entities not controlled by City but which are required to be collected by 

City. 

g) Regulations which do not impair the rights and approvals 

granted to Developer under this Agreement. For the purposes of this Section 5.2.1(g), 

regulations which impair Developer’s rights or approvals include, but are not limited to, 

regulations which (i) materially increase the cost of the Project (except as provided in 

Section 5.2.1(a), (b), and (d) above), or (ii) which would materially delay development of 

the Project or that would cause a material change in the uses of the Project as provided in 

this Agreement. 

5.2.2 New Rules and Regulations. This Agreement shall not be 

construed to prevent the City from applying new rules, regulations and policies in those 

circumstances specified in Government Code Section 65866. 

5.2.3 State or Federal Laws. In the event that state or federal laws or 

regulations, enacted after the Effective Date, prevent or preclude compliance with one or 

more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be 

modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or 

regulations; provided that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the 

extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or 

regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 

5.3 Common Set of Existing Regulations. Prior to the Effective Date, the City 

and Developer shall use reasonable efforts to identify, assemble and copy three identical 

sets of the Existing Regulations, to be retained by the City and Developer, so that if it 

36

ecomes necessary in the future to refer to any of the Existing Regulations, there will be 

a common set of the Existing Regulations available to all Parties. 

5.4 Conflicting Enactments. Except as provided in Section 5.2 above, any 

Subsequent Code Change which would conflict in any way with or be more restrictive 

than the Existing Regulations shall not be applied by the City to any part of the Property. 

Developer may, in its sole discretion, give the City written notice of its election to have 

any Subsequent Code Change applied to such portion of the Property as it may have an 

interest in, in which case such Subsequent Code Change shall be deemed to be an 

Existing Regulation insofar as that portion of the Property is concerned. If there is any 

conflict or inconsistency between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the 

Existing Regulations, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control. 

5.5 Timing of Development. The California Supreme Court held in Pardee 

Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 465, that failure of the parties in 

that case to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative 

restricting the timing of development to prevail over the parties’ agreement. It is the 

intent of Developer and the City to cure that deficiency by expressly acknowledging and 

providing that any Subsequent Code Change that purports to limit over time the rate or 

timing of development or to alter the sequencing of development phases (whether 

adopted or imposed by the City Council or through the initiative or referendum process) 

shall not apply to the Property or the Project and shall not prevail over this Agreement. 

In particular, but without limiting any of the foregoing, no numerical restriction shall be 

placed by the City on the amount of total square feet or the number of buildings, 

structures, residential units that can be built each year on the Property except as expressly 

provided in this Agreement. 

5.6 Process for Closure of Village Trailer Park. Developer shall complete all 

of the steps set forth below in this Section 5.6 prior to closing the mobilehome park now 

located at the Project Property. Developer shall comply with the Tenant Relocation Plan 

set forth on Exhibit “K”. Notwithstanding anything in this Section 5.6 to the contrary, in 

the event this Development Agreement is rendered ineffective or invalidated by court 

order as a result of a legal challenge or for other valid reason, Developer does not waive 

or relinquish any rights it may have under the Closure Notice that Developer delivered 

prior to the execution of the MOU. 

5.6.1 Developer may not give the six months’ written notice of 

termination of tenancy required by Civil Code Section 798.56(g)(2) and Section 5.6.2 

below until the effective date of the Removal Permit issued by the Santa Monica Rent 

Control Board for the Project Property. 

5.6.2 After the effective date of the Removal Permit issued by the Santa 

Monica Rent Control Board for the Project Property, any steps taken by Developer to 

terminate the tenancy of occupants of the Property shall comply with the applicable 

sections of the Mobilehome Residency Law, including the six months’ written notice 

requirement of Civil Code Section 798.56(g)(2), which permits a change of use in 

connection with applicable local government permits. 

37

5.6.3 Developer may not close portions of the mobilehome park now 

located at the Project Property earlier than six (6) months after the date of the notice 

issued under Section 5.6.2 above. 

5.6.4 Developer shall implement the Tenant Relocation Plan set forth on 

Exhibit “K” for all VTP residents of the portions of the mobilehome park now located on 

the Project Property. 

5.6.5 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a legal 

requirement imposed by the City pursuant to its police power to terminate existing 

tenancies at the Village Trailer Park. 

5.7 Operation of the Existing Mobilehome Park Prior to Closure. Developer 

acknowledges and agrees that, until the date that Developer has closed that portion of the 

mobilehome park now located on the Project Property, Developer is required to continue 

to operate the existing mobilehome park in compliance with all applicable laws, codes, 

ordinances, and regulations. 

ARTICLE 6 

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD 

6.1 Architectural Review Board Approval. The Project shall be subject to 

review and approval or conditional approval by the ARB in accordance with design 

review procedures in effect under the Existing Regulations. Consistent with Existing 

Regulations, the ARB cannot require modifications to the building design which negates 

the fundamental development standards established by this Agreement. For example, the 

ARB cannot require reduction in the overall height of the buildings, reduction in the 

number of stories in the buildings, reduction in density, or reduction in floor area greater 

than two percent (2.0%) from each building. Decisions of the ARB are appealable to the 

Planning Commission in accordance with the Existing Regulations. 

ARTICLE 7 

CITY TECHNICAL PERMITS 

7.1 Definitions. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall 

have the meanings set forth below: 

7.1.1 “Technical City Permits” means any Ministerial Approvals, 

consents or permits from the City or any office, board, commission, department, division 

or agency of the City, which are necessary for the actual construction of the Project or 

any portion thereof in accordance with the Project Site Plan and this Agreement. 

38

Technical City Permits include, without limitation (a) building permits, (b) related 

mechanical, electrical, plumbing and other technical permits, (c) demolition, excavation 

and grading permits, (d) encroachment permits, and (e) temporary and final certificates of 

occupancy. 

7.1.2 “Technical Permit Applications” means any applications 

required to be filed by Developer for any Technical City Permits. 

7.2 Diligent Action by City. 

7.2.1 Upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 7.3, the 

City shall accept the Technical Permit Applications filed by Developer with the City and 

shall diligently proceed to process such Technical Permit Applications to completion. 

7.2.2 Upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 7.3, the 

City shall diligently issue the Technical City Permits which are the subject of the 

Technical Permit Applications. 

7.3 Conditions for Diligent Action by the City. 

7.3.1 Acceptance and Processing of Technical Permit Applications. The 

obligation of the City to accept and diligently process the Technical Permit Applications 

which are filed by Developer, and then issue the Technical City Permits, is subject to the 

satisfaction of the following conditions: 

a) Developer shall have completed and filed all Technical 

Permit Applications which are required under the administrative procedures and policies 

of the City which are in effect on the date when the Technical Permit Application is filed; 

provided that such procedures and policies are uniformly in force and effect throughout 

the City; 

b) Developer shall have paid all processing and permit fees 

established by the City in connection with the filing and processing of any Technical 

Permit Application which are in effect on the date when the Technical Permit Application 

is filed; provided that such fees are uniformly in force and effect throughout the City; and 

c) If required for the particular Technical Permit Application, 

Developer shall have obtained the approval of the ARB referred to in Section 6.1 above. 

7.3.2 Issuance of a Technical City Permit. The obligation of the City to 

issue a Technical City Permit which is the subject of a Technical Permit Application filed 

by Developer is subject to the satisfaction of the following conditions (and only such 

conditions and no others): 

a) Developer shall have complied with all of its obligations 

under this Agreement which are required to be performed prior to or concurrent with the 

issuance of the Technical City Permits for the proposed Buildings; 

39

) Developer shall have received any permits or approvals 

from other governmental agencies which are required by law to be issued prior to or 

concurrent with the issuance of the Technical City Permits for the proposed Buildings; 

c) The proposed Buildings conform to the development 

standards for such Buildings established in this Agreement. In the event that a proposed 

Building is not in conformance with the development standards, Developer shall have the 

right to seek any relief from such standards under the procedures then available in the 

City; and 

d) The proposed Buildings conform to the Administrative and 

Technical Construction Codes of the City (Article VIII, Chapter 1 of the Santa Monica 

Municipal Code) (the “Technical Codes”) in effect on the date that the Technical Permit 

Application is filed. 

7.3.3 New Technical Requirements. From time to time, the City’s 

Technical Codes are amended to meet new technical requirements related to techniques 

of building and construction. If the sole means of achieving compliance for the Project 

with such revisions to the Technical Codes made after the Effective Date (“New 

Technical Requirements”) would require an increase from the allowable Building 

Height established in this Agreement for the Project, then the Planning Director is hereby 

authorized to grant Developer limited relief from the allowable Building Height without 

amending this Agreement if the requested relief is in compliance with the City’s General 

Plan. Any such approval shall be granted only after the Planning Director’s receipt of a 

written request for such relief from Developer. Developer is required to supply the 

Planning Director with written documentation of the fact that compliance with the New 

Technical Requirements cannot be achieved by some other method. Any such relief shall 

only be granted to the extent necessary in the Planning Director’s determination for 

Developer to comply with the New Technical Requirements. 

7.4 Duration of Technical City Permits. The duration of Technical City 

Permits issued by the City, and any extensions of the time period during which such 

Technical City Permits remain valid, shall be established in accordance with the 

Technical Codes in effect at the time that the Technical City Permits are issued. Subject 

to the terms of the next sentence, the lapse or expiration of a Technical City Permit shall 

not preclude or impair Developer from subsequently filing another Technical Permit 

Application for the same matter during the Term of this Agreement, which shall be 

processed by the City in accordance with the provisions of this ARTICLE 7. 

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, if Developer obtains 

building permits for the Project and, at any time after the Outside Construction Start 

Date, such building permits expire or are revoked pursuant to the applicable terms of the 

SMMC (as the same may be amended from time to time), then Developer may not 

subsequently apply for new building permits for the Project without first obtaining the 

prior written consent of the Planning Director, which may be granted or withheld in the 

Planning Director’s sole discretion. 

40

ARTICLE 8 

AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION 

8.1 Amendment and Modification of Development Agreement. Subject to the 

notice and hearing requirements of the applicable Development Agreement Statutes, this 

Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time only with the written consent 

of Developer and the City or their successors and assigns in accordance with the 

provisions of the SMMC and Section 65868 of the California Government Code. 

ARTICLE 9 

TERM 

9.1 Effective Date. This Agreement shall be dated, and the obligations of the 

Parties hereunder shall be effective as of the date upon which the ordinance approving 

this Agreement becomes effective (the “Effective Date”). The Parties shall execute this 

Agreement within ten (10) working days of the Effective Date. 

9.2 Term. 

9.2.1 Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence 

on the Effective Date and shall continue for ten (10) years thereafter (the “Term”), unless 

the Term is otherwise terminated pursuant to Section 11.4, after the satisfaction of all 

applicable public hearing and related procedural requirements or pursuant to Section 3.3. 

9.2.2 Termination Certificate. Upon termination of this Agreement, the 

Parties hereto shall execute an appropriate certificate of termination in recordable form (a 

“Termination Certificate”), which shall be recorded in the official records of Los 

Angeles County. 

9.2.3 Effect of Termination. Except as expressly provided herein (e.g., 

Section 4.3.2), none of the parties’ respective rights and obligations under this Agreement 

shall survive the Term. 

ARTICLE 10 

PERIODIC REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE 

10.1 City Review. The City shall review compliance with this Development 

Agreement once each year, on or before each anniversary of the Effective Date (each, a 

“Periodic Review”), in accordance with this ARTICLE 10 in order to determine whether 

or not Developer is out-of-compliance with any specific term or provision of this 

Agreement. . 

41

10.2 Evidence of Good Faith Compliance. At least sixty (60) days prior to the 

applicable anniversary date, Developer shall deliver to the City a written report 

demonstrating that Developer has been in good faith compliance with this Agreement 

during the twelve (12) month period prior to the anniversary of the Effective Date. The 

written report shall be provided in the form established by the City. For purposes of this 

Agreement, the phrase “good faith compliance” shall mean the following: (a) compliance 

by Developer with the requirements of the Existing Regulations, except as otherwise 

modified by this Agreement; and (b) compliance by Developer with the terms and 

conditions of this Agreement, subject to the existence of any specified Excusable Delays 

(as defined in Section 15.8 below) which prevented or delayed the timely performance by 

Developer of any of its obligations under this Agreement. 

10.3 Information to be Provided to Developer. Prior to any public hearing 

concerning the Periodic Review of this Agreement, the City shall deliver to Developer a 

copy of all staff reports prepared in connection with a Periodic Review, written 

comments from the public and, to the extent practical, all related exhibits concerning 

such Periodic Review. If the City delivers to Developer a Notice of Breach pursuant to 

Section 11.1 below, the City shall concurrently deliver to Developer a copy of all staff 

reports prepared in connection with such Notice of Breach, all written comments from the 

public and all related exhibits concerning such Notice of Breach. 

10.4 Notice of Breach; Cure Rights. If during any Periodic Review, the City 

reasonably concludes on the basis of substantial evidence that Developer has not 

demonstrated that it is in good faith compliance with this Agreement, then the City may 

issue and deliver to Developer a written Notice of Breach pursuant to Section 11.1 below, 

and Developer shall have the opportunity to cure the default identified in the Notice of 

Breach during the cure periods and in the manner provided by Section 11.2 and 

Section 11.3, as applicable. 

10.5 Failure of Periodic Review. The City’s failure to review at least annually 

compliance by Developer with the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not 

constitute or be asserted by any Party as a breach by any other Party of this Agreement. 

10.6 Termination of Development Agreement. If Developer fails to timely cure 

any item(s) of non-compliance set forth in a Notice of Default, then the City shall have 

the right but not the obligation to initiate proceedings for the purpose of terminating this 

Agreement pursuant to Section 11.4 below. 

10.7 City Cost Recovery. Following completion of each Periodic Review, 

Developer shall reimburse the City for its actual and reasonable costs incurred in 

connection with such review. 

42

ARTICLE 11 

DEFAULT 

11.1 Notice and Cure. 

11.1.1 Breach. If either Party fails to substantially to perform any term, 

covenant or condition of this Agreement which is required on its part to be performed (a 

“Breach”), the non-defaulting Party shall have those rights and remedies provided in this 

Agreement; provided that such non-defaulting Party has first sent a written notice of 

Breach (a “Notice of Breach”), in the manner required by Section 15.1, specifying the 

precise nature of the alleged Breach (including references to pertinent Sections of this 

Agreement and the Existing Regulations or Subsequent Code Changes alleged to have 

been breached), and the manner in which the alleged Breach may satisfactorily be cured. 

If the City alleges a Breach by Developer, the City shall also deliver a copy of the Notice 

of Breach to any Secured Lender of Developer which has delivered a Request for Notice 

to the City in accordance with ARTICLE 12. 

11.1.2 Monetary Breach. In the case of a monetary Breach by Developer, 

Developer shall promptly commence to cure the identified Breach and shall complete the 

cure of such Breach within thirty (30) business days after receipt by Developer of the 

Notice of Breach; provided that if such monetary Breach is the result of an Excusable 

Delay or the cure of the same is delayed as a result of an Excusable Delay, Developer 

shall deliver to the City reasonable evidence of the Excusable Delay. 

11.1.3 Non-Monetary Breach. In the case of a non-monetary Breach by 

either Party, the alleged defaulting Party shall promptly commence to cure the identified 

Breach and shall diligently prosecute such cure to completion; provided that the 

defaulting Party shall complete such cure within thirty (30) days after receipt of the 

Notice of Breach or provide evidence of Excusable Delay that prevents or delays the 

completion of such cure. The thirty (30) day cure period for a non-monetary Breach shall 

be extended as is reasonably necessary to remedy such Breach; provided that the alleged 

defaulting Party commences such cure promptly after receiving the Notice of Breach and 

continuously and diligently pursues such remedy at all times until such Breach is cured. 

11.1.4 Excusable Delay. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary 

contained in this Agreement, the City’s exercise of any of its rights or remedies under this 

Article 11 shall be subject to the provisions regarding Excusable Delay in Section 15.8 

below. 

11.2 Remedies for Monetary Default. If there is a Breach by Developer in the 

performance of any of its monetary obligations under this Agreement which remains 

uncured (a) thirty (30) business days after receipt by Developer of a Notice of Breach 

from the City and (b) after expiration of Secured Lender’s Cure Period under 

Section 12.1 (if a Secured Lender of Developer has delivered a Request for Notice to the 

City in accordance with Section 12.1), then an “Event of Monetary Default” shall have 

occurred by Developer and the City shall have available any right or remedy provided in 

43

this Agreement, at law or in equity. All of said remedies shall be cumulative and not 

exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of said remedies shall not 

constitute a waiver or election in respect to any other available remedy. 

11.3 Remedies for Non-Monetary Default. 

11.3.1 Remedies of Parties. If any Party receives a Notice of Breach from 

the other Party regarding a non-monetary Breach, and the non-monetary Breach remains 

uncured: (a) after expiration of all applicable notice and cure periods, and (b) in the case 

of a Breach by Developer, after the expiration of Secured Lender’s Cure Period under 

Section 12.1 (if a Secured Lender of Developer has delivered a Request for Notice to the 

City in accordance with Section 12.1), then an “Event of Non-Monetary Default” shall 

have occurred and the non-defaulting Party shall have available any right or remedy 

provided in this Agreement, or provided at law or in equity except as prohibited by this 

Agreement. All of said remedies shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, 

and the exercise of any one or more of said remedies shall not constitute a waiver or 

election in respect to any other available remedy. 

11.3.2 Specific Performance. The City and Developer acknowledge that 

monetary damages and remedies at law generally are inadequate and that specific 

performance is an appropriate remedy for the enforcement of this Agreement. Therefore, 

unless otherwise expressly provided herein, the remedy of specific performance shall be 

available to the non-defaulting party if the other Party causes an Event of Non-Monetary 

Default to occur. 

11.3.3 Writ of Mandate. The City and Developer hereby stipulate that 

Developer shall be entitled to obtain relief in the form of a writ of mandate in accordance 

with Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 or Section 1094.5, as appropriate, to remedy 

any Event of Non-Monetary Default by the City of its obligations and duties under this 

Agreement. Nothing in this Section 11.3.3, however, is intended to alter the evidentiary 

standard or the standard of review applicable to any action of, or approval by, the City 

pursuant to this Agreement or with respect to the Project. 

11.3.4 No Damages Relief Against City. It is acknowledged by 

Developer that the City would not have entered into this Agreement if the City were to be 

liable in damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. 

Consequently, and except for the payment of attorneys’ fees and court costs, the City 

shall not be liable in damages to Developer and Developer covenants on behalf of itself 

and its successors in interest not to sue for or claim any damages: 

a) for any default under this Agreement; 

b) for the regulatory taking, impairment or restriction of any 

right or interest conveyed or provided hereunder or pursuant hereto; or 

c) arising out of or connected with any dispute, controversy or 

issue regarding the application or interpretation or effect of the provisions of this 

Agreement. 

44

The City and Developer agree that the provisions of this Section 11.3.4 do not apply for 

damages which: 

(a) 

do not arise under this Agreement; 

(b) are not with respect to any right or interest conveyed or 

provided under this Agreement or pursuant to this Agreement; or 

(c) do not arise out of or which are not connected to any 

dispute, controversy, or issue regarding the application, interpretation, or effect of the 

provisions of this Agreement or the application of any City rules, regulations, or official 

policies. 

11.3.5 Enforcement by the City. The City, at its discretion, shall be 

entitled to apply the remedies set forth in Chapters 1.09 and 1.10 of the SMMC as the 

same may be amended from time to time and shall follow the notice procedures of 

Chapter 1.09 and 1.10 respectively in lieu of Section 11.1 of this Agreement if these 

remedies are applied. 

11.3.6 No Damages Against Developer. It is acknowledged by the City 

that Developer would not have entered into this Agreement if Developer were to be liable 

in damages in connection with any non-monetary default hereunder. Consequently, and 

except for the payment of attorneys’ fees and court costs, Developer shall not be liable in 

damages to the City for any nonmonetary default and the City covenants on behalf of 

itself not to sue for or claim any damages: 

issue regarding; 

of this Agreement. 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

for any non-monetary default hereunder or; 

arising out of or connected with any dispute, controversy or 

the application or interpretation or effect of the provisions 

The City and Developer agree that the provisions of this Section 11.3.6 do not apply for 

damages which: 

(a) 

are for a monetary default; or 

(b) do not arise out of or which are not connected with any 

dispute, controversy or issue regarding the application, interpretation, or effect of the 

provisions of this Agreement to or the application of, any City rules, regulations, or 

official policies. 

11.3.7 No Other Limitations. Except as expressly set forth in this 

Section 11.3, the provisions of this Section 11.3 shall not otherwise limit any other rights, 

remedies, or causes of action that either the City or Developer may have at law or equity 

after the occurrence of any Event of Non-Monetary Default. 

45

11.4 Modification or Termination of Agreement by City. 

11.4.1 Default by Developer. If Developer causes either an Event of 

Monetary Default or an Event of Non-Monetary Default, then the City may commence 

proceedings to modify or terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Section 11.4. 

11.4.2 Procedure for Modification or Termination. The procedures for 

modification or termination of this Agreement by the City for the grounds set forth in 

Section 11.4.1 are as follows: 

a) The City shall provide a written notice to Developer (and to 

any Secured Lender of Developer which has delivered a Request for Notice to the City in 

accordance of Section 12.1) of its intention to modify or terminate this Agreement unless 

Developer (or the Secured Lender) cures or corrects the acts or omissions that constitute 

the basis of such determinations by the City (a “Hearing Notice”). The Hearing Notice 

shall be delivered by the City to Developer in accordance with Section 15.1 and shall 

contain the time and place of a public hearing to be held by the City Council on the 

determination of the City to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement. 

The public hearing shall not be held earlier than: (i) thirty-one (31) days after delivery of 

the Hearing Notice to Developer or (ii) if a Secured Lender has delivered a Request for 

Notice in accordance with Section 12.1, the day following the expiration of the “Secured 

Lender Cure Period” (as defined in Section 12.1). 

b) If, following the conclusion of the public hearing, the City 

Council: (i) determines that an Event of Non-Monetary Default has occurred or the 

Developer has not been in good faith compliance with this Agreement pursuant to 

Section 10.1, as applicable and (ii) further determines that Developer (or the Secured 

Lender, if applicable) has not cured (within the applicable cure periods) the acts or 

omissions that constitute the basis of the determination under clause (i) above or if those 

acts or omissions could not be reasonably remedied prior to the public hearing that 

Developer (or the Secured Lender) has not in good faith commenced to cure or correct 

such acts or omissions prior to the public hearing or is not diligently and continuously 

proceeding therewith to completion, then upon making such conclusions, the City 

Council may modify or terminate this Agreement. The City cannot unilaterally modify 

the provisions of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 11.4. Any such modification 

requires the written consent of Developer. If the City Council does not terminate this 

Agreement, but proposes a modification to this Agreement as a result of the public 

hearing and Developer does not (within five (5) days of receipt) execute and deliver to 

the City the form of modification of this Agreement submitted to Developer by the City, 

then the City Council may elect to terminate this Agreement at any time after the sixth 

day after Developer’s receipt of such proposed modification. 

46

11.5 Cessation of Rights and Obligations. If this Agreement is terminated by 

the City pursuant to and in accordance with Section 11.4, the rights, duties and 

obligations of the Parties under this Agreement shall cease as of the date of such 

termination, except only for those rights and obligations that expressly survive the 

termination of this Agreement. In such event, any and all benefits, including money 

received by the City prior to the date of termination, shall be retained by the City. 

11.6 Completion of Improvements. Notwithstanding the provisions of 

Sections 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, and 11.5, if prior to termination of this Agreement, Developer 

has performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance 

upon a building permit issued by the City, then Developer shall have acquired a vested 

right to complete construction of the Buildings in accordance with the terms of the 

building permit and occupy or use each such Building upon completion for the uses 

permitted for that Building as provided in this Agreement. Any Building completed or 

occupied pursuant to this Section 11.6 shall be considered legal non-conforming subject 

to all City ordinances standards and policies as they then exist governing legal nonconforming 

buildings and uses unless the Building otherwise complies with the property 

development standards for the district in which it is located and the use is otherwise 

permitted or conditionally permitted in the district. 

ARTICLE 12 

MORTGAGEES 

12.1 Encumbrances on the Property. This Agreement shall not prevent or limit 

Developer (in its sole discretion), from encumbering the Property (in any manner) or any 

portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, assignment 

of rents or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property 

(a “Mortgage”). Each mortgagee of a mortgage or a beneficiary of a deed of trust (each, 

a “Secured Lender”) on the Property shall be entitled to the rights and privileges set 

forth in this ARTICLE 12. Any Secured Lender may require from the City certain 

interpretations of this Agreement. The City shall from time to time, upon request made 

by Developer, meet with Developer and representatives of each of its Secured Lenders to 

negotiate in good faith any Secured Lender’s request for interpretation of any part of this 

Agreement. The City will not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay, the delivery to 

a Secured Lender of the City’s written response to any such requested interpretation. 

12.1.1 Mortgage Not Rendered Invalid. Except as provided in 

Section 12.1.2, neither entering into this Agreement nor a Breach of this Agreement, nor 

any Event of Monetary Default nor any Event of Non-Monetary Default shall defeat, 

render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for 

value. 

12.1.2 Priority of Agreement. This Agreement shall be superior and 

senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or 

47

interest in or with respect to the Property or any portion thereof by a Secured Lender or 

its successor in interest (whether pursuant to foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in lieu of 

foreclosure, lease termination or otherwise) shall be subject to all of the terms and 

conditions of this Agreement. 

12.1.3 Right of Secured Lender to Cure Default. 

a) A Secured Lender may give notice to the City, specifying 

the name and address of such Secured Lender and attaching thereto a true and complete 

copy of the Mortgage held by such Secured Lender, specifying the portion of the 

Property that is encumbered by the Secured Lender’s lien (a “Request for Notice”). If 

the Request for Notice has been given, at the same time the City sends to Developer any 

Notice of Breach or Hearing Notice under this Agreement, then if such Notice of Breach 

or Hearing Notice affects the portion of the Property encumbered by the Secured 

Lender’s lien, the City shall send to such Secured Lender a copy of each such Notice of 

Breach and each such Hearing Notice from the City to Developer. The copy of the 

Notice of Breach or the Hearing Notice sent to the Secured Lender pursuant to this 

Section 12.1.3(a) shall be addressed to such Secured Lender at its address last furnished 

to the City. The period within which a Secured Lender may cure a particular Event of 

Monetary Default or Event of Non-Monetary Default shall not commence until the City 

has sent to the Secured Lender such copy of the applicable Notice of Breach or Hearing 

Notice. 

b) After a Secured Lender has received a copy of such Notice 

of Default or Hearing Notice, such Secured Lender shall thereafter have a period of time 

(in addition to any notice and/or cure period afforded to Developer under this Agreement) 

equal to: (a) ten (10) business days in the case of any Event of Monetary Default and 

(b) thirty (30) days in the case of any Event of Non-Monetary Default, during which 

period the Secured Lender may provide a remedy or cure of the applicable Event of 

Monetary Default or may provide a remedy or cure of the applicable Event of Non- 

Monetary Default; provided that if the cure of the Event of Non-Monetary Default cannot 

reasonably be completed within thirty days, Secured Lender may, within such 30-day 

period, commence to cure the same and thereafter diligently prosecute such cure to 

completion (a “Secured Lender’s Cure Period”). If Developer has caused an Event of 

Monetary Default or an Event of Non-Monetary Default, then each Secured Lender shall 

have the right to remedy such Event of Monetary Default or an Event of Non-Monetary 

Default, as applicable, or to cause the same to be remedied prior to the conclusion of the 

Secured Lender’s Cure Period and otherwise as herein provided. The City shall accept 

performance by any Secured Lender of any covenant, condition, or agreement on 

Developer’s part to be performed hereunder with the same force and effect as though 

performed by Developer. 

c) The period of time given to the Secured Lender to cure any 

Event of Monetary Default or an Event of Non-Monetary Default by Developer which 

reasonably requires that said Secured Lender be in possession of the Property to do so, 

shall be deemed extended to include the period of time reasonably required by said 

Secured Lender to obtain such possession (by foreclosure, the appointment of a receiver 

48

or otherwise) promptly and with due diligence; provided that during such period all other 

obligations of Developer under this Agreement, including, without limitation, payment of 

all amounts due, are being duly and promptly performed. 

12.1.4 Secured Lender Not Obligated Under this Agreement. 

a) No Secured Lender shall have any obligation or duty under 

this Agreement to perform the obligations of Developer’s or the affirmative covenants of 

Developer’s hereunder or to guarantee such performance unless and until such time as a 

Secured Lender takes possession or becomes the owner of the estate covered by its 

Mortgage. If the Secured Lender takes possession or becomes the owner of any portion 

of the Property, then from and after that date, the Secured Lender shall be obligated to 

comply with all provisions of this Agreement; provided that the Secured Lender shall not 

be responsible to the City for any unpaid monetary obligations of Developer that accrued 

prior to the date the Secured Lender became the fee owner of the Property. 

b) Nothing in Section 12.1.4(a) is intended, nor should be 

construed or applied, to limit or restrict in any way the City’s authority to terminate this 

Agreement, as against any Secured Lender as well as against Developer if any curable 

Event of Monetary Default or an Event of Non-Monetary Default is not completely cured 

within the Secured Lender’s Cure Period. 

13.1 Transfers and Assignments. 

ARTICLE 13 

TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNMENTS 

13.1.1 Not Severable from Ownership Interest in Property. This 

Agreement shall not be severable from Developer’s interest in the Property and any 

transfer of the Property or any portion thereof shall automatically operate to transfer the 

benefits and burdens of this Agreement with respect to the transferred Property or 

transferred portions, as applicable. 

13.1.2 Transfer Rights. Developer may freely sell, transfer, exchange, 

hypothecate, encumber or otherwise dispose of its interest in the Property, without the 

consent of the City. Developer shall, however, give written notice to the City, in 

accordance with Section 15.1, of any transfer of the Property, disclosing in such notice 

(a) the identity of the transferee of the Property (the “Property Transferee”) and (b) the 

address of the Property Transferee as applicable. 

13.2 Release Upon Transfer. Upon the sale, transfer, exchange or 

hypothecation of the rights and interests of Developer to the Property, Developer shall be 

released from its obligations under this Agreement to the extent of such sale, transfer or 

exchange with respect to the Property if : (a) Developer has provided written notice of 

such transfer to City; and (b) the Property Transferee executes and delivers to City a 

49

written agreement in which the Property Transferee expressly and unconditionally 

assumes all of the obligations of Developer under this Agreement with respect to the 

Property in the form of Exhibit “J” attached hereto (the “Assumption Agreement”). 

Upon such transfer of the Property and the express assumption of Developer’s obligations 

under this Agreement by the transferee, the City agrees to look solely to the transferee for 

compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. Any such transferee shall be entitled 

to the benefits of this Agreement as “Developer” hereunder and shall be subject to the 

obligations of this Agreement. Failure to deliver a written Assumption Agreement 

hereunder shall not affect the transfer of the benefits and burdens as provided in 

Section 13.1, provided that the transferor shall not be released from its obligations 

hereunder unless and until the executed Assumption Agreement is delivered to the City. 

ARTICLE 14 

INDEMNITY TO CITY 

14.1 Indemnity. Developer agrees to and shall defend, indemnify and hold 

harmless the City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, 

volunteers and other representatives (collectively referred to as “City Indemnified 

Parties”) from and against any and all loss, liability, damages, cost, expense, claims, 

demands, suits, attorney’s fees and judgments (collectively referred to as “Damages”), 

including but not limited to claims for damage for personal injury (including death) and 

claims for property damage arising directly or indirectly from the following: (1) for any 

act or omission of Developer or those of its officers, board members, agents, employees, 

volunteers, contractors, subcontractors or other persons acting on its behalf (collectively 

referred to as the “Developer Parties”) which occurs during the Term and relates to this 

Agreement; (2) for any act or omission related to the operations of Developer Parties, 

including but not limited to the maintenance and operation of areas on the Property 

accessible to the public. Developer’s obligation to defend, indemnify and hold harmless 

applies to all actions and omissions of Developer Parties as described above caused or 

alleged to have been caused in connection with the Project or Agreement, except to the 

extent any Damages are caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of any 

City Indemnified Parties. This Section 14.1 applies to all Damages suffered or alleged to 

have been suffered by the City Indemnified Parties regardless of whether or not the City 

prepared, supplied or approved plans or specifications or both for the Project. 

14.2 City’s Right to Defense. The City shall have the right to approve legal 

counsel retained by Developer to defend any claim, action or proceeding which 

Developer is obligated to defend pursuant to Section 14.1, which approval shall not be 

unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. If any conflict of interest results during 

the mutual representation of the City and Developer in defense of any such action, or if 

the City is reasonably dissatisfied with legal counsel retained by Developer, the City shall 

have the right (a) at Developer’s costs and expense, to have the City Attorney undertake 

and continue the City’s defense, or (b) with Developer’s approval, which shall not be 

50

easonably withheld or delayed, to select separate outside legal counsel to undertake and 

continue the City’s defense. 

ARTICLE 15 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

15.1 Notices. Formal notices, demands and communications between the 

Parties shall be deemed sufficiently given if delivered to the principal offices of the City 

or Developer, as applicable, by (i) personal service, or (ii) express mail, Federal Express, 

or other similar overnight mail or courier service, regularly providing proof of delivery, 

or (iii) registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or 

(iv) facsimile (provided that any notice delivered by facsimile is followed by a separate 

notice sent within twenty-four (24) hours after the transmission by facsimile delivered in 

one of the other manners specified above). Such notice shall be addressed as follows: 

To City: 




Attention: City Manager 

Fax: (310) 917-6640 

With a Copy to: 




Attn: Planning and Community Development Director 

Fax: (310) 458-3380 

To Developer: 

The Luzzatto Company, Inc. 

3110 Main Street, Suite 200 


Attn: Marc Luzzatto 

Fax: (310) 829-7151 

Notice given in any other manner shall be effective when received by the addressee. Any 

Party may change the addresses for delivery of notices to such Party by delivering notice 

to the other Party in accordance with this provision. 

15.2 Entire Agreement; Conflicts. This Agreement represents the entire 

agreement of the Parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions 

mentioned herein or incidental hereto, and supersedes all negotiations or previous 

agreements between the Parties or their predecessors in interest with respect to all or any 

51

part of the subject matter hereof. Should any or all of the provisions of this Agreement 

be found to be in conflict with any other provision or provisions found in the Existing 

Regulations, then the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail. Should any of the 

Conditions of Approval set forth in Section B of Exhibit “D” attached hereto conflict 

with any of the Mitigation Measures set forth in Section A of Exhibit “D” attached 

hereto, the more stringent or exacting requirement shall control. 

15.3 Binding Effect. The Parties intend that the provisions of this Agreement 

shall constitute covenants which shall run with the land comprising the Property during 

the Term for the benefit thereof and that the burdens and benefits thereof shall bind and 

inure to the benefit of all successors-in-interest to the Parties hereto. Every Party who 

now or hereafter owns or acquires any right, title, or interest in or to any portion of the 

Project during the Term is and shall be conclusively deemed to have consented and 

agreed to every provision contained herein, to the extent relevant to said right, title or 

interest, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by 

which such person acquired an interest in the Project. 

15.4 Agreement Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement is made and 

entered into for the sole protection and benefit of Developer and the City and their 

respective successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based 

upon any provision of this Agreement. 

15.5 No Partnership or Joint Venture. Nothing in this Agreement shall be 

deemed to create a partnership or joint venture between the City and Developer or to 

render either Party liable in any manner for the debts or obligations of the other. 

15.6 Estoppel Certificates. Either Party may, at any time, and from time to 

time, deliver written notice to the other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing 

(each, an “Estoppel Certificate”): (a) that this Agreement is in full force and effect, 

(b) that this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if 

so amended, identifying the amendments, (c) whether or not, to the knowledge of the 

responding Party, the requesting Party is in Breach or claimed Breach in the performance 

of its obligations under this Agreement, and, if so, describing the nature and amount of 

any such Breach or claimed Breach, and (d) whether or not, to the knowledge of the 

responding Party, any event has occurred or failed to occur which, with the passage of 

time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute an Event of Monetary Default or an 

Event of Non-Monetary Default and, if so, specifying each such event. A Party receiving 

a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall execute and return such Certificate within thirty 

(30) days following the receipt of the request therefor. If the party receiving the request 

hereunder does not execute and return the certificate in such 30-day period and if 

circumstances are such that the Party requesting the notice requires such notice as a 

matter of reasonable business necessity, the Party requesting the notice may seek a 

second request which conspicuously states “FAILURE TO EXECUTE THE 

REQUESTED ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS SHALL BE 

DEEMED WAIVER PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15.6 AND 15.13 OF THE 

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT” and which sets forth the business necessity for a 

timely response to the estoppel request. If the Party receiving the second request fails to 

52

execute the Estoppel Certificate within such 15-day period, it shall be conclusively 

deemed that the Agreement is in full force and effect and has not been amended or 

modified orally or in writing, and that there are no uncured defaults under this Agreement 

or any events which, with passage of time of giving of notice, of both, would constitute a 

default under the Agreement. The City Manager shall have the right to execute any 

Estoppel Certificate requested by Developer under this Agreement. The City 

acknowledges that an Estoppel Certificate may be relied upon by any Property 

Transferee, Secured Lender or other party. 

15.7 Time. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of 

which time is an element. 

15.8 Excusable Delays. 

15.8.1 In addition to any specific provisions of this Agreement, nonperformance 

by Developer of its obligations under this Agreement shall be excused when 

it has been prevented or delayed in such performance by reason of any act, event or 

condition beyond the reasonable control of Developer (collectively, “Excusable Delays”) 

for any of the following reasons: 

a) War, insurrection, walk-outs, riots, acts of terrorism, 

floods, earthquakes, fires, casualties, acts of God, or similar grounds for excused 

performances; 

b) Governmental restrictions or moratoria imposed by the City 

or by other governmental entities or the enactment of conflicting State or Federal laws or 

regulations; 

c) The imposition of restrictions or moratoria by judicial 

decisions or by litigation, contesting the validity, or seeking the enforcement or 

clarification of, this Agreement whether instituted by Developer, the City or any other 

person or entity, or the filing of a lawsuit by any Party arising out of this Agreement or 

any permit or approval Developer deems necessary or desirable for the implementation of 

the Project; 

d) The institution of a referendum pursuant to Government 

Code Section 65867.5 or a similar public action seeking to in any way invalidate, alter, 

modify or amend the ordinance adopted by the City Council approving and implementing 

this Agreement; 

e) Inability to secure necessary labor, materials or tools, due 

to strikes, lockouts, or similar labor disputes; and 

f) Failure of the City to timely perform its obligations 

hereunder, including its obligations under Section 7.2 above 

15.8.2 Under no circumstances shall the inability of Developer to secure 

financing be an Excusable Delay to the obligations of Developer. 

53

15.8.3 In order for an extension of time to be granted for any Excusable 

Delay, Developer must deliver to the City written notice of the commencement of the 

Excusable Delay within sixty (60) days after the date on which Developer becomes aware 

of the existence of the Excusable Delay. The extension of time for an Excusable Delay 

shall be for the actual period of the delay. 

15.8.4 Nothing contained in this Section 15.8 is intended to modify the 

terms of either Section 5.1.2 or Section 5.5 of this Agreement. 

15.9 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed exclusively by the 

provisions hereof and by the laws of the State of California. 

15.10 Cooperation in Event of Legal Challenge to Agreement. If there is any 

court action or other proceeding commenced that includes any challenge to the validity, 

enforceability or any term or provision of this Agreement, then Developer shall 

indemnify, hold harmless, pay all costs actually incurred, and provide defense in said 

action or proceeding, with counsel reasonably satisfactory to both the City and 

Developer. The City shall cooperate with Developer in any such defense as Developer 

may reasonably request. 

15.11 Attorneys’ Fees. If any Party commences any action for the interpretation, 

enforcement, termination, cancellation or rescission of this Agreement or for specific 

performance for the Breach of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to its 

reasonable attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and costs. Attorneys’ fees shall include 

attorneys’ fees on any appeal as well as any attorneys’ fees incurred in any post-judgment 

proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. Such attorneys’ fees shall be paid 

whether or not such action is prosecuted to judgment. In any case where this Agreement 

provides that the City or Developer is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees from the other, 

the Party so entitled to recover shall be entitled to an amount equal to the fair market 

value of services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees 

actually paid by it to third Parties. The fair market value of the legal services for public 

attorneys shall be determined by utilizing the prevailing billing rates of comparable 

private attorneys. 

15.12 Recordation. The Parties shall cause this Agreement to be recorded 

against title to the Property in the Official Records of the County of Los Angeles. The 

cost, if any, of recording this Agreement shall be borne by Developer. 

15.13 No Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be 

effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party 

against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought and referring expressly to this 

Section 15.13. No delay or omission by either Party in exercising any right or power 

accruing upon non-compliance or failure to perform by the other Party under any of the 

provisions of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a 

waiver thereof, except as expressly provided herein. No waiver by either Party of any of 

the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other Party shall be construed or 

54

deemed a waiver of any succeeding breach or nonperformance of the same or other 

covenants and conditions hereof of this Agreement. 

15.14 Construction of this Agreement. The Parties agree that each Party and its 

legal counsel have reviewed and revised this Agreement and that any rule of construction 

to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not apply 

in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. 

15.15 Other Governmental Approvals. Developer may apply for such other 

permits and approvals as may be required for development of the Project in accordance 

with this Agreement from other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies having 

jurisdiction over the Property. The City shall reasonably cooperate with Developer in its 

endeavors to obtain such permits and approvals. 

15.15.1 Further Assurances; Covenant to Sign Documents. Each 

Party shall take all actions and do all things, and execute, with acknowledgment or 

affidavit, if required, any and all documents and writings, which may be necessary or 

proper to achieve the purposes and objectives of this Agreement. 

15.15.2 Processing. Upon satisfactory completion by Developer of 

all required preliminary actions and payments of appropriate processing fees, if any, the 

City shall, subject to all legal requirements, promptly initiate, diligently process, and 

complete at the earliest possible time all required steps, and expeditiously act upon any 

approvals and permits necessary for the development by Developer of the Project in 

accordance with this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the following: 

a) the processing of applications for and issuing of all 

Discretionary Approvals requiring the exercise of judgment and deliberation by City; 

b) the holding of any required public hearings; and 

c) the processing of applications for and issuing of all City 

Technical Permits requiring the determination of conformance with the Existing 

Regulations. 

15.15.3 No Revocation. The City shall not revoke or subsequently 

disapprove any approval or future approval for the development of the Project or the 

Property once issued by the City provided that the development of the Project or the 

Property is in accordance with such approval. Any disapproval by the City shall state in 

writing the reasons for such disapproval and the suggested actions to be taken in order for 

approval to be granted. 

15.15.4 Processing During Third Party Litigation. If any third party 

lawsuit is filed against the City or Developer relating to this Agreement or to other 

development issues affecting the Property, the City shall not delay or stop the 

development, processing or construction of the Property, or issuance of the City 

Technical Permits, unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity. 

The City shall not stipulate to or fail to oppose the issuance of any such order. 

55

Notwithstanding the foregoing and without prejudice to the provisions of 

Section 15.8.1c), after service on the City or Developer of the initial petition or complaint 

challenging this Agreement or the Project, the Developer may apply to the Planning 

Director for a tolling of the applicable deadlines for Developer to otherwise comply with 

this Agreement. Within 40 days after receiving such an application, the Planning 

Director shall either toll the time period (for up to five years) during the pendency of the 

litigation or deny the requested tolling. 

15.15.5 State, Federal or Case Law. Where any state, federal or 

case law allows the City to exercise any discretion or take any act with respect to that 

law, the City shall, in an expeditious and timely manner, at the earliest possible time, 

(i) exercise its discretion in such a way as to be consistent with, and carry out the terms 

of, this Agreement and (ii) take such other actions as may be necessary to carry out in 

good faith the terms of this Agreement. 

15.16 Venue. Any legal action or proceeding among the Parties arising out of 

this Agreement shall be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, 

State of California, in any other appropriate court in that County, or in the Federal 

District Court in the Central District of California. 

15.17 Exhibits. The following exhibits which are part of this Agreement are 

attached hereto and each of which is incorporated herein by this reference as though set 

forth in full: 

Exhibit “A” 

Exhibit “B” 

Exhibit “C” 

Exhibit “D” 

Exhibit “E” 






Exhibit “H” 

Exhibit “I” 

Exhibit “J” 

Exhibit “K” 

Exhibit “L” 

Exhibit “M” 

Legal Description of the Property 

Project Plans 

Permitted Fees and Exactions 

Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval 

SMMC Article 9 (Planning and Zoning) 

Local Hiring Program for Construction 

Local Hiring Program for Permanent Employment 

Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Easement Area 

New Road Easement Area 

Public Use Areas 

Santa Monica Sign Code 

Construction Mitigation Plan 

Assignment and Assumption Agreement 

VTP Resident Relocation Program 

Tract Map 

Exceptions to Title to Residual Parcel 

56

Except as to the Project Plans (attached hereto as Exhibit “B”) which shall be 

treated in accordance with Section 2.1 above, the text of this Agreement shall prevail in 

the event that any inconsistencies exist between the Exhibits and the text of this 

Agreement. 

15.18 Counterpart Signatures. The Parties may execute this Agreement on 

separate signature pages which, when attached hereto, shall constitute one complete 

Agreement. 

15.19 Certificate of Performance. Upon the completion of the Project, or any 

phase thereof, or upon performance of this Agreement or its earlier revocation and 

termination, the City shall provide Developer, upon Developer’s request, with a statement 

(“Certificate of Performance”) evidencing said completion, termination or revocation 

and the release of Developer from further obligations hereunder, except for any further 

obligations which survive such completion, termination or revocation. The Certificate of 

Performance shall be signed by the appropriate agents of Developer and the City and 

shall be recorded against title to the Property in the official records of Los Angeles 

County, California. Such Certificate of Performance is not a notice of completion as 

referred to in California Civil Code Section 3093. 

15.20 Interests of Developer. Developer represents to the City that, as of the 

Effective Date, it is the owner of the entire Property, subject to encumbrances, easements, 

covenants, conditions, restrictions, and other matters of record. 

15.21 Operating Memoranda. The provisions of this Agreement require a close 

degree of cooperation between the City and Developer. During the Term of this 

Agreement, clarifications to this Agreement and the Existing Regulations may be 

appropriate with respect to the details of performance of the City and Developer. If and 

when, from time to time, during the term of this Agreement, the City and Developer 

agree that such clarifications are necessary or appropriate, they shall effectuate such 

clarification through operating memoranda approved in writing by the City and 

Developer, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto and become part of this 

Agreement and the same may be further clarified from time to time as necessary with 

future written approval by the City and Developer. Operating memoranda are not 

intended to and cannot constitute an amendment to this Agreement but mere ministerial 

clarifications, therefore public notices and hearings shall not be required for any 

operating memorandum. The City Attorney shall be authorized, upon consultation with, 

and approval of, Developer, to determine whether a requested clarification may be 

effectuated pursuant to the execution and delivery of an operating memorandum or 

whether the requested clarification is of such character to constitute an amendment of this 

Agreement which requires compliance with the provisions of Section 8.1 above. The 

authority to enter into such operating memoranda is hereby delegated to the City 

Manager and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any operating memoranda 

hereunder without further action by the City Council. 

57

15.22 Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurance on the Part of Developer. 

15.22.1 Developer’s Faithful Performance. The Parties 

acknowledge and agree that Developer’s faithful performance in developing the Project 

on the Property and in constructing and installing certain public improvements pursuant 

to this Agreement and complying with the Existing Regulations will fulfill substantial 

public needs. The City acknowledges and agrees that there is good and valuable 

consideration to the City resulting from Developer’s assurances and faithful performance 

thereof and that same is in balance with the benefits conferred by the City on the Project. 

The Parties further acknowledge and agree that the exchanged consideration hereunder is 

fair, just and reasonable. Developer acknowledges that the consideration is reasonably 

related to the type and extent of the impacts of the Project on the community and the 

Property, and further acknowledges that the consideration is necessary to mitigate the 

direct and indirect impacts caused by Developer on the Property. 

15.22.2 Obligations to be Non-Recourse. As a material element of 

this Agreement, and in partial consideration for Developer’s execution of this Agreement, 

the Parties each understand and agree that the City’s remedies for breach of the 

obligations of Developer under this Agreement shall be limited as described in 

Sections 11.2 through 11.4 above. 

15.23 Not a Public Dedication. Except for the dedications to be made by 

Developer pursuant to Section 2.6, nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a gift 

or dedication of the Property, or of the Project, or any portion thereof, to the general 

public, for the general public, or for any public use or purpose whatsoever, it being the 

intention and understanding of the Parties that this Agreement be strictly limited to and 

for the purposes herein expressed for the development of the Project as private property. 

Developer shall have the right to prevent or prohibit the use of the Property, or the 

Project, or any portion thereof, including common areas and buildings and improvements 

located thereon, by any person for any purpose inimical to the development of the 

Project, including without limitation to prevent any person or entity from obtaining or 

accruing any prescriptive or other right to use the Property or the Project. Any portion of 

the Property to be conveyed to the City by Developer as provided in this Agreement, 

shall be held and used by the City only for the purposes contemplated herein or otherwise 

provided in such conveyance, and the City shall not take or permit to be taken (if within 

the power or authority of the City) any action or activity with respect to such portion of 

the Property that would deprive Developer of the material benefits of this Agreement or 

would materially and unreasonably interfere with the development of the Project as 

contemplated by this Agreement. 

15.24 Other Agreements. The City acknowledges that certain additional 

agreements may be necessary to effectuate the intent of this Agreement and facilitate 

development of the Project. The City Manager or his/her designee is hereby authorized 

to prepare, execute, and record those additional agreements. 

15.25 Severability and Termination. If any provision of this Agreement is 

determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, or if any 

58

provision of this Agreement is superseded or rendered unenforceable according to any 

law which becomes effective after the Effective Date, the remainder of this Agreement 

shall be effective to the extent the remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to 

perform, taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. 

{signatures on next page} 

59

This Agreement is executed by the Parties on the date first set forth above and is 

made effective on and as of the Effective Date. 

DEVELOPER: 

VILLAGE TRAILER PARK, LLC, 

a California limited liability company 

a Tenant in Common as to a 50% interest 

By: ________DRAFT_______________ 

Name: __________________________ 

Title: ___________________________ 

VILLAGE TRAILER PARK, 

a California corporation 

a Tenant in Common as to a 50% interest 

By: ________DRAFT_______________ 

Name: __________________________ 

Title: ___________________________ 

CITY: 

CITY OF SANTA MONICA, 

a municipal corporation 

By: ________DRAFT_______________ 

Name: ___________________________ 

Title: _____________________________ 

ATTEST: 

By: ________DRAFT_______________ 

Name: ______________________________ 

City Clerk 


By: ________DRAFT_______________ 

Name: ______________________________ 


Signature page 1

EXHIBIT “A” 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 

All that certain real property situated in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, 

described as follows: 

PARCEL 1: 

THE SOUTHEASTERLY HALF OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 5 IN BLOCK 200 OF 

THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 39 PAGES 45 ET SEQ., OF 

MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF 

SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 

BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE 

SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT, A 

DISTANCE OF 200 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE 

SOUTHWESTERLY PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID 

LOT, A DISTANCE OF 137.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY PARALLEL 

WITH THE SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE THEREOF, A DISTANCE OF 355 

FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE 

SOUTHEASTERLY 85 FEET OF SAID LOT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG 

SAID LAST MENTIONED NORTHWESTERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 137.50 

FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT; 

THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE, A 

DISTANCE OF 355 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF 

BEGINNING. 

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHEASTERLY 25 FEET THEREOF, AS 

DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, A MUNICIPAL 

CORPORATION, RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1955 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 414, 

OFFICIAL RECORDS. 

PARCEL 2: 

THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 4 AND 5, IN BLOCK 200, OF THE TOWN OF SANTA 

MONICA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP 

RECORDED IN BOOK 39 PAGES 45 ET SEQ., OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS, 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED 

AS A WHOLE AS FOLLOWS: 

BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE 

SOUTHWESTERLY 120.00 FEET OF SAID LOT 4 WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY 

LINE OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID 

NORTHWESTERLY LINE 110.40 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, AT RIGHT 

Exhibit A Page 1

ANGLES TO SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 120.00 FEET; THENCE 

NORTHEASTERLY, PARALLEL WITH SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 79.88 

FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 519.85 

FEET, MORE OR LESS, IN A DIRECT LINE TO A POINT IN THE 

SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4 DISTANT SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG 

SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE 28.77 FEET FROM THE MOST EASTERLY 

CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE 

SOUTHEASTERLY LINES OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5, A DISTANCE OF 232.46 

FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE 

NORTHEASTERLY 137.50 FEET OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY 

ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 640.00 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE 

NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG 

THE NORTHWESTERLY LINES OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5; A DISTANCE OF 232.32 

FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A LINE THAT IS DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES TO 

THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4 AND THAT PASSES THROUGH 

THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID 

LINE SO DRAWN, 120.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. 

Exhibit A Page 2

EXHIBIT “B” 

PROJECT PLANS 

On file with City of Santa Monica 

Exhibit B Page 1

EXHIBIT “C” 

PERMITTED FEES AND EXACTIONS 

1. Developer shall pay the following fees and charges that are within the City’s 

jurisdiction and at the rate in effect at the time payments are made: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

Upon submittal for Architectural Review Board (ARB) review, Developer 

shall pay City fees for processing of ARB applications; 

Upon submittal for plan check, Developer shall pay City plan check fees; 

Prior to issuance of construction permits, Developer shall pay the 

following City fees and all other standard fees imposed on similar 

development projects: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical, Grading, Seismic Mapping, 

Excavation and Shoring Permit fees (collected by Building & Safety) 

Shoring Tieback fee (collected by EPWM) 

Park and Recreation Facilities Tax (SMMC Section 6.80). WAIVED. 

Condominium Tax (SMMC Section 6.76.010). WAIVED. 

Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management fee (SMMC 

Section 7.60.020) (collected by EPWM) (collected by EPWM) 

Wastewater Capital Facilities Fee (SMMC Section 7 04.460) (collected 

by EPWM) 

Water Capital Facilities Fee & Water Meter Instillation fee (Water 

Meter Permit fee) (SMMC Section 7.12.090) (collected by EPWM) 

Fireline Meter fee (SMMC Section 7.12.090) (collected by EPWM) 

Childcare Linkage Fee (SMMC Section 9.72.040). Developer shall 

execute a contract to pay the fee prior to issuance of a building permit; 

provided that Developer shall not be obligated to pay the Childcare 

Linkage Fee to the City, rather, the payment by Developer of the 

contribution in Section 2.6.2f) of this Agreement shall constitute the 

Developer’s full satisfaction of this fee payment obligation. 

Cultural Arts Fee reduced to $100,000 (SMMC Section 9.04.10.20). 

Developer shall execute a contract to pay the fee prior to issuance of a 

building permit. Developer shall pay the fee prior to the issuance of a 

final certificate of occupancy for the Project. 

Exhibit C Page 1

(d) 

Upon inspection of the Project during the course of construction, City 

inspection fees. 

These fees shall be reimbursed to Developer in accordance with the City’s 

standard practice should Developer not proceed with development of the Project. 

2. Prior to issuance of permits for any construction work in the public right-of-way, 

or use of public property, Developer shall pay the following City fees: 

 

 

 

Use of Public Property Permit fees (SMMC 7.04.670) (EPWM) 

Utility Excavation Permit fee (SMMC 7.04.010) (EPWM) 

Street Permit fee (SMMC 7.04.790) (EPWM) 

3. The Developer shall reimburse the City for its actual costs to monitor 

environmental mitigation measures. The City shall bill the developer for staff 

time and any material used pursuant to the hourly fees in effect at the time 

monitoring is performed. Developer shall submit payment to the City within 30 

days. 

4. Developer shall reimburse the City for its ongoing actual costs to monitor the 

project’s compliance with this Development Agreement. The City shall bill 

Developer for staff time and any material used pursuant to the hourly fees in 

effect at the time monitoring is performed. Developer shall submit payment to the 

City within 30 days. 

Exhibit C Page 2

EXHIBIT “D” 

MITIGATION MEASURES 

AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 

Exhibit D Page 1

SECTION A - MITIGATION MEASURES 

1. BR1 Prior to removal, trees on the project site will be inspected for bird nests 

by a qualified biologist. Inspection of the trees shall occur prior to the typical 

breeding/nesting season (March 1 st through August 30 th ). If nesting is observed, 

the biologist shall recommend a buffer area with a specified radius to be 

established, within which no disturbance or intrusion shall be allowed until the 

young had fledged and left the nest or it is determined by the monitoring biologist 

that the nest has failed. If no nesting is observe, trees to be removed from within 

the project site shall be netted to prevent birds from inhabiting the trees prior to 

removal and construction. 

2. CON1 The construction contractor shall utilize super-compliant architectural 

coatings as defined by the SCAQMD (VOC standard of less than ten grams per 

liter ) 

3. CON2 Water or a stabilizing agent shall be applied to exposed surfaces at least 

two times per day to prevent generation of dust plumes. 

4. CON3 The construction contractor shall utilize at least one of the following 

measures at each vehicle egress from the project site to a paved public road: 

 

 

 

 

Install a pad consisting of washed gravel maintained in clean condition to a 

depth of at least six inches and extending at least 30 feet wide and at least 50 

feet long; 

Pave the surface extending at least 100 feet and at least 20 feet wide; 

Utilize a wheel shaker/wheel spreading device consisting of raised dividers at 

least 24 feet long and 10 feet wide to remove bulk material from tires and 

vehicle undercarriages; or 

Install a wheel washing system to remove bulk material from tires and vehicle 

undercarriages. 

5. CON4 All haul trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials shall be 

covered (e.g., with tarps or other enclosures that would reduce fugitive dust 

emissions). 

6. CON5 Construction activity on unpaved surfaces shall be suspended when wind 

speed exceed 25 miles per hour (such as instantaneous gusts). 

7. CON6 Ground cover in disturbed areas shall be replaced as quickly as possible. 

Otherwise, non-toxic chemical soil stabilizers shall be applied according to 

manufacturer specifications, to all inactive portions of the construction site 

(previously graded areas inactive for four days or more). 

Exhibit D Page 2

8. CON7 Heavy-duty equipment operations shall be suspended during first and 

second stage smog alerts. 

9. CON8 All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other 

suitable noise attenuation devices. 

10. CON9 Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as 

opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than metaltracked 

equipment). 

11. CON10 The construction contractor shall use on-site electrical sources to power 

equipment rather than diesel generators when electricity is readily available. 

12. CON 11 Construction haul truck and materials delivery traffic shall avoided 

residential areas whenever feasible 

13. CON 12 Construction noise levels shall not exceed the City of Santa Monica’s 

noise standards except for between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, in accordance with Section 4.12.110(d) of the Santa 

Monica Municipal Code 

14. CON 13 In accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.12.120, the 

project applicant shall be required to post a sign informing all workers and 

subcontractors of the time restrictions for construction activities. The sign shall 

also include the City telephone numbers where violations can be reported and 

complaints associated with construction noise can be submitted 

15. CON 14 The applicant shall prepare, implement, and maintain a Construction 

Impact Mitigation Plan which shall be designed to: 

 

 

 

 

 

Prevent material traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network; 

Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private 

parking to the greatest extent practicable; 

Ensure safety for both those constructing the project and the surrounding 

community; and 

Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods. 

The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall be subject to review and 

approval by the following City departments: Environmental and Public Works 

Management (EPWM); Fire; Planning and Community Development; and 

Police to ensure that the Plan has been designed in accordance with this 

mitigation measure. This review shall occur prior to commencement of any 

construction staging for the project. It shall, at a minimum, include the 

following: 

Exhibit D Page 3

Ongoing Requirements Throughout the Duration of Construction 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A detailed traffic control plan for work zones shall be maintained which 

includes at a minimum accurate existing and proposed: parking and travel lane 

configurations; warning, regulatory, guide and directional signage; and area 

sidewalks, bicycle lanes and parking lanes. The plan shall include specific 

information regarding the project’s construction activities that may disrupt 

normal pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures to address these 

disruptions. Such plans must be reviewed and approved by the Transportation 

Management Division prior to commencement of construction and 

implemented in accordance with this approval. 

Work within the public right-of-way shall be performed between 9:00 a.m. 

and 4:00 p.m., including: dirt and demolition material hauling and 

construction material delivery. Work within the public right-of-way outside 

of these hours shall only be allowed after the issuance of an After Hours 

Permit. 

Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established EPWM 

requirements. 

Trucks shall only travel on a City-approved construction route. Truck 

queuing/staging shall not be allowed on Santa Monica streets. Limited 

queuing may occur on the construction site itself. 

Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred 

location for materials is to be on-site, with a minimum amount of materials 

within a work area in the public right-of-way, subject to a current Use of 

Public Property Permit. 

Any requests for work before or after normal construction hours within the 

public right-of-way shall be subject to review and approval through the After 

Hours Permit process administered by the Building and Safety Division. 

Provision of off-street parking for construction workers, which may include 

the use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined 

necessary by the City of Santa Monica. 

Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to 

Commencement of Construction 

Exhibit D Page 4

Advise the traveling public of impending construction activities (e.g. 

information signs, portable message signs, media listing/notification, 

implementation of an approved traffic control plan). 

Approval from the City through issuance of a Use of Public Property Permit, 

Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit or Oversize Load Permit, as well as any 

Caltrans Permits required, for any construction work requiring encroachment 

into public rights-of-way, detours or any other work within the public right-ofway. 

Timely notification of construction schedules to all affected agencies (e.g., 

Big Blue Bus, Police Department, Fire Department, Environmental and Public 

Works Management Department, and Planning and Community Development 

Department) and to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of 

property within a radius of 500 feet. 

Coordination of construction work with affected agencies in advance of start 

of work. Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal. 

Approval by the Transportation Management Division of any haul routes 

involving earth, concrete or construction materials, and equipment hauling 

16. GS1 At the time of final building plan check, a site-specific Geotechnical Report 

shall be submitted to the City of Santa Monica Building and Safety Division for 

review and approval. The Geotechnical Report shall be prepared in accordance 

with the City’s Guidelines for Geotechnical Reports and at a minimum shall 

address: seismic hazards (fault management zone; groundshaking; liquefaction; 

subsidence, etc); hydrocollapse potential; and expansive soils. Information 

obtained from the Geotechnical Report shall be incorporated into the design and 

construction of the proposed project. The recommendations provided in the 

Geotechnical Report as well as Santa Monica Building Code requirements 

regarding foundation design, retaining wall design, excavations and shoring shall 

be fully implemented. 

17. GS2 Construction and excavation activities shall adhere to the Best Management 

Practices (BMPs) set forth by the City of Santa Monica Urban Runoff Pollution 

Ordinance (Chapter 7.10 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code). Such BMPs 

include using plastic coverings to prevent erosion of any unprotected area, such as 

mounds of dirt or dumpsters, along with devices designed to intercept and safely 

divert runoffs. 

18. GS3 All grading activities shall be scheduled for completion before the start of 

the rainy season (between November and April) to the extent feasible. If grading 

events do occur during the raining season, a rain event action plan shall be 

prepared and designed to protect all exposed portions of the site within 48 hours 

of any likely precipitation event forecast of 50 percent or greater probability 

Exhibit D Page 5

19. GS4 An erosion control plan that identifies BMPs shall be implemented to the 

satisfaction of the City of Santa Monica Building and Safety Department to 

minimize potential erosion during construction. The erosion control plan shall be 

a condition prior to issuance of any grading permit. 

20. GS5 Provisions shall be made for adequate surface drainage away from the areas 

of excavation as well as protection of excavated areas from flooding. The grading 

contractor shall control surface water runoff and the transport of silt and sediment. 

21. HM1 Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, for the permanent structures on the 

project site a Licensed Asbestos Inspector shall be retained to determine the 

presence of asbestos and asbestos containing materials (ACM) within structures to 

be demolished that are present on the project site. If asbestos is discovered, a 

Licensed Asbestos Abatement Contractor shall be retained to safely remove all 

asbestos from the development site. 

22. HM2 Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, lead-based paint testing shall be 

conducted for existing structures and trailers to be demolished. All materials 

identified as containing lead shall be removed by a licensed lead-based 

paint/materials abatement contractor. 

23. HM3 An operations and maintenance program shall be implemented in order to 

safely manage the suspect ACMs and LBP located at the project site. 

24. HW1 If temporary and/or permanent dewatering on the project site is required, 

the Applicant shall obtain a dewatering permit from the City of Santa Monica 

Water Resources Protection Program prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 

Soil and groundwater testing to a minimum depth of 50 feet shall be conducted to 

the satisfaction of the Water Resources Protection Program staff. If contaminated 

groundwater is discovered on-site, treatment and discharge of the contaminated 

groundwater shall be conducted in compliance with applicable regulatory 

requirements including the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board 

standards. 

25. T1 23 rd Street/Ocean Park Boulevard. Add an exclusive right-turn lane on the 

eastbound approach of Ocean Park Boulevard. The mitigation measure was 

proposed due to the heavy existing eastbound through movement volumes. The 

proposed mitigation would require shifting the existing eastbound through lane 

approach approximately two feet to the north to provide room for a functional 

right-turn lane. The proposed mitigation would require implementation of peak 

period parking restrictions for the first 75 feet of parking (approximately three 

parking spaces) closest to the intersection (eastbound on Ocean Park Boulevard, 

west of 23rd Street) so vehicles can make eastbound right-turns onto 23 rd Street 

from Ocean Park Boulevard during the peak periods or when there is available 

space outside of peak periods. The proposed mitigation measure would require 

Exhibit D Page 6

some restriping and peak period parking restriction signage at the eastbound 

approach of this intersection. 

26. T2 Cloverfield Boulevard/Santa Monica Boulevard. The left-turn phasing for 

the westbound leg of the Cloverfield Boulevard/Santa Monica Boulevard 

intersection shall be modified from a protected phase to a permitted-protected 

phase to decrease delay at the worst approach of the intersection to address the 

AM peak hour impact. The City shall monitor the operation of this intersection 

and adjust the signal timing and phasing as appropriate. Implementation of this 

mitigation measure would necessitate the provision of a combination of new 

signage, controller cabinets, poles, mast arms, detectors, and/or signal heads. 

Furthermore, this mitigation measure will provide the City greater flexibility in 

adjusting traffic signal operations to address peak hour congestion issues. 

27. T3 Stewart Street/Olympic Boulevard. The traffic signal at the Stewart 

Street/Olympic Boulevard intersection shall be modified to provide protectedpermitted 

left-turn phasing for northbound and eastbound approaches to decrease 

delay at the worst approaches of the intersection to address the impact. The City 

shall monitor the operation of this intersection and adjust the signal timing and 

phasing as appropriate. Implementation of this mitigation measure would 

necessitate the provision of a combination of new signage, controller cabinets, 

poles, mast arms, detectors, and/or signal heads. Furthermore, this mitigation 

measure will provide the City greater flexibility in adjusting traffic signal 

operations to address peak hour congestion issues. 

28. T4 Centinela Avenue/I-10 Westbound Ramps. The traffic signal at the 

Centinela Avenue/I-10 Westbound Ramps intersection shall be modified to 

provide protected-permitted left-turn phasing for northbound approach to decrease 

delay at the worst approach of the intersection to address. The City shall monitor 

the operation of this intersection and adjust the signal timing and phasing as 

appropriate. The implementation of the permitted-protected left-turn phasing 

would necessitate the provision of some combination of new signage, controller 

cabinets, poles, mast arms, detectors, and/or signal heads. Furthermore, this 

mitigation measure will provide the City greater flexibility in adjusting traffic 

signal operations to address peak hour congestion issues. Since this intersection 

is shared by the City of Santa Monica and City of Los Angeles, this mitigation 

measure must be approved by LADOT. The applicant shall use its good faith 

reasonable efforts to obtain such approval from the City of Los Angeles. If timely 

approved by the City of Los Angeles, such improvements shall be completed 

prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project 

29. T5 26 th Street & Wilshire Boulevard. Convert the protected permitted phasing 

for the eastbound and westbound left turn movements to permitted phasing. The 

City shall monitor the operation of this intersection and adjust the signal timing 

and phasing as appropriate. This mitigation measure would require temporary 

signage during a period of adjustment for motorists and the provision of some 

Exhibit D Page 7

combination of new signage, controller cabinets, poles, mast arms, detectors, 

and/or signal heads. Furthermore, this mitigation measure will provide the City 

greater flexibility in adjusting traffic signal operations to address peak hour 

congestion issues 

30. T6 Barrington Avenue/Olympic Boulevard. Convert the eastbound left-turn 

phasing from permitted to protected permitted. The City shall monitor the 

operation of this intersection and adjust the signal timing and phasing as 

appropriate. The implementation of the protected-permitted left-turn phasing 

would necessitate the provision of some combination of new signage, controller 

cabinets, poles, mast arms, detectors and/or signal heads. Furthermore this 

mitigation measure will provide the City greater flexibility in adjusting traffic 

signal operations to address peak hour congestion issues. The applicant shall use 

its good faith reasonable efforts to obtain such approval from the City of Los 

Angeles. If timely approved by the City of Los Angeles, such improvements shall 

be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project. 

31. CUL-1 If archaeological materials are discovered during project grading and 

excavation activities, all work within a 100-meter radius shall be temporarily 

ceased. The materials shall be treated in accordance with Federal, State, and local 

guidelines, including those set forth in California Public Resources Code 

Section 21083.2. In addition, if it is determined that an archaeological site is a 

historical resource, the provisions of Section 21084.1 of the Public Resources 

Code and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 would be implemented. 

32. CUL-2 If paleontological materials are discovered during project grading and 

excavation activities, all work within a 100-meter radius shall be temporarily 

ceased. A qualified paleontologist shall be secured by contacting the Los Angeles 

County Natural History Museum to assess the resources and evaluate the impact. 

The qualified paleontologist shall prepare a report of the findings and a copy of 

the report shall be submitted to the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum. 

33. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Pursuant to the requirements 

of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Planning Division will 

coordinate a monitoring and reporting program regarding any required changes to 

the project made in conjunction with project approval and any conditions of 

approval, including those conditions intended to mitigate or avoid significant 

effects on the environment. This program shall include, but is not limited to, 

ensuring that the City Planning Division itself and other City divisions and 

departments such as the Building and Safety Division, the Department of 

Environmental and Public Works, the Fire Department, the Police Department, 

the Planning and Community Development Department and the Finance 

Department are aware of project requirements which must be satisfied prior to 

issuance of a Building Permit, Certificate of Occupancy, or other permit, and that 

other responsible agencies are also informed of conditions relating to their 

responsibilities. Project owner shall demonstrate compliance with conditions of 

Exhibit D Page 8

approval in a written report submitted to the Planning Director and Building 

Officer prior to issuance of a Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy, and, as 

applicable, provide periodic reports regarding compliance with such conditions. 

Project Specific Conditions 

SECTION B - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 

1. The project shall provide the Significant Project Features and LUCE Community 

Benefits as established in Section 2.6 of this Agreement. 

2. The Architectural Review Board shall pay particular attention to the following design 

elements of the project: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The interior elevations of Buildings A and B to ensure that the pedestrian 

pathway remains inviting and is designed at a human-scale. 

The use of ground floor commercial space to ensure that it promotes a 

pedestrian oriented design consistent with the strategies for creating the 

Bergamot Transit Village. 

The ground floor residential units throughout the project to ensure that they 

are designed in a pedestrian-oriented manner consistent with the strategies for 

creating the Bergamot Transit Village. 

The east elevation of Building B to ensure that there are sufficient building 

stepbacks and building articulation. 

The scale and amount of applied building colour and materials to reduce the 

appearance of repetitive elevations and horizontal masses such as the east 

elevation of Building B. 

The scale of the buildings adjacent to Pennsylvania Avenue to ensure a 

human-scale environment. 

Openness of the south lobby of Building B to reinforce the sense of an open 

connection between the Building B residential courtyard and Pennsylvania 

Avenue. 

Treatments for the long interior hallway of Building B in order to introduce 

natural light 

Ensure pedestrian orientation and clear access despite the change in grade 

between the Colorado-facing retail space on the east side of Building B and 

the sidewalk and the change in grade on the walkway on the east side of 

Building B between Pennsylvania Avenue and the sidewalk on Colorado 

Avenue. 

Exhibit D Page 9

Ensure that the residential courtyards function as usable open space that is 

sufficient in bringing in light with use of landscaping and materials to activate 

the area. 

The materials and form of Building B to ensure that it is represented as an 

individual building from Building A and does not overwhelm Building A. 

Ensure that the Residual Parcel is incorporated into the landscape design for 

the Project through the use of landscaping to transition between the Residual 

Parcel and the Project Property. 

3. Developer shall execute a deed restriction with the City for 16 of the Rental Housing 

Units to be restricted as 7 Extremely Low Income Units and 9 Very Low Income 

Units, to be recorded before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the 

Project. 

4. No Certificate of Occupancy may be issued for Buildings A or B until Building C is 

issued a Certificate of Occupancy. 

5. Until the Park Transfer Date, Developer shall continue to operate the retained 

mobilehome park on the Residual Parcel consistent with the requirements of state 

law. In the event this condition is invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, the 

Park Transfer Date shall be advanced to the date of final judgment, and Developer 

shall transfer fee title to the Residual Parcel to the City or its designee pursuant to 

Section 2.6.2(n), regardless of whether Developer can satisfy the requirements of 

Section 2.6.2(n)(ii) and regardless of Developer’s ability to deliver title to the residual 

Parcel in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.6.2(n)(ix). 

6. No building permit, grading permit, or excavation permit may be approved or issued 

unless and until the Developer has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City 

Attorney’s Office that Developer has obtained possession of all of the real property 

required for the development of the Project Property. 

7. Prior to issuance of a building permit, grading permit, or excavation permit for the 

Project, Developer shall provide to the City a title policy showing that Developer 

owns fee title to the entire Project Property. 

Administrative Conditions 

8. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with any conditions of approval of 

this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy shall 

be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. 

Conformance with Approved Plans 

9. This approval is for those plans dated November 7, 2012, a copy of which shall be 

maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be 

Exhibit D Page 10

consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of 

approval. 

10. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of 

Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to review as 

provided in the Development Agreement. Construction shall be in conformance with 

the plans submitted or as modified in accordance with the Development Agreement. 

11. Except as otherwise provided by the Development Agreement, project plans shall be 

subject to complete Code Compliance review when the building plans are submitted 

for plan check and shall comply with all applicable provisions of Article IX of the 

Municipal Code and all other pertinent ordinances and General Plan policies of the 

City of Santa Monica prior to building permit issuance. 

Fees 

12. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with 

the requirements of Part 9.04.10.20 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Private 

Developer Cultural Arts Requirement. If the developer elects to comply with these 

requirements by providing on-site public art work or cultural facilities, no final City 

approval shall be granted until such time as the Director of the Community and 

Cultural Services Department issues a notice of compliance in accordance with 

Part 9.04.10.20. 

13. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies with 

the requirements of Chapter 9.72 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, the Child 

Care Linkage Program. 

Cultural Resources 

14. Except as otherwise provided by the Development Agreement, no demolition of 

buildings or structure built 40 years of age or older shall be permitted until the end of 

a 60-day review period by the Landmarks Commission to determine whether an 

application for landmark designation shall be filed. If an application for landmark 

designation is filed, no demolition shall be approved until a final determination is 

made by the Landmarks Commission on the application. 

15. If any archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation or construction, work 

in the affected area shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be contacted 

to conduct a survey of the affected area at project's owner's expense. A determination 

shall then be made by the Director of Planning to determine the significance of the 

survey findings and appropriate actions and requirements, if any, to address such 

findings. 

Exhibit D Page 11

Project Operations 

16. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to 

surrounding properties or residents by reason of lights, noise, activities, parking or 

other actions. 

17. The project shall at all times comply with the provisions of the Noise Ordinance 

(SMMC Chapter 4.12). 

Final Design 

18. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash enclosures, and signage shall be 

subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Board. 

19. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 9.04.10.04 (Landscaping Standards) 

of the Zoning Ordinance including use of water-conserving landscaping materials, 

landscape maintenance and other standards contained in the Subchapter. 

20. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in 

accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.130, 140, and 150. Refuse areas shall be 

of a size adequate to meet on-site need, including recycling. The Architectural 

Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the screening of such 

areas and equipment. Any rooftop mechanical equipment shall be minimized in 

height and area, and shall be located in such a way as to minimize noise and visual 

impacts to surrounding properties. Unless otherwise approved by the Architectural 

Review Board, rooftop mechanical equipment shall be located at least five feet from 

the edge of the roof. Except for solar hot water heaters, no residential water heaters 

shall be located on the roof. 

21. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the required front or street side yard 

setback areas. The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular 

attention to the location and screening of such meters. 

22. Prior to consideration of the project by the Architectural Review Board, the applicant 

shall review disabled access requirements with the Building and Safety Division and 

make any necessary changes in the project design to achieve compliance with such 

requirements. The Architectural Review Board, in its review, shall pay particular 

attention to the aesthetic, landscaping, and setback impacts of any ramps or other 

features necessitated by accessibility requirements. 

23. As appropriate, the Architectural Review Board shall require the use of anti-graffiti 

materials on surfaces likely to attract graffiti. 

Construction Plan Requirements 

24. Final building plans submitted for approval of a building permit shall include on the 

plans a list of all permanent mechanical equipment to be placed indoors which may 

be heard outdoors. 

Exhibit D Page 12

Demolition Requirements 

25. Until such time as the demolition is undertaken, and unless the structure is currently 

in use, the existing structure shall be maintained and secured by boarding up all 

openings, erecting a security fence, and removing all debris, bushes and planting that 

inhibit the easy surveillance of the property to the satisfaction of the Building and 

Safety Officer and the Fire Department. Any landscaping material remaining shall be 

watered and maintained until demolition occurs. 

26. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, applicant shall prepare for Building Division 

approval a rodent and pest control plan to insure that demolition and construction 

activities at the site do not create pest control impacts on the project neighborhood. 

Construction Period 

27. Any construction related activity in the public right-of-way will be required to acquire 

the approvals by the City of Santa Monica, including but not limited to: Use of Public 

Property Permits, Sewer Permits, Excavation Permits, Alley Closure Permits, Street 

Closure Permits, and Temporary Traffic Control Plans. 

28. Immediately after demolition and during construction, a security fence, the height of 

which shall be the maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained 

around the perimeter of the lot. The lot shall be kept clear of all trash, weeds, etc. 

29. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the site shall cover any open 

load with a tarpaulin or other secure covering to minimize dust emissions. 

Immediately after commencing dirt removal from the site, the general contractor shall 

provide the City of Santa Monica with written certification that all trucks leaving the 

site are covered in accordance with this condition of approval. 

30. During demolition, excavation, and construction, this project shall comply with 

SCAQMD Rule 403 to minimize fugitive dust and associated particulate emission, 

including but not limited to the following: 

31. All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive 

amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least three times daily with complete 

coverage, preferably at the start of the day, in the late morning, and after work is done 

for the day. 

32. All grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of high 

winds (i.e., greater than 20 mph measured as instantaneous wind gusts) so as to 

prevent excessive amounts of dust. 

33. Soils stockpiles shall be covered. 

34. Onsite vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph. 

Exhibit D Page 13

35. Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles enter and exit the construction site 

onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. 

36. An appointed construction relations officer shall act as a community liaison 

concerning onsite construction activity including resolution of issues related to PM10 

generation. 

37. Streets shall be swept at the end of the day using SCAQMD Rule 1186 certified street 

sweepers or roadway washing trucks if visible soil is carried onto adjacent public 

paved roads (recommend water sweepers with reclaimed water). 

38. All active portions the construction site shall be sufficiently watered three times a day 

to prevent excessive amounts of dust. 

39. Developer shall prepare a notice, subject to the review by the Director of Planning 

and Community Development, that lists all construction mitigation requirements, 

permitted hours of construction, and identifies a contact person at City Hall as well as 

the developer who will respond to complaints related to the proposed construction. 

The notice shall be mailed to property owners and residents of the neighborhood 

within 1000’ of the Project at least five (5) days prior to the start of construction. 

40. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consistent with the public hearing 

sign requirements which shall identify the address and phone number of the owner 

and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and complaints during 

the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours of permissible 

construction work. 

41. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily visible and accessible location 

at all times during construction at the project site. The pages shall be laminated or 

otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy. 

42. No construction-related vehicles may be parked on the street at any time or on the 

subject site during periods of peak parking demand. All construction-related vehicles 

must be parked for storage purposes at on offsite location on a private lot for the 

duration of demolition and construction. The offsite location shall be approved as part 

of the Department of Environmental and Public Works review of the construction 

period mitigation plan and by the Department of City Planning if a Temporary Use 

Permit is required. 

43. Construction period signage shall be subject to the approval of the Architectural 

Review Board. 

Standard Conditions 

44. Mechanical equipment shall not be located on the side of any building which is 

adjacent to a residential building on the adjoining lot, unless otherwise permitted by 

applicable regulations. Roof locations may be used when the mechanical equipment is 

installed within a sound-rated parapet enclosure. 

Exhibit D Page 14

45. Final approval of any mechanical equipment installation will require a noise test in 

compliance with SMMC Section 4.12.040. Equipment for the test shall be provided 

by the owner or contractor and the test shall be conducted by the owner or contractor. 

A copy of the noise test results on mechanical equipment shall be submitted to the 

Community Noise Officer for review to ensure that noise levels do not exceed 

maximum allowable levels for the applicable noise zone. 

46. The property owner shall insure any graffiti on the site is promptly removed through 

compliance with the City’s graffiti removal program. 

Condition Monitoring 

47. The applicant authorizes reasonable City inspections of the property to ensure 

compliance with the conditions of approval imposed by the City in approving this 

project and will bear the reasonable cost of these inspections. 

STRATEGIC AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 

48. Consistent with the requirements of the Development Agreement, Final auto parking, 

bicycle parking, and loading layouts and specification shall be subject to the review 

and approval of the Strategic and Transportation Planning Division: 

http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Transportation/Transportation_Ma 

nagement/ParkingStandards.pdf 

49. Consistent with the requirements of the Development Agreement, Where a driveway, 

garage, parking space or loading zone intersects with the public right-of-way at the 

alley or sidewalk, hazardous visual obstruction triangles shall be provided in 

accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.090. Please reference the following 

standards: 


nagement/HVO.pdf 

50. Consistent with the requirements of the Development Agreement, Slopes of all 

driveways and ramps used for ingress or egress of parking facilities shall be designed 

in accordance with the standards established by the Strategic and Transportation 

Planning Manager but shall not exceed a twenty percent slope. Please reference the 

following standards: 


nagement/RampSlope.pdf 

Exhibit D Page 15

PUBLIC LANDSCAPE 

51. Street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as required in a manner 

consistent with the City’s Urban Forest Master Plan, per the specifications of the 

Public Landscape Division of the Community & Cultural Services Department and 

the City’s Tree Code (SMMC Chapter 7.40). No street trees shall be removed without 

the approval of the Public Landscape Division. 

52. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit all street trees that are adjacent to or will 

be impacted by the demolition or construction access shall have tree protection zones 

established in accordance with the Urban Forest Master Plan. All tree protection 

zones shall remain in place until demolition and/or construction has been completed. 

OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT 

53. Developer shall enroll the property in the Savings By Design incentive program 

where available through Southern California Edison prior to submittal of plans for 

Architectural Review. Developer shall execute an incentive agreement with 

Southern California Edison prior to the issuance of a building permit. 

54. The project shall comply with requirements in section 8.106 of the Santa Monica 

Municipal code, which adopts by reference the California Green Building 

Standards Code and which adds local amendments to that Code. In addition, the 

project shall meet the landscape water conservation and construction and 

demolition waste diversion requirements specified in Section 8.108 of the Santa 

Monica Municipal Code. 

RENT CONTROL 

55. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary 

to demolish, convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental unit(s) from the 

housing market, the owner of the property shall first secure a removal permit 

under Section 1803(t), an exemption determination, an approval of a vested rights 

claim from the Rent Control board, or have withdrawn the controlled rental 

unit(s) pursuant to the provisions of the Ellis Act. 

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 

56. To ensure AHPP compliance, a monitoring fee will be applied to each affordable 

unit produced. A separate fee has been established for a new unit start-up, 

subsequent re-occupancy/resale and an annual monitoring fee. 

The Administrative Guidelines for the AHPP (fee structures, costs, and 

affordability limits) are updated annually and available on the Santa Monica 

House and Economic Development website. 

Exhibit D Page 16

PUBLIC WORKS 

General Conditions 

57. Developer shall be responsible for the payment of the following Public Works 

Department (PWD) permit fees prior to issuance of a building permit: 

a. Water Services 

b. Wastewater Capital Facility 

c. Water Demand Mitigation 

d. Fire Service Connection 

e. Tieback Encroachment 

f. Encroachment of on-site improvements into public right-of-way 

g. Construction and Demolition Waste Management – If the valuation of a 

project is at least $50,000 or if the total square feet of the project is equal to or 

greater than 1000 square feet, then the owner or contractor is required to 

complete and submit a Waste Management Plan. All demolition projects are 

required to submit a Waste Management Plan. A performance deposit is 

collected for all Waste Management Plans equal to 3% of the project value, 

not to exceed $30,000. All demolition only permits require a $1,000 deposit 

or $1.00 per square foot, whichever is the greater of the two. 

Some of these fees shall be reimbursed to developer in accordance with the City’s 

standard practice should Developer not proceed with development of the Project. In 

order to receive a refund of the Construction and Demolition performance deposit, the 

owner or contractor must provide receipts of recycling 70% of all materials listed on 

the Waste Management Plan. 

58. Any work or use of the public right-of-way including any proposed encroachments of 

on-site improvements into the public right-of-way will require a permit from the 

Public Works Department (PWD) - Administrative Services Division. 

59. Plans and specifications for all offsite improvements shall be prepared by a 

Registered Civil Engineer licensed in the State of California for approval by the City 

Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. 

60. Immediately after demolition and during construction, a security fence, the height of 

which shall be the maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained 

around the perimeter of the lot. The lot shall be kept clear of all trash, weeds, etc. 

61. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consistent with the public hearing 

sign requirements, which shall identify the address and phone number of the owner, 

developer and contractor for the purposes of responding to questions and complaints 

during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours of permissible 

construction work. 

62. Prior to the demolition of any existing structure, the applicant shall submit a report 

from an industrial hygienist to be reviewed and approved as to content and form by 

Exhibit D Page 17

the Office of Sustainability and Environment Division. The report shall consist of a 

hazardous materials survey for the structure proposed for demolition. The report 

shall include a section on asbestos and in accordance with the South Coast AQMD 

Rule 1403, the asbestos survey shall be performed by a state Certified Asbestos 

Consultant (CAC). The report shall include a section on lead, which shall be 

performed by a state Certified Lead Inspector/Assessor. Additional hazardous 

materials to be considered by the industrial hygienist shall include: mercury (in 

thermostats, switches, fluorescent light), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (including 

light Ballast), and fuels, pesticides, and batteries. 

Water Resources 

63. Connections to the sewer or storm drains require a sewer permit from the PWD - 

Civil Engineering Division. Connections to storm drains owned by Los Angeles 

County require a permit from the L.A. County Department of Public Works. 

64. Parking areas and structures and other facilities generating wastewater with potential 

oil and grease content are required to pretreat the wastewater before discharging to 

the City storm drain or sewer system. Pretreatment will require that a clarifier or 

oil/water separator be installed and maintained on site. 

65. If the project involves dewatering, developer/contractor shall contact the LA Regional 

Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to obtain an NPDES Permit for discharge of 

groundwater from construction dewatering to surface water. For more information 

refer to: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/ and search for Order # R4-2003- 

0111. 

66. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit a sewer 

study that shows that the City’s sewer system can accommodate the entire 

development. Developer shall be responsible to upgrade any downstream 

deficiencies, to the satisfaction of the Water Resources Manager, if calculations show 

that the project will cause such mains to receive greater demand than can be 

accommodated. Improvement plans shall be submitted to the Engineering Division. 

All reports and plans shall also be approved by the Water Resources Engineer. 

67. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit a water 

study that shows that the City’s water system can accommodate the entire 

development for fire flows and all potable needs. Developer shall be responsible to 

upgrade any water flow/pressure deficiencies, to the satisfaction of the Water 

Resources Manager, if calculations show that the project will cause such mains to 

receive greater demand than can be accommodated. Improvement plans shall be 

submitted to the Engineering Division. All reports and plans shall also be approved 

by the Water Resources Engineer. 

68. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall submit a 

hydrology study of all drainage to and from the site to demonstrate adequacy of the 

existing storm drain system for the entire development. Developer shall be 

Exhibit D Page 18

esponsible to upgrade any system deficiencies, to the satisfaction of City Engineer, if 

calculations show that the project will cause such facilities to receive greater demand 

than can be accommodated. All reports and improvement plans shall be submitted to 

Engineering Division for review and approval. The study shall be performed by a 

Registered Civil Engineer licensed in the State of California. 

69. All existing sanitary sewer “house connections” to be abandoned, shall be removed 

and capped at the “Y” connections. 

70. The fire services and domestic services 3-inches or greater must be above ground, on 

the applicant’s site, readily accessible for testing. Commercial or residential units are 

required to either have an individual water meter or a master meter with sub-meters. 

71. Developer is required to meet state cross-connection and potable water sanitation 

guidelines. Refer to requirements and comply with the cross-connections guidelines 

available at: http://www.lapublichealth.org/eh/progs/envirp/ehcross.htm. Prior to 

issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a cross-connection inspection shall be 

completed. 

72. All new restaurants and cooking facilities at the site are required to install Gravity 

Grease Interceptors to pretreat wastewater containing grease. The minimum capacity 

of the interceptor shall be determined by using table 10-3 of the 2007 Uniform 

Plumbing Code, Section 1014.3. All units shall be fitted with a standard final-stage 

sample box. The 2007 Uniform Plumbing Code guideline in sizing Gravity Grease 

Interceptors is intended as a minimum requirement and may be increased at the 

discretion of PWD, Water Resources Protection Program. 

73. Plumbing fixtures that meet the standards for 20% water use reduction specified in 

the California Green Building Standards Code are required on all new development 

and remodeling where plumbing is to be added. 

Urban Water Runoff Mitigation 

74. To mitigate storm water and surface runoff from the project site, an Urban Runoff 

Mitigation Plan shall be required by the PWD pursuant to Municipal Code 

Chapter 7.10. Prior to submittal of landscape plans for Architectural Review Board 

approval, the applicant shall contact PWD to determine applicable requirements, such 

as: 

 

 

 

The site must comply with SMMC Chapter 7.10 Urban Runoff Pollution 

Ordinance for the construction phase and post construction activities; 

Non-stormwater runoff, sediment and construction waste from the 

construction site and parking areas is prohibited from leaving the site; 

Any sediments or materials which are tracked off-site must be removed the 

same day they are tracked off-site; 

Exhibit D Page 19

Excavated soil must be located on the site and soil piles should be covered and 

otherwise protected so that sediments are not tracked into the street or 

adjoining properties; 

No runoff from the construction site shall be allowed to leave the site; and 

Drainage control measures shall be required depending on the extent of 

grading and topography of the site. 

Development sites that result in land disturbance of one acre or more are 

required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to submit a 

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Effective September 2, 

2011, only individuals who have been certified by the Board as a “Qualified 

SWPPP Developer” are qualified to develop and/or revise SWPPPs. A copy of 

the SWPPP shall also be submitted to the PWD. 

75. Prior to implementing any temporary construction dewatering or permanent 

groundwater seepage pumping, a permit is required for the City Water Resources 

Protection Program (WRPP). Please contact the WRPP for permit requirements as 

least two weeks in advance of planned dewatering of seepage pumping. They can be 

reached at (310) 458-8235. 

Public Streets & Right-of-Way 

76. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, streetscape for 

Colorado Avenue, Stanford Street, Pennsylvania Avenue Extension, and New Road 

frontages, such as AC pavement rehabilitation, replacement of sidewalk, curbs and 

gutters, installation of street trees, lighting and other appropriate street improvements 

shall be designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and 

Public Landscape Division. 

77. Unless otherwise approved by the PWD, all sidewalks shall be kept clear and 

passable during the grading and construction phase of the project. 

78. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveways which need replacing or removal as a 

result of the project as determined by the PWD shall be reconstructed to the 

satisfaction of the PWD. Design, materials and workmanship shall match the 

adjacent elements. This is especially true for areas within the City that have 

architectural concrete, pavers, tree wells, art elements, special landscaping, etc. 

79. Street and alley sections adjacent to the development shall be replaced as determined 

by the PWD. This typically requires full reconstruction of the street or alley in 

accordance with City of Santa Monica standards for the full adjacent length of the 

property. 

80. Developer shall dedicate the Pennsylvania Avenue Extension Area and all 

improvements made thereto, which shall provide for new pedestrian sidewalks, 

bicycle lanes, parkways and vehicular access, all as may be specified by the City; and 

serve as utility corridors across the Property (the “Pennsylvania Avenue Utility 

Corridors”) for the placement of public utility facilities that the City determines, 

Exhibit D Page 20

from time to time, should be located in the Pennsylvania Avenue Utility Corridors. 

The Pennsylvania Avenue Utility Corridors in such dedication shall contain the 

following limitations: 

Any dry utilities (including without limitation electricity and telephone or 

data) shall be located within an area that is no deeper than will leave at least 

eight feet six inches (8’ 6”) clear height within each level of the subterranean 

parking garage. Any of clearance within the parking and drive aisle in the 

parking garage and up to twenty-five (25) feet wide, in a location to be 

reasonably determined by Developer that will allow the minimum height 

clearances to be maintained in the parking garage and that will avoid the 

mechanical and other system facilities installed by Developer in the 

subterranean parking structure that serve the Project. 

81. Developer shall dedicate the New Road Area and all improvements made thereto, 

which shall provide for new pedestrian sidewalks, bicycle lanes, parkways and 

vehicular access, all as may be specified by the City; and serve as utility corridors 

across the Property (the “New Road Utility Corridors”) for the placement of public 

utility facilities that the City determines, from time to time, should be located in the 

New Road Utility Corridors. The New Road Utility Corridors in such dedication 

shall contain the following limitations: 

 

Utilities 

Any dry utilities (including without limitation electricity and telephone or 

data) shall be located within an area that is no deeper than will leave at least 

eight feet six inches (8’ 6”) clear height within each level of the subterranean 

parking garage. Any of clearance within the parking and drive aisle in the 

parking garage and up to eight feet (8’ 0”) wide, in a location to be reasonably 

determined by Developer that will allow the minimum height clearances to be 

maintained in the parking garage and that will avoid the mechanical and other 

system facilities installed by Developer in the subterranean parking structure 

that serve the Project. 

82. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, provide new streetpedestrian 

lighting with a multiple circuit system along the new street right-of-way 

and within the development site in compliance with the PWD Standards and 

requirements. New street-pedestrian light poles, fixtures and appurtenances to meet 

City standards and requirements. 

83. Make arrangements with utility companies and pay for undergrounding of all 

overhead utilities within and along the development frontages. Existing and proposed 

overhead utilities need to be relocated underground. 

84. Location of Southern California Edison electrical transformer and switch 

equipment/structures must be clearly shown of the development site plan and other 

appropriate plans within the project limits. The SCE structures serving the proposed 

development shall not be located in the public right-of-way. 

Exhibit D Page 21

Resource Recovery and Recycling 

85. Development plans must show the refuse and recycling (RR) area dimensions to 

demonstrate adequate and easily accessible area. If the RR area is completely 

enclosed, then lighting, ventilation and floor drain connected to sewer will be 

required. Section 9.04.10.02.151 of the SMMC has dimensional requirements for 

various sizes and types of projects. Developments that place the RR area in 

subterranean garages must also provide a bin staging area on their property for the 

bins to be placed for collection. 

86. Contact the PWD – Resource Recovery and Recycling (RRR) Division to obtain 

dimensions of the refuse recycling enclosure. 

87. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, submit a waste management plan, a map of the 

enclosure and staging area with dimensions and a recycling plan to the RRR Division 

for its approval. The State of California AB 341 requires any multi-family building 

housing 5 units or more to have a recycling program in place for its tenants. All 

commercial businesses generating 4 cubic yards of trash per week must also have a 

recycling program in place for its employees and clients/customers. Show 

compliance with these requirements on the building plans. Visit the RRR website or 

contact the RRR Division for requirements of the Waste Management Plan and to 

obtain the minimum dimensions of the refuse recycling enclosure. The recycling plan 

shall include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List of materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans, and glass to 

be recycled; 

Location of recycling bins; 

Designated recycling coordinator; 

Nature and extent of internal and external pick-up service; 

Pick-up schedule; and 

Plan to inform tenants/ occupants of service. 

Exhibit D Page 22

Construction Period Mitigation 

88. A construction period mitigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant for approval 

by the PWD prior to issuance of a building permit. The approved mitigation plan 

shall be posted on the site for the duration of the project construction and shall be 

produced upon request. As applicable, this plan shall: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Specify the names, addresses, telephone numbers and business license 

numbers of all contractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and 

architect; 

Describe how demolition of any existing structures is to be accomplished; 

Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erection/construction; 

Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or sidewalk is proposed to 

be used in conjunction with construction; 

Set forth the extent and nature of any pile-driving operations; 

Describe the length and number of any tiebacks which must extend under the 

public right-of-way and other private properties; 

Specify the nature and extent of any dewatering and its effect on any adjacent 

buildings; 

Describe anticipated construction-related truck routes, number of truck trips, 

hours of hauling and parking location; 

Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling; 

State whether any construction activity beyond normally permitted hours is 

proposed; 

Describe any proposed construction noise mitigation measures, including 

measures to limit the duration of idling construction trucks; 

Describe construction-period security measures including any fencing, 

lighting, and security personnel; 

Provide a grading and drainage plan; 

Provide a construction-period parking plan which shall minimize use of public 

streets for parking; 

List a designated on-site construction manager; 

Provide a construction materials recycling plan which seeks to maximize the 

reuse/recycling of construction waste; 

Provide a plan regarding use of recycled and low-environmental-impact 

materials in building construction; and 

Provide a construction period urban runoff control plan. 

Exhibit D Page 23

Air Quality 

89. Dust generated by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal 

of retaining dust on the site through implementation of the following measures 

recommended by the SCAQMD Rule 43 Handbook: 

 

 

 

 

During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or 

fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to the extent 

necessary to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each 

day’s activities cease. 

Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the site shall cover any 

open load with a tarpaulin or other secure covering to minimize dust 

emissions. Immediately after commencing dirt removal from the site, the 

general contractor shall provide the City with written certification that all 

trucks leaving the site are covered in accordance with this condition of 

approval. 

During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or 

fill materials, streets and sidewalks within 150 feet of the site perimeter shall 

be swept and cleaned a minimum of twice weekly or as frequently as required 

by the PWD. 

During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep 

all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the 

site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later 

morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 

15 miles per hour. 

Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated 

with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 

90. Construction equipment used on the site shall meet the following conditions in order 

to minimize NO x and ROC emissions: 

 

 

Diesel-powered equipment such as booster pumps or generators should be 

replaced by electric equipment to the extent feasible; and 

The operation of heavy-duty construction equipment shall be limited to no 

more than 5 pieces of equipment at one time. 

Noise Attenuation 

91. All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be 

equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. 

92. Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. 

Exhibit D Page 24

93. For all noise-generating activity on the project site associated with the installation of 

new facilities, additional noise attenuation techniques shall be employed to reduce 

noise levels to City of Santa Monica noise standards. Such techniques may include, 

but are not limited to, the use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment and 

the construction of temporary sound barriers between construction sites and nearby 

sensitive receptors. 

Miscellaneous 

94. For temporary excavation and shoring that includes tiebacks into the public right-ofway, 

a Tieback Agreement, prepared by the City Attorney, will be required. 

Exhibit D Page 25

FIRE 

General Requirements 

The following comments are to be included on plans if applicable. 

Requirements are based on the California Fire Code (CFC), the Santa Monica Municipal 

Code (SMMC) and the California Building Code (CBC). To the extent that there is a 

conflict between these requirements and the site plan included in the Project Plans, the 

site plan shall supersede these requirements. 

California Fire Code/ Santa Monica Fire Department Requirements 

1. A fire apparatus access road shall be provided to within 150 feet of all exterior walls 

of the first floor of the building. The route of the fire apparatus access road shall be 

approved by the fire department. The 150 feet is measured by means of an 

unobstructed route around the exterior of the building. Notwithstanding the 

foregoing, Building C of the Project shall not be subject to this condition; provided 

that Building C has sprinklers installed on all floors in accordance with applicable 

City building codes. 

2. Apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet. A 

minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches shall be provided for the apparatus 

access roads. 

3. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided 

with an approved means for turning around the apparatus. 

4. A “Knox” key storage box shall be provided for ALL new construction. For 

buildings, other than high-rise, a minimum of 3 complete sets of keys shall be 

provided. Keys shall be provided for all exterior entry doors, fire protection 

equipment control equipment rooms, mechanical and electrical rooms, elevator 

controls and equipment spaces, etc. For high-rise buildings, 6 complete sets are 

required. 

5. Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 8 Section 8.44.050 requires an approved 

automatic fire sprinkler system in ALL new construction and certain remodels or 

additions. Any building that does not have a designated occupant and use at the time 

fire sprinkler plans are submitted for approval, the system shall be designed and 

installed to deliver a minimum density of not less than that required for ordinary 

hazard, Group 2, with a minimum design area of not less than three thousand square 

feet. Plans and specifications for fire sprinkler systems shall be submitted and 

approved prior to system installation. 

6. Buildings four or more stories in height shall be provided with not less than one 

standpipe during construction. 

Exhibit D Page 26

7. The standpipe(s) shall be installed before the progress of construction is more than 

35- feet above grade. Two-and-one-half-inch valve hose connections shall be 

provided at approved, accessible locations adjacent to useable stairs. Temporary 

standpipes shall be capable of delivering a minimum demand of 500 gpm at 100-psi 

residual pressure. Pumping equipment shall be capable of providing the required 

pressure and volume. 

8. Provide Multipurpose Dry Chemical type fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 

2A-10B:C. Extinguishers shall be located on every floor or level. Maximum travel 

distance from any point in space or building shall not exceed 75 feet. Extinguishers 

shall be mounted on wall or installed in cabinet no higher than 4 ft. above finished 

floor and plainly visible and readily accessible or signage shall be provided. 

9. An automatic fire extinguishing system complying with UL 300 shall be provided to 

protect commercial-type cooking or heating equipment that produces grease-laden 

vapors. A separate plan submittal is required for the installation of the system and 

shall be in accordance with UFC Article 10, NFPA 17A and NFPA 96. Provide a 

Class “K” type portable fire extinguisher within 30 feet the kitchen appliances 

emitting grease-laden vapors. 

10. Every building and/or business suite is required to post address numbers that are 

visible from the street and alley. Address numbers shall be a minimum of six (6) 

inches in height and contrast with their background. Suite or room numbers shall be a 

minimum of four (4) inches in height and contrast with their background. Santa 

Monica Municipal Code Chapter 8 Section 8.48.130 (l) (1) 

11. When more than one exit is required they shall be arranged so that it is possible to go 

in either direction to a separate exit, except dead-ends not exceeding 20 feet, and 50 

feet in fully sprinklered buildings. 

12. Exit and directional signs shall be installed at every required exit doorway, 

intersection of corridors, exit stairways and at other such locations and intervals as 

necessary to clearly indicate the direction of egress. This occupancy/use requires the 

installation of approved floor level exit pathway marking. Exit doors shall be 

openable from the inside without the use of a key, special effort or knowledge. 

13. Show ALL door hardware intended for installation on Exit doors. 

14. In buildings two stories or more in height an approved floor plan providing 

emergency procedure information shall be posted at the entrance to each stairway, in 

every elevator lobby, and immediately inside all entrances to the building. The 

information shall be posted so that it describes the represented floor and can be easily 

seen upon entering the floor level or the building. Required information shall meet the 

minimum standards established in the Santa Monica Fire Department, Fire Prevention 

Division, and information sheet entitled “Evacuation Floor Plan Signs.” (California 

Code of Regulations Title 19 Section 3.09) 

15. Stairway Identification shall be in compliance with CBC 1022.8 

Exhibit D Page 27

16. Floor-level exit signs are required in Group A, E, I, R-1, R-2 and R-4 occupancies. 

17. In buildings two stories in height at least one elevator shall conform to the California 

Building Code Chapter 30 Section 3003.5a for General Stretcher Requirements for 

medical emergency use. 

a. The elevator entrance shall not be less than 42 inches wide by 72 inches 

high. 

b. The elevator car shall have a minimum clear distance between walls 

excluding return panels of not less than 80 inches by 54 inches. 

c. Medical emergency elevators shall be identified by the international 

symbol (star of life) for emergency elevator use. The symbol shall be not 

less than 3-inches in size. 

18. Storage, dispensing or use of any flammable or combustible liquids, flammable 

compressed gases or other hazardous materials shall comply with the Uniform Fire 

Code. The Santa Monica Fire Department prior to any materials being stored or used 

on site shall approve the storage and use of any hazardous materials. Complete and 

submit a “Consolidated Permit Application Package.” Copies may be obtained by 

calling (310) 458-8915. 

19. Alarm-initiating devices, alarm-notification devices and other fire alarm system 

components shall be designed and installed in accordance with the appropriate 

standards of Chapter 35 of the Building Code, and the National Fire Alarm 

Code NFPA 72. The fire alarm system shall include visual notification appliances for 

warning the hearing impaired. Approved visual appliances shall be installed in ALL 

rooms except private (individual) offices, closets, etc 

20. An approved fire alarm system shall be installed as follows: 

21. Group A Occupancies with an occupant load of 1,000 or more shall be provided with 

a manual fire alarm system and an approved prerecorded message announcement 

using an approved voice communication system. Emergency power shall be provided 

for the voice communication system. 

22. Group E Occupancies having occupant loads of 50 or more shall be provided with an 

approved manual fire alarm system. 

23. Group R-1, R-2 Apartment houses containing 16 or more dwelling units, in building 

three or more stories in height R-2.1 and R-4 Occupancies shall be provided with a 

manual alarm system. Smoke detectors shall be provided in all common areas and 

interior corridors of required exits. Recreational, laundry, furnace rooms and similar 

areas shall be provided with heat detectors. 

24. Plans and specifications for fire alarm systems shall be submitted and approved prior 

to system installation 

Exhibit D Page 28

Santa Monica Fire Department - Fire Prevention Policy Number 5-1 

Subject: Fire Apparatus Access Road Requirements 

Scope: This policy identifies the minimum standards for apparatus access roads required 

by California Fire Code, Section 503. 

Application 

25. Fire apparatus access roads shall comply with the following minimum standards: 

a. The minimum clear width shall be not less than 20 feet. No parking, 

stopping or standing of vehicles is permitted in this clear width. 

b. When fire hydrants or fire department connections to fire sprinkler 

systems are located on fire apparatus access roads the minimum width 

shall be 26 feet. This additional width shall extend for 20 feet on each side 

of the centerline of the fire hydrant or fire department connection. 

c. The minimum vertical clearance shall be 13 feet, 6 inches. 

d. The minimum turn radius for all access road turns shall be not less than 39 

feet for the inside radius and 45 feet for the outside radius. 

e. Dead-end access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided 

with either a 96 feet diameter “cul-de-sac,” 60 foot “Y” or 120-foot 

“hammerhead” to allow the apparatus to turn. 

f. The surface shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads 

of at least 75,000-pound and shall be “all-weather.” An “all-weather” 

surface is asphalt, concrete or other approved driving surface capable of 

supporting the load. 

26. Gates installed on fire apparatus access roads shall comply with the following: 

a. The width of any gate installed on a fire apparatus access road shall be a 

minimum of 20 feet. 

b. Gates may be of the swinging or sliding type. 

c. Gates shall be constructed of materials that will allow for manual 

operation by one person. 

d. All gate components shall be maintained in an operative condition at all 

times and shall be repaired or replaced when defective. 

e. Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening the gate by fire 

department personnel for emergency access. The Fire Prevention Division 

shall approve emergency opening devices. 

f. Manual opening gates may be locked with a padlock, as long it is 

accessible to be opened by means of forcible entry tools. 

g. The Fire Prevention Division shall approve locking device specification. 

Exhibit D Page 29

27. Fire apparatus access roads shall be marked with permanent NO PARKING – FIRE 

LANE CVC SECTION 22500.1. Signs shall havee a minimumm dimensionn of 12 inches 

wide and 18 inches high having red letters on a white reflective background. 

a. Fire apparatus 

access roads signs and placement shall comply 

with the 

following: 

i. Fire Apparatus access roads 200 to 26 feet wide must be posted on 

both sides as a fire 

lane. 

ii. 

Fire Apparatus access roads 266 to 32 feet wide must be posted on 

one side as a fire lane. 

28. Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in heightt or more than 3 stories in height 

shall have at least 2 fire apparatus access roads for each structure. 

29. Fire apparatus access roads for commercial and industrial development shall comply 

with the following: 

a. Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height or more than 3 stories in 

height shall have at least 2 means of fire apparatus access for each 

structure. 

b. Buildings or facilities having a gross floor area off more than 62,000 

square feet shall be provided with 2 fire apparatuss access roads. 

Exhibit D 

Page 30

c. When two access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart 

equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall 

diagonal dimension of the property or area to be accessed measured in a 

straight line between accesses. 

30. Aerial apparatus access roads shall comply with the following: 

a. Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height 

from the lowest point of Fire Department access shall be provided shall be 

provided with approved apparatus access roads capable of accommodating 

aerial apparatus. 

b. Apparatus access roads shall have a minimum width of 26 feet in the 

immediate vicinity of any building or portion of a building more than 30 

feet in height. 

c. At least one of the required access roads meeting this condition shall be 

located within a minimum of 15 feet and maximum of 30 feet from the 

building and shall be a positioned parallel to one entire side of the 

building. 

Exhibit D Page 31

31. California Building Code / Santa Monica Fire Department Requirements 

Occupancy Classification and Division 

If a change in occupancy or use, identify the existing and all proposed new 

occupancy classifications and uses 

Assembly (A-1, A-2, A-3), Business (B), Mercantile (M), Residential (R), etc. 

Include all accessory uses 

Building Height 

Height in feet (SMMC defines a High-Rise as any structure greater than 55 

feet.) 

Number of stories 

Detail increase in allowable height 

Type I (II-FR.) buildings housing Group B office or Group R, Division 1 

Occupancies each having floors used for human occupancy located more than 

55 feet above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall comply 

with CBC Section 403. 

Automatic sprinkler system. 

Smoke-detection systems. 

Smoke control system conforming to Chapter 9 Section 909. 

Fire alarm and communication systems. 

i. Emergency voice alarm signaling system. 

ii. Fire department communication system. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Central control station. (96 square feet minimum with a minimum dimension 

of 8’ ft) 

{omitted} 

Elevators. 

Standby power and light and emergency systems. 

Exits 

Seismic consideration. 

Exhibit D Page 32

Total Floor Area of Building or Project 

Basic Allowable Floor Area 

Floor Area for each room or area 

Detail allowable area increase calculations 

Corridor Construction 

Type of Construction 

Detail any and all code exceptions being used 

Occupant Load Calculations 

Occupancy Classification for each room or area. 

Occupant Load Calculation for each room or area based on use or occupancy 

Total Proposed Occupant Load 

Means of Egress 

Exit width calculations 

Exit path of travel 

Exit Signage and Pathway Illumination (low level exit signage) 

Atria - Atria shall comply with CBC Section 404 as follows: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Atria shall not be permitted in buildings containing Group H Occupancies. 

The entire building shall be sprinklered. 

A mechanically operated smoke-control system meeting the requirements of 

Section 909 and 909.9 shall be installed. 

Smoke detectors shall be installed in accordance with the Fire Code. 

Except for open exit balconies within the atrium, the atrium shall be separated 

from adjacent spaces by one-hour fire-resistive construction. See exceptions to 

Section 404.6. 

When a required exit enters the atrium space, the travel distance from the 

doorway of the tenant space to an enclosed stairway, horizontal exit, exterior 

door or exit passageway shall not exceed 200 feet. 

In other than jails, prisons and reformatories, sleeping rooms of Group I 

Occupancies shall not have required exits through the atrium. 

Standby power shall be provided for the atrium and tenant space smokecontrol 

system. Sections 404.7 and 909.11. 

Exhibit D Page 33

The interior finish for walls and ceilings of the atrium and all unseparated 

tenant spaces shall be Class I. Section 404.8. 

Atriums of a height greater than 20 feet, measured from the ceiling sprinklers, shall only 

contain furnishings and decorative materials with potential heat of combustion less than 

9,000 Btu’s per pound. All furnishings to comply with California Bureau of Home 

Furnishings, Technical Bulletin 133, “Flammability Test for Seating Furniture in Public 

Occupancies.” 

All furnishings in public areas shall comply with California Bureau of Home Furnishings, 

Technical Bulletin 133, and “Flammability Test for Seating Furniture in Public 

Occupancies.” 

Fire – Los Angeles County 

32. Fire Flow Requirements 

I. INTRODUCTION 

A. Purpose: To provide Department standards for fire flow, hydrant spacing 

and specifications. 

B. Scope: Informational to the general public and instructional to all 

individuals, companies, or corporations involved in the subdivision of land, 

construction of buildings, or alterations and/or installation of fire protection 

water systems and hydrants. 

C. Author: The Deputy Chief of the Prevention Services Bureau through the 

Assistant Fire Chief (Fire Marshal) of the Fire Prevention Division is 

responsible for the origin and maintenance of this regulation. 

D. Definitions: 

1. GPM – gallons per minute 

2. psi – pounds per square inch 

3. Detached condominiums – single detached dwelling units on land 

owned in common 

4. Multiple family dwellings – three or more dwelling units attached 

Exhibit D Page 34

II. 

RESPONSIBILITY 

A. Land Development Unit 

1. The Department’s Land Development Unit shall review all 

subdivisions of land and apply fire flow and hydrant spacing 

requirements in accordance with this regulation and the present 

zoning of the subdivision or allowed land use as approved by the 

County’s Regional Planning Commission or city planning 

department. 

B. Fire Prevention Engineering Section 

1. The Department’s Fire Prevention Engineering Section shall review 

building plans and apply fire flow and hydrant spacing requirements 

in accordance with this regulation. 

III. 

POLICY 

1. The procedures, standards, and policies contained herein are provided 

to ensure the adequacy of, and access to, fire protection water and 

shall be enforced by all Department personnel. 

{remainder of page is blank} 

Exhibit D Page 35

IV. 

PROCEDURES 

A. Land development: fire flow, duration of flow, and hydrant spacing 

The following requirements apply to land development issues such as: tract 

maps, conditional use permits, zone changes, lot line adjustments, planned 

unit developments, etc. 

1. Residential 

Fire Zones 3 

Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) 

a. Single family dwelling 

and detached condominiums 

(1 – 4 Units) 

(Under 5,000 square feet) 

b. Detached condominium 

(5 or more units) 

(Under 5,000 square feet) 

c. Two family dwellings 

(Duplexes) 

Fire Flow 

Duration 

of Flow 

1,250 GPM 2 hrs. 600 ft. 

1,500 GPM 2 hrs. 300 ft. 

1,500 GPM 2 hrs. 600 ft. 

Public Hydrant 

Spacing 

NOTE: FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS OVER 5,000 

SQUARE FEET. SEE, TABLE 1 FOR FIRE FLOW 

REQUIREMENTS PER BUILDING SIZE. 

1. Multiple family dwellings, hotels, high rise, commercial, industrial, 

etc. 

a. Due to the undetermined building designs for new land 

development projects (undeveloped land), the required fire flow 

shall be: 5,000 GPM 5 hrs. 300 ft. 

NOTE: 

REDUCTION IN FIRE FLOW IN ACCORDANCE 

WITH TABLE 1. 

Exhibit D Page 36

. Land development projects consisting of lots having existing 

structures shall be in compliance with Table 1 (fire flow per 

building size). This standard applies to multiple family 

dwellings, hotels, high rise, commercial, industrial, etc. 

NOTE: 

FIRE FLOWS PRECEDING ARE MEASURED AT 

20 POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH RESIDUAL 

PRESSURE. 

B. Building plans 

The Department’s Fire Prevention Engineering Section shall review building 

plans and apply fire flow requirements and hydrant spacing in accordance with 

the following: 

1. Residential 

Building Occupancy Classification 

a. Single family dwellings - Fire Zone 3 (Less than 5,000 square feet) 

Fire Flow 

Duration 

of Flow 


Spacing 

On a lot of one acre or more 750 GPM 2 hrs. 600 ft. 

On a lot less than one acre 1,250 GPM 2 hrs 600 ft. 

b. Single family dwellings – VHFHSZ (Less than 5,000 square feet) 

On a lot of one acre or more 1,000 GPM 2 hrs. 600 ft. 

On a lot less than one acre 1,250 GPM 2 hrs 600 ft. 

NOTE: FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS GREATER THAN 5,000 

SQUARE FEET IN AREA SEE TABLE 

Exhibit D Page 37

Duration 

Fire Flow of Flow 

c. Two family dwellings – VHFHSZ (Less than 5,000 square feet) 


Spacing 

Duplexes 1,500 GPM 2 hrs 600 ft. 

1. Mobilehome Park 

a. Recreation Buildings Refer to Table 1 for fire flow according to building 

size. 

b. Mobilehome Park 1,250 GPM 2 hrs 600 ft. 

2. Multiple residential, apartments, single family residences (greater than 

5,000 square feet), private schools, hotels, high rise, commercial, 

industrial, etc. (R-1, E, B, A, I, H, F, M, S) (see Table 1). 

C. Public fire hydrant requirements 

1. Fire hydrants shall be required at intersections and along access ways as 

spacing requirements dictate 

2. Spacing 

a. Cul-de-sac 

When cul-de-sac depth exceeds 450’ (residential) or 

200’ (commercial), hydrants shall be required at mid-block. 

Additional hydrants will be required if hydrant spacing exceeds 

specified distances. 

b. Single family dwellings 

Fire hydrant spacing of 600 feet 

NOTE: 

The following guidelines shall be used in meeting 

single family dwellings hydrant spacing 

requirements: 

(1) Urban properties (more than one unit per acre): 

No portion of lot frontage should be more than 450’ via 

vehicular access from a public hydrant. 

Exhibit D Page 38

(2) Non-Urban Properties (less than one unit per acre): 

No portion of a structure should be placed on a lot where 

it exceeds 750’ via vehicular access from a properly 

spaced public hydrant that meets the required fire flow. 

c. All occupancies 

Other than single family dwellings, such as commercial, industrial, 

multi-family dwellings, private schools, institutions, detached 

condominiums (five or more units), etc. 

Fire hydrant spacing shall be 300 feet. 

NOTE: The following guidelines shall be used in meeting the 

hydrant spacing requirements. 

(1) No portion of lot frontage shall be more than 200 feet via 

vehicular access from a public hydrant. 

(2) No portion of a building should exceed 400 feet via 

vehicular access from a properly spaced public hydrant. 

d. Supplemental fire protection 

When a structure cannot meet the required public hydrant spacing 

distances, supplemental fire protection shall be required. 

NOTE: Supplemental fire protection is not limited to the 

installation of on-site fire hydrants; it may include automatic 

extinguishing systems. 

1. Hydrant location requirements - both sides of a street 

Hydrants shall be required on both sides of the street whenever: 

a. Streets having raised median center dividers that make access to 

hydrants difficult, cause time delay, and/or creates undue hazard. 

b. For situations other than those listed in “a” above, the Department’s 

inspector’s judgment shall be used. The following items shall be 

considered when determining hydrant locations: 

(1) Excessive traffic loads, major arterial route, in which 

traffic would be difficult to detour. 

(2) Lack of adjacent parallel public streets in which traffic 

could be redirected (e.g., Pacific Coast Highway). 

Exhibit D Page 39

D. On-Site Hydrant Requirements 

(3) Past practices in the area. 

(4) Possibility of future development in the area. 

(5) Type of development (i.e., flag-lot units, large apartment 

or condo complex, etc.). 

(6) Accessibility to existing hydrants 

(7) Possibility of the existing street having a raised median 

center divider in the near future. 

1. When any portion of a proposed structure exceeds (via vehicular 

access) the allowable distances from a public hydrant and on-site 

hydrants are required, the following spacing requirements shall be met: 

a. Spacing distance between on-site hydrants shall be 300 to 600 feet. 

(1) Design features shall assist in allowing distance 

modifications. 

b. Factors considered when allowing distance modifications. 

2. Fire flow 

(1) Only sprinklered buildings qualify for the maximum 

spacing of 600 feet. 

(2) For non-sprinklered buildings, consideration should be 

given to fire protection, access doors, outside storage, etc. 

Distance between hydrants should not exceed 400 feet. 

a. All on-site fire hydrants shall flow a minimum of 1,250 gallons per 

minute at 20 psi for a duration of two hours. If more than one onsite 

fire hydrant is required, the on-site fire flow shall be at least 

2,500 gallons per minute at 20 psi, flowing from two hydrants 

simultaneously. On site flow may be greater depending upon the 

size of the structure and the distance from public hydrants. 

NOTE: 

ONE OF THE TWO HYDRANTS TESTED SHALL BE 

THE FARTHEST FROM THE PUBLIC WATER 

SOURCE. 

Exhibit D Page 40

3. Distance from structures 

All on-site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 feet from a 

structure or protected by a two-hour firewall. 

4. Shut-off valves 

All on-site hydrants shall be equipped with a shut-off (gate) valve, which 

shall be located as follows: 

a. Minimum distance to the hydrant 10 feet. 

b. Maximum distance from the hydrant 25 feet 

5. Inspection of new installations 

All new on-site hydrants and underground installations are subject to 

inspection of the following items by a representative of the Department: 

a. Piping materials and the bracing and support thereof. 

b. A hydrostatic test of 200 psi for two hours. 

c. Adequate flushing of the installation. 

d. Flow test to satisfy required fire flow. 

6. Maintenance 

(1) Hydrants shall be painted with two coats of red primer 

and one coat of red paint, with the exception of the stem 

and threads, prior to flow test and acceptance of the 

system. 

It shall be the responsibility of the property management company, the 

homeowners association, or the property owner to maintain on-site 

hydrants. 

a. Hydrants shall be painted with two coats of red primer and one coat 

of red, with the exception of the stem and threads, prior to flow test 

and acceptance of the system. 

b. No barricades, walls, fences, landscaping, etc., shall be installed or 

planted within three feet of a fire hydrant. 

E. Public Hydrant Flow Procedure 

Exhibit D Page 41

The minimum acceptable flow from any existing public hydrant shall be 1,000 

GPM unless the required fire flow is less. Hydrants used to satisfy fire flow 

requirements will be determined by the following items: 

1. Only hydrants that meet spacing requirements are acceptable for 

meeting fire flow requirements. 

2. In order to meet the required fire flow: 

a. Flow closest hydrant and calculate to determine flow at 20 pounds 

per square inch residual pressure. If the calculated flow does not 

meet the fire flow requirement, the next closest hydrant shall be 

flowed simultaneously with the first hydrant, providing it meets the 

spacing requirement, etc. 

b. If more than one hydrant is to be flowed in order to meet the 

required fire flow, the number of hydrants shall be flowed as 

follows: 

One hydrant 

Two hydrants 

Three hydrants 

1,250 GPM and below 

1,251– 3,500 GPM flowing simultaneously 

3,501– 5,000 GPM flowing simultaneously 

F. Hydrant Upgrade Policy 

1. Existing single outlet 2 1/2” inch hydrants shall be upgraded to a double 

outlet 6” x 4” x 2 1/2” hydrant when the required fire flow exceeds 

1,250GPM. 

2. An upgrade of the fire hydrant will not be required if the required fire 

flow is between the minimum requirement of 750 gallons per minute, up 

to and including 1,250 gallons per minute, and the existing public water 

system will provide the required fire flow through an existing wharf fire 

hydrant. 

3. All new required fire hydrant installations shall be approved 6” x 4” x 2 

1/2” fire hydrants. 

4. When water main improvements are required to meet GPM flow, and the 

existing water main has single outlet 2 1/2” fire hydrant(s), then a 

hydrant(s) upgrade will be required. This upgrade shall apply regardless 

of flow requirements. 

5. The owner-developer shall be responsible for making the necessary 

arrangements with the local water purveyor for the installation of all 

public facilities. 

Exhibit D Page 42

6. Approved fire hydrant barricades shall be installed if curbs are not 

provided (see Figures 1, 2, and 3 following on pages 11 and 12). 

G. Hydrant Specifications 

All required public and on-site fire hydrants shall be installed to the 

following specifications prior to flow test and acceptance of the system. 

1. Hydrants shall be: 

a. Installed so that the center line of the lowest outlet is between 14 and 

24 inches above finished grade 

b. Installed so that the front of the riser is between 12 and 24 inches 

behind the curb face 

c. Installed with outlets facing the curb at a 45-degree angle to the curb 

line if there are double outlet hydrants 

d. Similar to the type of construction which conforms to current 

A.W.W.A. Standards 

e. Provided with three-foot unobstructed clearance on all sides. 

f. Provided with approved plastic caps 

g. Painted with two coats of red primer and one coat of traffic signal 

yellow for public hydrants and one coat of red for on-site hydrants, 

with the exception of the stems and threads 

2. Underground shut-off valves are to be located: 

a. A minimum distance of 10 feet from the hydrant 

b. A maximum distance of 25 feet from the hydrant 

Exception: Location can be less than 10 feet when the water main 

is already installed and the 10-foot minimum distance cannot be 

satisfied. 

3. All new water mains, laterals, gate valves, buries, and riser shall be a 

minimum of six inches inside diameter. 

Exhibit D Page 43

4. When sidewalks are contiguous with a curb and are five feet wide or less, 

fire hydrants shall be placed immediately behind the sidewalk. Under no 

circumstances shall hydrants be more than six feet from a curb line. 

5. The owner-developer shall be responsible for making the necessary 

arrangements with the local water purveyor for the installation of all 

public facilities. 

6. Approved fire hydrant barricades shall be installed if curbs are not 

provided (see Figures 1, 2, and 3 following on pages 11 and 12). 

Exhibit D Page 44

Barricade/ /Clearance Details 

Figure 1 

Figure 2 

Exhibit D 

Page 45

Figure 3 

Notes: 

1. Constructed of steel not less than four inches in diameter, six 

inches if 

heavy truck traffic is anticipated, schedule 40 steel and concrete filled. 

2. Posts shall be 

set not lesss than three feet deep in a concrete footing of not 

less than 15 inches in diameter, with the top of the posts not less than 

three feet above ground and not less than three feet from the hydrant 

3. Posts, fences, vehicles, growth, trashh storage and 

other materials or things 

shall not be placed or kept near fire hydrants in a manner that would 

prevent fire hydrants from 

being immediately discernable. 

4. If hydrant is to be barricaded, no barricade shall be constructed in front of 

the hydrant outlets (Figure 2, shadedd area). 

5. The exact location of barricades mayy be changed 

by the field 

inspector 

during a field 

inspection. 

6. The steel pipe above ground shall bee painted a minimum of two field 

coats of primer. 

7. Two finish coats of “traffic signal yellow” shall be used for fire hydrant 

barricades. 

8. Figure 3 shows hydrant hook up during fireground operations. Notice 

apparatus (hydra-assist-valve) connected to hydrant and the required area. 

Figure 3 shows the importance of not constructing barricades or other 

obstructions 

in front of hydrant outlets. 

Exhibit D 

Page 46

H. Private fire protection systems for rural commercial and industrial 

development 

Where the standards of this regulation cannot be met for industrial and 

commercial developments in rural areas, alternate proposals which meet NFPA 

Standard 1142 may be submitted to the Fire Marshal for review. Such 

proposals shall also be subject to the following: 

1. The structure is beyond 3,000 feet of any existing, adequately-sized water 

system. 

a. Structures within 3,000 feet of an existing, adequately-sized 

water system, but beyond a water purveyor service area, will 

be reviewed on an individual basis. 

2. The structure is in an area designated by the County of Los Angeles’ 

General Plan as rural non-urban. 

I. Blue reflective hydrant markers replacement policy 

1. Purpose: To provide information regarding the replacement of blue 

reflective hydrant markers, following street construction or repair work. 

a. Fire station personnel shall inform Department of Public 

Works Road Construction Inspectors of the importance of the 

blue reflective hydrant markers, and encourage them to 

enforce their Department permit requirement, that streets and 

roads be returned to their original condition, following 

construction or repair work. 

b. When street construction or repair work occurs within this 

Department’s jurisdiction, the nearest Department of Public 

Works Permit Office shall be contacted. The location can be 

found by searching for the jurisdiction office in the “County 

of Los Angeles Telephone Directory” under “Department of 

Public Works Road Maintenance Division.” The importance 

of the blue reflective hydrant markers should be explained, 

and the requirement encouraged that the street be returned to 

its original condition, by replacing the hydrant markers. 

Exhibit D Page 47

TABLE 1 * 

BUILDING SIZE 

(First floor area) Fire Flow *(1) (2) Duration Hydrant Spacing 

Under 3,000 

sq. ft. 

1,000 GPM 

2 hrs. 

300 ft. 

3,000 to 4,999 

sq. ft. 

1,250 GPM 

2 hrs. 

300 ft. 

5,000 to 7,999 

sq. ft. 

1,500 GPM 

2 hrs. 

300 ft. 

8,000 to 9,999 

sq. ft. 

2,000 GPM 

2 hrs. 

300 ft. 

10,000 to 14,999 

sq. ft. 

2,500 GPM 

2 hrs. 

300 ft. 

15,000 to 19,999 

sq. ft. 

3,000 GPM 

3 hrs. 

300 ft. 

20,000 to 24,999 

sq. ft. 

3,500 GPM 

3 hrs. 

300 ft. 

25,000 to 29,999 

sq. ft. 

4,000 GPM 

4 hrs. 

300 ft. 

30,000 to 34,999 

sq. ft. 

4,500 GPM 

4 hrs. 

300 ft. 

35,000 or more 

sq. ft. 

5,000 GPM 

5 hrs. 

300 ft. 

*See applicable footnotes below: 

(FIRE FLOWS MEASURED AT 20 POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH RESIDUAL 

PRESSURE) 

(1) Conditions requiring additional fire flow. 

a. Each story above ground level - add 500 GPM per story. 

b. Any exposure within 50 feet - add a total of 500 GPM. 

c. Any high-rise building (as determined by the jurisdictional 

building code) the fire flow shall be a minimum of 3,500 GPM for 

3 hours at 20 psi. 

d. Any flow may be increased up to 1,000 GPM for a hazardous 

occupancy. 

(2) Reductions in fire flow shall be cumulative for type of construction and a fully 

sprinklered building. The following allowances and/or additions may be made 

to standard fire flow requirements: 

Exhibit D Page 48

a. A 25% reduction shall be granted for the following types of construction: 

Type I-F.R, Type II-F.R., Type II one-hour, Type II-N, Type III one-hour, 

Type III-N, Type IV, Type IV one hour, and Type V one-hour. This 

reduction shall be automatic and credited on all projects using these types 

of construction. Credit will not be given for Type V-N structures (to a 

minimum of 2,000 GPM available fire flow). 

b. A 25% reduction shall be granted for fully sprinklered buildings (to a 

minimum of 2,000 GPM available fire flow). 

c. When determining required fire flows for structures that total 70,000 

square feet or greater, such flows shall not be reduced below 3,500 GPM 

at 20 psi for three hours. 

Exhibit D Page 49

EXHIBIT “E” 

SMMC ARTICLE 9 (PLANNING AND ZONING) 

On file with the City Clerk 

Exhibit E Page 1

EXHIBIT “F-1” 

LOCAL HIRING PROGRAM FOR CONSTRUCTION 

Local Hiring Policy For Construction. Developer shall implement a local hiring policy 

(the “Local Hiring Policy”) for construction of the Project, consistent with the following 

guidelines: 

1. Purpose. The purpose of the Local Hiring Policy is to facilitate the employment 

by Developer and its contractors at the Project of residents of the City of Santa 

Monica (the “Targeted Job Applicants”), and in particular, those residents who 

are “Low-Income Individuals” (defined below). 

2. Definitions. 

a. “Contract” means a contract or other agreement for the providing of any 

combination of labor, materials, supplies, and equipment to the 

construction of the Project that will result in On-Site Jobs, directly or 

indirectly, either pursuant to the terms of such contract or other agreement 

or through one or more subcontracts. 

b. “Contractor” means a prime contractor, a sub-contractor, or any other 

entity that enters into a Contract with Developer for any portion or 

component of the work necessary to construct the Project (excluding 

architectural, design and other “soft” components of the construction of 

the Project). 

c. “Low Income Individual” means a resident of the City of Santa Monica 

whose household income is no greater than 80% of the Median Income. 

d. “Median Income” means the median income for the Los Angeles 

Metropolitan Statistical Area, as published from time to time by the City 

in connection with its Affordable Housing Production Program pursuant to 

SMMC Section 9.56. 

e. “On-Site Jobs” means all jobs by a Contractor under a Contract for which 

at least fifty percent (50%) of the work hours for such job requires the 

employee to be at the Project site, regardless of whether such job is in the 

nature of an employee or an independent contractor. 

3. Priority for Targeted Job Applicants. Subject to Section 6 below in this 

Exhibit “F-1,” the Local Hiring Policy provides that the Targeted Job Applicants 

shall be considered for each On-Site Job in the following order of priority: 

a. First Priority: Low Income Individuals living within one mile of the 

Project; 

Exhibit F-1 Page 1

. Second Priority: Low Income Individuals living in census tracts 

throughout the City for which household income is no greater than 80% of 

the Median Income; 

c. Third Priority: Low Income Individuals living in the City, other than the 

first priority and second priority Low Income Individuals; and 

d. Fourth Priority: City residents other than the first priority, second priority, 

and third priority City residents. 

4. Coverage. The Local Hiring Policy shall apply to all hiring for On-Site Jobs 

related to the construction of the Project, by Developer and its Contractors. 

5. Outreach. So that Targeted Job Applicants are made aware of the availability of 

On-Site Jobs, Developer or its Contractors shall advertise available On-Site Jobs 

in the Santa Monica Daily Press or similar local newspaper. 

6. Hiring. Developer and its prime contractor shall consider in good faith all 

applications submitted by Targeted Job Applicants for On-Site Jobs, in 

accordance with their respective normal hiring practices. The City acknowledges 

that the Contractors shall determine in their respective subjective business 

judgment whether any particular Targeted Job Applicant is qualified to perform 

the On-Site Job for which such Targeted Job Applicant has applied. 

7. Term. The Local Hiring Policy shall continue to apply to the construction of the 

Project until the final certificate of occupancy for the Project has been issued by 

the City. 

Exhibit F-1 Page 2

EXHIBIT “F-2” 

LOCAL HIRING PROGRAM FOR PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT 

Local Hiring Policy For Permanent Employment. The Developer (if an Operator) or 

Commercial Operator shall implement a local hiring policy (the “Local Hiring Policy”), 

consistent with the following guidelines: 

1. Purpose. The purpose of the Local Hiring Policy is to facilitate the employment 

by the commercial tenants of the Project of residents of the City of Santa Monica 

(the “Targeted Job Applicants”), and in particular, those residents who are 

“Low-Income Individuals” (defined below) by ensuring Targeted Job Applicants 

are aware of Project employment opportunities and have a fair opportunity to 

apply and compete for such jobs. The goal of this policy is local hiring. 

2. Findings. 

a. Approximately 73,000-74,000 individuals work in the City. The City has 

a resident labor force of approximately 56,800. However, only about onethird 

(32.2 percent) of the City's resident labor force works at jobs located 

in the City, with the balance working outside of the City. Consequently, a 

significant portion of the City's resident and non-resident work force is 

required to commute long distances to find work, causing increased traffic 

on state highways, increased pollution, increased use of gas and other 

fuels and other serious environmental impacts. 

b. Due to their employment outside of the City, many residents of the City 

are forced to leave for work very early in the morning and return late in 

the evening, often leaving children and teenagers alone and unsupervised 

during the hours between school and the parent return from work outside 

the area. 

c. Absentee parents and unsupervised youth can result in increased problems 

for families, communities and the City as a whole, including, but not 

limited to, increased crime, more frequent and serious injuries, poor 

homework accomplishments, failing grades and increased high school 

dropout rates. 

d. Of the approximately 45,000 households in the City, thirty percent are 

defined as low-income households or lower, with eleven percent of these 

households defined as extremely low income and eight percent very low 

income. Approximately 10.5% of the City's residents are unemployed. 

e. By ensuring that Targeted Job Applicants are aware of and have a fair 

opportunity to compete for Project jobs, this local hiring policy will 

facilitate job opportunities to City residents which would expand the City's 

Exhibit F-2 Page 1

3. Definitions. 

employment base and reduce the impacts on the environment caused by 

long commuting times to jobs outside the area. 

a. “Low Income Individual” means a resident of the City of Santa Monica 

whose household income is no greater than 80% of the Median Income. 

b. “Median Income” means the median income for the Los Angeles 

Metropolitan Statistical Area, as published from time to time by the City 

in connection with its Affordable Housing Production Program pursuant to 

SMMC Section 9.56. 

c. “On-Site Jobs” means all jobs on the Project site within the nonresidential 

uses of greater than 1,500 gross square feet, regardless of 

whether such job is in the nature of an employee or an independent 

contractor. 

d. “Commercial Operator” means the operators of non-residential uses on 

the Project site. 

4. Priority for Targeted Job Applicants. Subject to Section 6 below in this 

Exhibit “F-2,” the Local Hiring Policy provides that the Targeted Job Applicants 

shall be considered for each On-Site Job in the following order of priority: 

a. First Priority: Low Income Individuals living within one mile of the 

Project; 

b. Second Priority: Low Income Individuals living in the City, other than the 

first priority Low Income Individuals; and 

c. Third Priority: City residents other than the first priority and second 

priority City residents. 

For purposes of this Local Hiring Policy, the employer is authorized to rely on the 

most recent year’s income tax records (W-2) and proof of residency (e.g. driver’s 

license, utility bill, voter registration) if voluntarily submitted by a prospective job 

applicant for purposes of assessing a Targeted Job Applicant’s place of residence 

and income. 

5. Coverage. The Local Hiring Policy shall apply to all hiring for On-Site Jobs. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Local Hiring Policy shall not apply to 

temporary employees utilized while a permanent employee is temporarily absent 

or while a replacement is being actively sought for a recently-departed permanent 

employee. Furthermore, the Local Hiring Policy shall not preclude the re-hiring 

of a prior employee or the transfer of an existing employee from another location. 

Exhibit F-2 Page 2

6. Recruitment. 

a. Advanced Local Recruitment - Initial Hiring for New Business. So that 

Targeted Job Applicants are made aware of the availability of On-Site 

Jobs, at least 30 days before recruitment (“Advanced Recruitment 

Period”) is opened up to general circulation for the initial hiring by a new 

business, Operator shall advertise available On-Site Jobs in the Santa 

Monica Daily Press or similar local media and electronically on a Citysponsored 

website, if such a resource exists. In addition, Developer shall 

consult with and provide written notice to at least two first source hiring 

organizations, which may include but are not limited to the following: 

(i) Local first source hiring programs 

(ii) Trade unions 

(iii) Apprenticeship programs at local colleges 

(iv) Santa Monica educational institutions 

(v) Other non-profit organizations involved in referring eligible 

applicants for job opportunities 

b. Advanced Local Recruitment - Subsequent Hiring. For subsequent 

employment opportunities, the Advanced Recruitment Period for Targeted 

Job Applicants can be reduced to at least 7 days before recruitment is 

opened up to general circulation. Alternatively, the Developer may also 

use an established list of potential Targeted Job Applicants of not more 

than one year old. 

c. Obligations After Completion of Advanced Recruitment Period. Once 

these advanced local recruitment obligations have been met, Developer is 

not precluded from advertising regionally or nationally for employees. 

7. Hiring. Developer or Commercial Operator shall consider in good faith all 

applications submitted by Targeted Job Applicants for On-Site Jobs in accordance 

with their normal practice to hire the most qualified candidate for each position 

and shall be make good faith efforts to hire Targeted Job Applicants when such 

Applicants are most qualified or equally qualified as other applicants. The City 

acknowledges that the Developer or Commercial Operator shall determine in their 

respective subjective business judgment whether any particular Targeted Job 

Applicant is qualified to perform the On-Site Job for which such Targeted Job 

Applicant has applied. 

8. Proactive Outreach. Developer shall designate a “First-Source Hiring 

Coordinator” (FHC) that shall manage all aspects of the Local Hiring Policy. 

The FHC shall be responsible for actively seeking partnerships with local firstsource 

hiring organizations prior to employment opportunities being available. 

Exhibit F-2 Page 3

The FHC shall also be responsible for encouraging and making available 

information on first-source hiring to respective commercial tenants of the Project. 

The FHC shall contact new employers on the Project site to inform them of the 

available resources on first-source hiring. In addition to implementation of the 

Local Hiring Policy, the FHC can have other work duties unrelated to the Local 

Hiring Policy. 

9. Term. The Local Hiring Policy shall apply for the life of the Project. 

Exhibit F-2 Page 4

EXHIBIT “G-1” 

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUEE EXTENSION EASEMENT AREAA 

Exhibit G-1 

Page 1


NEW ROAD 

EASEMENT AREA 

Exhibit G-2 

Page 1


PUBLIC 

USE AREAS 

Exhibit G-3 

Page 1

EXHIBIT “H” 

SANTA MONICA SIGN CODE 

On file with the City Clerk 

Exhibit H Page 1

EXHIBIT “I” 

CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION PLAN 

CON-1 Construction Impact Mitigation Plan. 

The applicant shall prepare, implement and maintain a Construction Impact Mitigation 

Plan that shall be designed to: 

• Prevent material traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network. 

• Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private 

parking to the greatest extent practicable. 

• Ensure safety for both those constructing the project and the surrounding 

community. 

• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods. 

The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the 

following City departments: Department of Public Works; Fire; Planning and Community 

Development; and Police. This review will ensure that the Plan has been designed in 

accordance with this mitigation measure. This review shall occur prior to commencement 

of any construction staging for the project. The Mitigation Plan shall, at a minimum, 

include the following: 

Ongoing Requirements Throughout the Duration of Construction 

• A detailed traffic control plan for work zones shall be maintained which 

includes at a minimum accurate existing and proposed: parking and travel lane 

configurations; warning, regulatory, guide and directional signage; and area 

sidewalks, bicycle lanes and parking lanes. The plan shall include specific 

information regarding the project’s construction activities that may disrupt 

normal pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures to address these 

disruptions. Such plans must be reviewed and approved by the Transportation 

Management Division prior to commencement of construction and 

implemented in accordance with this approval. 

• Work within the public right-of-way shall be performed between 9:00 AM 

and 4:00 PM, including: dirt and demolition material hauling and construction 

material delivery. Work within the public right-of-way outside of these hours 

shall only be allowed after the issuance of an after-hours construction permit. 

• Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established PW 

requirements. 

Exhibit I Page 1

• Trucks shall only travel on a City approved construction route. Truck 

queuing/staging shall not be allowed on Santa Monica streets. Limited 

queuing may occur on the construction site itself. 

• Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred 

location for materials is to be on-site, with a minimum amount of materials 

within a work area in the public right-of-way, subject to a current Use of 

Public Property Permit. 

• Any requests for work before or after normal construction hours within the 

public right-of-way shall be subject to review and approval through the After 

Hours Permit process administered by the Building and Safety Division. 

• Off-street parking shall be provided for construction workers. This may 

include the use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if 

determined necessary by the City of Santa Monica. 

Project Coordination Elements That shall Be Implemented Prior to Commencement of 

Construction 

• The traveling public shall be advised of impending construction activities (e.g. 

information signs, portable message signs, media listing/notification, 

implementation of an approved traffic control plan). 

• Any construction work requiring encroachment into public rights-of-way, 

detours or any other work within the public right-of-way shall require 

approval from the City through issuance of a Use of Public Property Permit, 

Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit or Oversize Load Permit, as well as any 

Caltrans Permits required. 

• Timely notification of construction schedules shall be given to all affected 

agencies (e.g., Big Blue Bus, Police Department, Fire Department, 

Department of Public Works, and Planning and Community Development 

Department) and to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of 

property within a radius of 500 feet. 

• Construction work shall be coordinated with affected agencies in advance of 

start of work. Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal. 

• The Strategic Transportation Planning Division shall approve of any haul 

routes, for earth, concrete or construction materials and equipment hauling. 

Exhibit I Page 2

CON-2(a) Diesel Equipment Mufflers. 

All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped 

with factory-recommended mufflers. 

CON-2(b) Electrically-Powered Tools. 

Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. 

CON-2(c) Restrictions on Excavation and Foundation/Conditioning. 

Pile driving, excavation, foundation- laying, and conditioning activities (the noisiest 

phases of construction) shall be restricted to between the hours of 10:00 AM and 3:00 

PM, Monday through Friday, in accordance with Section 4.12.110(d) of the Santa 

Monica Municipal Code. 

CON-2(d) Additional Noise Attenuation Techniques. 

For all noise generating construction activity on the project site, additional noise 

attenuation techniques shall be employed to reduce noise levels at to 83 dB or less from 

8:00 to 6:00 PM weekdays and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Saturdays. Per the Noise Ordinance, 

construction noise may exceed 83 dB if it only occurs between 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM. 

Such techniques may include, but are not limited to, the use of sound blankets on noise 

generating equipment and the construction of temporary sound barriers around the 

perimeter of the project construction site. 

CON-2(e) Construction Sign Posting. 

In accordance with Municipal Code Section 4.12.120, the project applicant shall be 

required to post a sign informing all workers and subcontractors of the time restrictions 

for construction activities. The sign shall also include the City telephone numbers where 

violations can be reported and complaints associated with construction noise can be 

submitted. 

CON-3(a) ROG Control Measures. 

The applicant shall ensure that architectural coatings used on the project comply with 

SCAQMD Rule 1113, which limits the VOC content of architectural coatings. 

Exhibit I Page 3

CON-3(b) Fugitive Dust Control Measures. 

The following shall be implemented during construction to minimize fugitive dust and 

associated particulate emissions: 

• Sufficiently water all excavated or graded material to prevent excessive 

amounts of dust. 

• Watering shall occur at least three times daily with complete coverage, 

preferably at the start of the day, in the late morning and after work is done for 

the day. 

• Cease all grading, earth moving or excavation activities during periods of high 

winds (i.e., greater than 20 mph measured as instantaneous wind gusts) so as 

to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Securely cover all material transported 

on and off-site to prevent excessive amounts of dust. 

• Cover all soil stockpiles. 

• Limit on-site vehicle speeds to 15 mph. 

• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto 

paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. 

• Appoint a construction relations officer to act as a community liaison 

concerning on-site construction activity including resolution of issues related 

to PM10 generation. 

• Sweep streets at the end of the day using SCAQMD Rule 1186 certified street 

sweepers or roadway washing trucks if visible soil is carried onto adjacent 

public paved roads (recommend water sweepers with reclaimed water). 

Exhibit I Page 4

EXHIBIT “J” 

ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT 

Recording Requested By and 


Armbruster & Goldsmith, LLP 

11611 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 900 

Los Angeles, CA 90049 

Attn: Howard Weinberg, Esq. 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT 

This ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is 

made and entered into by and between __________________________, a 

________________________ (“Assignor”), and ________________________, a 

__________________ (“Assignee”). 

R E C I T A L S 

A. The City of Santa Monica (“City”) and Assignor entered into that certain 

Development Agreement dated _______________, 2012 (the “Development 

Agreement”), with respect to the real property located in the City of Santa 

Monica, State of California more particularly described in Exhibit ”A” 

attached hereto (the “Project Site”). 

B. Assignor has obtained from the City certain development approvals and 

permits with respect to the development of the Project Site, including without 

limitation, approval of the Development Agreement and a tract map for the 

Project Site (collectively, the “Project Approvals”). 

C. Assignor intends to sell, and Assignee intends to purchase, the Project Site. 

D. In connection with such purchase and sale, Assignor desires to transfer all of 

the Assignor’s right, title, and interest in and to the Development Agreement 

and the Project Approvals with respect to the Project Site. Assignee desires 

to accept such assignment from Assignor and assume the obligations of 

Assignor under the Development Agreement and the Project Approvals with 

respect to the Project Site. 

Exhibit J Page 1

THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 

1. Assignment. Assignor hereby assigns and transfers to Assignee all of 

Assignor’s right, title, and interest in and to the Development Agreement 

and the Project Approvals with respect to the Project Site. Assignee 

hereby accepts such assignment from Assignor. 

2. Assumption. Assignee expressly assumes and agrees to keep, perform, 

and fulfill all the terms, conditions, covenants, and obligations required to 

be kept, performed, and fulfilled by Assignor under the Development 

Agreement and the Project Approvals with respect to the Project Site. 

3. Effective Date. The execution by City of the attached receipt for this 

Agreement shall be considered as conclusive proof of delivery of this 

Agreement and of the assignment and assumption contained herein. This 

Agreement shall be effective upon its recordation in the Official Records 

of Los Angeles County, California, provided that Assignee has closed the 

purchase and sale transaction and acquired legal title to the Project Site. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of 

the dates set forth next to their signatures below. 

“ASSIGNOR” 

[SIGNATURE BLOCK] 

“ASSIGNEE” 

[SIGNATURE BLOCK] 

Exhibit J Page 2

RECEIPT BY CITY 

The attached ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT is received 

by the City of Santa Monica on this ___ day of ________________, ________. 


___________________________________ 

By: _______________________________ 

Planning Director 

Exhibit J Page 3

EXHIBIT “K” 

VTP RESIDENT RELOCATION PLAN 

OPTION #1 

Move to City of Santa Monica-Owned Mountain View Mobilehome Park 

Any resident who chooses to move into the City-owned Mountain View Mobilehome 

Park will be offered the following: 

1. Owner shall purchase, install, and transfer title to resident a manufactured home 

that is reasonably similar architecturally to those previously approved by the 

ARB, with the exception of green screens for all units and corrugated metal 

roofing material for units that do not have frontage on Stewart Street. Installation 

of the replacement manufactured home shall include all utility connections. 

2. Owner payment of moving costs associated with moving all personal property 

based on an actual move by a professional moving company or a $500 cash 

moving allowance if chosen by the resident. 

3. Services of a relocation specialist and/or case manager to assist such resident 

through all aspects of the relocation to include, but not be limited to, explaining 

options and relocation assistance program details, identifying replacement sites, 

coordinate moving arrangements and payment of benefits. 

4. Owner to assume cost of disposing trailers. 

5. Owner payment of $1,500 for personal property allowance. 

Benefits are contingent upon the unit owner cooperating with the Owner in the 

acquisition and completing of documents for the transfer of title of the resident’s existing 

VTP unit. 

OPTION #2 – Fixed Payment In-Lieu of Actual Move Costs 

While replacement housing may be available, the locations of the replacement housing 

may not be in a location acceptable to a mobilehome owner. Therefore, any resident who 

chooses not to move or does not move their unit within the legal noticing requirements, 

an alternative mitigation benefit to facilitate moving to other replacement housing of the 

resident’s choice, is offered as follows: 

1. Owner will make the greater of $20,000 or a lump sum cash payment based on 

estimates by at least 3 professional moving companies for the reasonable cost to 

actually move a unit to another mobilehome park up to 50 miles, assuming it could be 

moved. The estimates may be obtained by either the Owner or the resident. 

Exhibit K Page 1

2. Payments will be made to the legal owner of the unit. 

3. Owner payment of moving costs associated with moving all personal property based 

on an actual move by a professional moving company or a $500 cash moving 

allowance if chosen by the resident. 

4. Services of a relocation specialist and/or case manager to assist such resident through 

all aspects of the relocation to include, but not be limited to, explaining options and 

relocation assistance program details, identifying replacement sites, coordinate 

moving arrangements and payment of benefits. 

5. Owner to pay to the legal owner of the unit the fair market value of the unit, as stated 

in Table 6 of the Tenant Impact Report. 




VTP unit. 

OPTION #3 – Temporary Relocation during Project Construction with Move Back to 

VTP apartments in new Project 

Any resident who chooses to temporarily relocate to replacement housing that could 

increase their existing housing costs and elects to have the right of first refusal on rentcontrolled, 

affordable apartments in the new project will be offered the following: 

1. Payment of tenant relocation assistance as required by SMMC Chapter 4.36, subject 

to paragraph 2 below. 

2. (A) For low income, very low income or extremely low income households, 

payment of rental differential, if any, between existing total rent and replacement 

housing total rent for up to the earlier of project completion or seven and one-half 

(7.5) years of tenancy in a comparable unit. For purposes of this Agreement, a 

comparable housing unit shall be identified based on factors including but not be 

limited to: size, price, location, proximity to medical and recreational facilities, parks, 

community centers, shops, transportation, schools, places of worship, amenities, and 

if desired by the resident, location of the rental unit in the City of Santa Monica. The 

replacement housing total rent per month shall not exceed $1,352.00 per month. If 

tenant relocation assistance is less than the rental differential then tenant relocation 

assistance shall be subtracted from rental differential. If tenant relocation assistance 

exceeds rent differential, then rent differential is not proposed. 

(B) For households that do not qualify as low income, very low income or 

extremely low income, payment of rental differential, if any, between existing total 

rent and replacement housing total rent for up to the earlier of project completion or 

Exhibit K Page 2

four (4) years of tenancy in a comparable unit. For purposes of this Agreement, a 

comparable housing unit shall be identified based on factors including but not be 

limited to: size, price, location, proximity to medical and recreational facilities, parks, 

community centers, shops, transportation, schools, places of worship, amenities, and 

if desired by the resident, location of the rental unit in the City of Santa Monica. 

The replacement housing total rent per month shall not exceed $1,352.00 per month. 

If tenant relocation assistance is less than the rental differential then tenant relocation 

assistance shall be subtracted from rental differential. If tenant relocation assistance 

exceeds rent differential, then rent differential is not proposed. 




4. Owner payment of moving costs associated with moving all personal property back to 

the Project based on an actual move by a professional moving company or a $500 

cash moving allowance if chosen by the resident. 




moving arrangements and payment of benefits. The options described above more 

than adequately mitigate the adverse impacts of the closure upon the residents of the 

VTP. 

6. Upon completion of construction of the Project, Developer shall give VTP Residents 

who select this Option #3 a notice of their right to move in. Any VTP Resident who 

elects to return to the Project pursuant to any of the foregoing relocation options in 

this Exhibit “K” must execute Developer’s standard form lease for the Project within 

forty-five (45) days after Developer delivers written notice to such VTP Resident that 

the Project is available for occupancy. If a VTP Resident fails to execute a lease 

and/or take occupancy within such 45-day period, then thereafter Developer shall 

have no further obligation to lease a dwelling unit in the Project to any member of 

such VTP Resident. Senior and disabled VTP Residents who select this Option #3 

and who are income qualified will be given preference on moving into the Extremely 

Low Income Units. 

7. Upon completion of construction of the Project, if there are more than 7 qualified 

extremely low income VTP residents who choose this option, then for all such 

qualified residents in excess of 7, they shall be offered leases in the Very Low Income 

Units in the Project; provided that the rent payable under such leases will not exceed 

the Extremely Low Income rents, as defined by this Agreement. 

8. Owner to pay to the legal owner of the unit the fair market value of the unit, as stated 

in Table 6 of the Tenant Impact Report. 

Exhibit K Page 3





VTP unit. 

OPTION #4 – Move to Another Mobilehome Park Outside of Santa Monica 

Any resident, who chooses and is able to move their mobilehome or cannot move their 

unit (e.g. trailers and recreational vehicles) and would like to live in another mobilehome 

park that is not located in the City of Santa Monica, will be offered the following: 

1. The reasonable cost of physically moving the mobilehome and movable 

improvements such as patios, carports and porches, to a new site within 50 miles of 

VTP, which includes but is not limited to, dismantling, packing, moving, 

reassembling, rebuilding, including skirting and tie-downs, and unpacking, as 

necessary. 

2. If the unit (e.g. trailers and recreational vehicles) cannot be reasonably moved to 

another mobilehome park, Owner shall purchase, install, and transfer title to resident 

a comparable, qualifying replacement mobilehome satisfactory to the resident. For 

purposes of this Agreement, the factors in determining a comparable, qualifying 

replacement mobilehome shall include but not be limited to the following: size and 

amenities. 




4. If an actual move by a professional moving company is chosen, as described above, 

payment of new utility connections, when replacing the mobilehome owner’s current 

service (excluding any possible utility deposits charged by the new providers or 

additional services). 




moving arrangements and payment of benefits. 



Exhibit K Page 4



VTP unit. 

OPTION #5 – Move to Conventional Rental Housing 

Any resident who chooses to move to conventional rental housing will be offered the 

following: 

1. Payment of tenant relocation assistance as required by SMMC Chapter 4.36, subject 

to paragraph 3 below. 

2. Payment of rental differential, if any, between existing total rent and replacement 

housing total rent for up to four (4) years of tenancy in a comparable unit. For 

purposes of this Agreement, a comparable housing unit shall be identified based on 

factors including but not be limited to: size, price, location, proximity to medical and 

recreational facilities, parks, community centers, shops, transportation, schools, 

places of worship, amenities, and if desired by the resident, location of the rental unit 

in the City of Santa Monica. The replacement housing total monthly rent shall not 

exceed $1,352.00 per month. If tenant relocation assistance is less than the rental 

differential then tenant relocation assistance shall be subtracted from rental 

differential. If tenant relocation assistance exceeds rent differential, then rent 

differential is not proposed. 







moving arrangements and payment of benefits. The options described above more 

than adequately mitigate the adverse impacts of the closure upon the residents of the 

VTP. 

5. Owner to pay to the legal owner of the unit the fair market value of the unit, as 

indicated in Table 6 of the Tenant Impact Report. 





VTP unit. 

Exhibit K Page 5

OPTION #6 – Mutual Agreement Between Owner and VTP Resident 

At any time in the course of the Park closure process, the residents and Owner may find it 

agreeable to achieve settlement by means of other compensation and/or agreement not 

listed in the scenarios above including moving to available spaces within the Residual 

Parcel. Not all of the occupants of the Park are in the same financial situation or may feel 

that the compensation provided by the above options does not meet their specific and 

unique needs. While this Agreement outlines possible relocation options in the closure 

process, it does not outline options tailored to the very specific needs of every affected 

resident. These residents and Owner may therefore agree to any and all alternative 

benefits, services and/or compensation to secure title for removal of the mobilehome that 

is deemed mutually beneficial to both parties. 

OPTION #7 – Seasonal Residents 

1. VTP Residents who have a primary residence at a location other than VTP shall be 

entitled to tenant relocation assistance as required by SMMC Chapter 4.36. 




3. Owner to pay to the legal owner of the unit the fair market value of the unit, as 

indicated in Table 6 of the Tenant Impact Report. 



completing of documents for the transfer of title of the unit. 

RELOCATION PROCEDURES 

1. Developer shall select and execute a contract with a relocation consultant within 

30 days of approval of this Agreement, which selection shall be approved by the 

Planning Director. The scope of services and reporting requirements in the 

relocation consultant's contract shall be approved by the City Attorney. The 

Planning Director and City Attorney shall review and approve the relocation 

consultant’s contract within fifteen (15) business days of submittal. 

2. The process and procedures for residents to claim relocation benefits and obtain 

advisory assistance shall be as follows: 

Claim Relocation Benefits 

At residents’ request, the relocation consultant will meet with each resident to 

verify information, gather together required documentation, and fill out 

applications as needed. As residents choose from the list of relocation options, 

Exhibit K Page 6

the resident can avail themselves of the relocation benefits. The process and 

procedures for residents claiming their relocation benefits is as follows: 

i. Residents will provide all necessary documentation to substantiate 

eligibility for the monetary assistance 

ii. Assistance amounts would be as listed in the mitigation options above 

iii. Resident will notify relocation specialist of intent to move and relocation 

specialist, in conjunction with resident, will complete and submit to 

Owner required claim forms to request eligible funds; 

iv. Owner will review and, if in conformance with previously approved 

mitigation options, will authorize payment, or request additional 

information (e.g. requesting transfer of clear title to unit); 

v. The relocation consultant will issue benefit checks, which will be 

available on-site for pick-up, delivered personally or mailed, depending on 

circumstances; 

vi. Receipts of payments will be obtained and maintained in the relocation 

case file. 

Advisory Assistance 

Throughout the entire relocation process, the relocation consultant will be 

available to assist residents with their relocation assistance needs including the 

following: 

i. Be available to provide continuous explanation of benefits so residents 

have a full understanding of the issue related to closure of VTP. 

ii. Provide residents with on-going reports of available replacement housing 

to preferred locations of the resident. 

iii. Provide assistance as needed and requested to lessen hardships by working 

with the resident and housing resources including but not limited to real 

estate agents, property managers, and lenders to secure replacement 

housing. 

iv. If applicable, facilitate interaction between resident and professional 

furniture movers and companies that will disassemble, transport and 

reinstall a mobilehome, as defined by Civil Code Section 798.3. 

v. Facilitate interaction between resident and health care providers and other 

social service providers. 

vi. Assist residents in inspecting replacement housing if resident does not 

have a car or cannot drive by coordinating transportation so resident can 

inspect replacement housing opportunities. 

vii. Provide assistance in claiming eligible monetary benefits from Owner. 

viii. Other individual assistance that may be required on a case-by-case basis. 

ix. If necessary, a temporary project site office may be maintained throughout 

the relocation process that will be accessible to all VTP residents to 

provide relocation assistance. The office will be staffed with an 

experienced relocation coordinator, counselors and other professionals and 

Exhibit K Page 7

office hours will be scheduled to accommodate residents during normal 

business hours and on-call service (if necessary) thereafter. 

3. The Owner shall serve the following documents, to be reviewed and approved by 

the Planning Director within five (5) business days of submittal, with the Notice 

of Closure required by Section 5.6.3 of this Agreement: 

 

 

 

 

Clear explanation of payments and relocation benefits required by this 

Exhibit “K”; 

Claim form that explains the requirements for how VTP residents may file 

claims for benefits; 

Grievance procedures; and 

How residents may obtain advisory assistance from the relocation consultant. 

4. Prior to serving Notice of Closure pursuant to Section 5.6.2 of this Agreement, 

Owner shall post an acceptable security with the City of Santa Monica to satisfy 

the obligations set forth in this relocation plan in a sum not less than $18,500 for 

each VTP resident. After each resident has selected a relocation option and 

within fifteen (15) business days of the conclusion of the 120-day period required 

by Item #6 of these Relocation Procedures, Owner shall post an additional 

acceptable security with the City of Santa Monica that reflects the full amount of 

relocation options chosen by VTP residents. With respect to the additional 

security required for residents that select Option 2(a), Owner shall post the full 

amount of the rent differential for the initial five (5) year period within fifteen 

(15) business days of the conclusion of the 120-day period required by Item #6 of 

these Relocation Procedures. If the Project is not completed within five (5) years 

of the Effective Date, before the expiration of that five year period, Owner shall 

post the full amount of the rent differential for year six. If the Project is not 

completed within six (6) years of the Effective Date, before the expiration of that 

six year period, Owner shall post the full amount of the rent differential for year 

seven. If the Project is not completed within seven (7) years of the Effective 

Date, before the expiration of that seven year period, Owner shall post the full 

amount of the rent differential for the following six (6) month period. Failure to 

timely post the additional security required by this paragraph shall constitute an 

Event of Monetary Default and shall be grounds for termination of this 

Development Agreement pursuant to Section 11.4. The relocation consultant will 

be responsible for administering and disbursing the relocation benefits to the 

residents. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this sub-part 4, the Owner 

may establish an escrow with an escrow agent and the relocation consultant, on 

terms reasonably acceptable to the City, and deposit into such escrow funds equal 

to Owner’s obligations set forth above and such escrow funds shall constitute 

adequate security for Owner’s obligations regarding payment of these relocation 

amounts. 

5. Payments and all benefits outlined herein will only be paid and/or provided to 

VTP Residents who have not already relocated from the Village Trailer Park. 

Exhibit K Page 8

Payments and benefits and rights herein described including but not limited to 

rights in the Rental Housing Units in the Project will be personal to, and will not 

accrue to anyone other than, the VTP Residents. No rights herein will be 

assignable nor shall any heirs or beneficiaries or other parties gain any rights to 

any of the benefits and/or payments described herein. 

6. VTP Residents shall have 120 days after service of Notice of Closure pursuant to 

Section 5.6.2 of this Agreement to select a relocation option. Residents who do 

not choose an option within the 120 days shall be deemed to have chosen, at 

Developer’s option, either (a) the cash payment portion of Option #2 or (b) to be 

relocated to the Residual Parcel in a qualifying mobilehome to be provided by the 

Developer as set forth in Option #4. In the event that VTP residents cannot 

qualify to move to Mountain View, they will be provided first option for available 

spaces at the Residual Parcel. 

7. If and when the Condominium Units are completed in the Project and placed on 

the market to be sold, VTP Residents who have delivered to Developer a valid 

address for notices will receive written notice from Developer of the pending 

Condominium Unit sales and such residents will have a thirty day “first look” 

period to select a Condominium Unit and to purchase the same at a 5% discount 

from market prices. 

8. Developer shall accept Section 8 vouchers, if available, from VTP Residents who 

return to the Project in accordance with the terms of this Exhibit “K”. 

MANNER OF PAYMENTS 

Payments and all benefits outlined herein shall be made according to the following 

schedule: 

1. Upon notifying the relocation consultant of the selection of a relocation option, 

residents who select Option #3 or #5 shall receive $2,704. Residents who select 

Option #1 or #4 shall receive the first and last month's rent required by the 

mobilehome park selected by the resident. 

2. Upon notifying the relocation consultant of the selection of a relocation option, 

residents who select Option #2, or #7 shall receive the full payments and benefits as 

indicated in each Option, subject to meeting all requirements in each Option. 

3. Upon notifying the relocation consultant of the selection to accept the moving 

allowance for moving personal property rather than have the Owner pay for the 

move, residents shall receive the $500 cash moving allowance. 

4. Upon completing documents for the transfer of title of the resident’s existing VTP 

unit to the Owner, residents shall receive the remainder of the payments and 

relocation benefits for their selected relocation option with the exception of 

Option #3 and Option #5. 

Exhibit K Page 9

5. For residents who select Option #3 or #5, upon completing documents for transfer 

of title of resident’s existing VTP unit, residents shall receive full payment for the 

fair market value for their existing unit as indicated in Table 6 of the Tenant Impact 

Report and receive the rent differential in monthly installments based on the 

requirements of the Option selected under this Relocation Plan. 

Exhibit K Page 10

EXHIBIT “L” 

TRACT MAP 

Exhibit L 

Page 1

Exhibit L Page 2

Exhibit L Page 3

EXHIBIT “M” 

Exceptions to title to Residual Parcel 

1. Water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not disclosed by the public records. 

2. Matters which may be disclosed by an inspection and/or by a correct Land Title Survey. 

3. The affordable housing covenant approved by the City pursuant to Section 2.6.2(n)(iv). 

Exhibit M Page 1




To: 

From: 

Subject: 


Rod Gould, City Manager 

Tri-Party Real Estate Exchange to Create Buffer Area Adjacent to 

Exposition Light Rail Phase 2 Maintenance Facility 



execute real estate and other ancillary agreements with Santa Monica College (SMC) 

and the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (Expo) related to the purchase, 

lease, and exchange of real estate interests in properties located at 2909 Exposition 

Boulevard, 2900 Exposition Boulevard and 3400/3500 Airport Avenue, to allow for the 

creation of the proposed buffer area (Buffer Area) adjacent to the proposed Phase 2 

Exposition Light Rail Maintenance Facility (Maintenance Facility). 


On November 23, 2010, Council authorized real estate agreements with SMC and Expo 

to secure a site for the proposed Buffer Area. At that time, the exchange envisioned 

SMC’s sale of its Stewart Street/Exposition Boulevard parking lot land to the City, the 

City's sale of that same land to Expo, Expo’s sale of the Buffer Area to the City, and the 

City’s lease of Airport land to SMC with SMC having an option to purchase the Airport 

land. During continued negotiations, SMC has identified a preferred structure of 

reciprocal leases between the City and SMC. Under the proposed revised terms, Expo 

and SMC would exchange ownership of properties on Exposition Boulevard, with Expo 

owning what is currently SMC's parking lot and with SMC owning the proposed Buffer 

Area. The City would then lease the Buffer Area on Exposition Boulevard from SMC, 

and SMC would lease 3400/3500 Airport Avenue from the City. 

SMC would retain the option to purchase the airport land. The initial lease term would 

be for 25 years and with the options for lease extensions, the total lease period could be 

up to no more than 99 years. The lease and any purchase are subject to applicable 

state and federal law, including any Federal Aviation Administration regulations that 

may apply. If SMC exercises its purchase option, the City gets ownership of the buffer 

land. It is the City’s intent that this should occur as soon as feasible.

Background 

Council gave direction on November 23, 2010 to finalize the terms of property 

exchanges among SMC, Expo, and the City that would allow for the creation of the 

Buffer Area next to the proposed Expo Maintenance Facility. Under those terms, SMC 

was to sell its 2.35-acre site at Stewart Street and Exposition Boulevard (SMC Parking 

Lot) to the City, who would then sell it to Expo. Expo was to sell a comparably sized 

property along Exposition Boulevard (Buffer Area) to the City, and the City was to longterm 

lease an equivalently valued property at 3400/3500 Airport Avenue (Airport Non- 

Aviation Land) to SMC, with an option to purchase. 

On October 25, 2011, Council voted to support the community’s preference for selection 

of scenario 2 for the Expo Maintenance Facility, which changed the site configuration to 

provide continuous buffer coverage along Exposition Blvd. and allow for better noise 

abatement and aesthetic advantages, including at the corner of Expo and Stewart. 

On January 24, 2012, Council approved creation of parkland as the use for the buffer. 

Mia Lehrer and Associates was approved as the designer for the park by Council on 

September 11, 2012. 

Staff has been working with Expo/Metro and the Maintenance Design Group on the 

design of the Maintenance Facility, its physical layout and the park delineation. 

Maintenance Facility design will be complete in December, specifically creating an 

approximately 2.35-acre site for the buffer area between the Maintenance Facility and 

residential area on the south side of Exposition Blvd. City staff, Expo, and Metro have 

made progress on a number of the mitigations and good neighbor provisions. 

Expo/Metro has conducted four community outreach meetings to engage neighbors in 

the planning and design process. The design addresses noise, light, traffic and 

sustainability in response to residents’ concerns and Council direction. It is anticipated 

that the building will earn a LEED gold rating. Both the City and Expo/MTA will continue 

to work with the community and SMC to ensure that any remaining concerns are 

addressed and that any impacts are mitigated in accordance with CEQA requirements 

and in accordance with other commitments to the City and the community. The City

park project for the Buffer Area is getting underway. Mia Lehrer and Associates are 

providing design services. 

Discussion 

As exchange negotiations have progressed, SMC has indicated its desire that the 

property exchange be structured as mutually reciprocal long-term leases between the 

City and SMC, with each having an option to purchase the leased land. SMC would be 

made “whole” for the exchange of the SMC Parking Lot by owning the Buffer Area and 

by being able to secure a lease with option to purchase comparable Airport Non- 

Aviation Land adjacent to SMC’s Airport Bundy Campus to be used for educational 

purposes. Similarly, the City would be made "whole" for the lease of the Airport Non- 

Aviation Land by its securing a lease with option to purchase the Buffer Area along 

Exposition Boulevard. The initial lease term would be for 25 years with optional 25 year 

lease extensions up to a total lease period of no more than 99 years. The lease and any 

purchase are subject to applicable state and federal law, including any Federal Aviation 

Administration regulations that may apply. If SMC exercises its purchase option, the 

City gets ownership of the buffer land. It is the City’s intent that this should occur as 

soon as feasible. 

In summary, the proposed tri-party agreements would provide for: 

1) SMC to transfer fee title of the SMC Parking Lot to Expo. 

2) Expo to transfer fee title of the Buffer Area to SMC. 

3) The City to enter into a lease and option to purchase agreement with SMC 

for SMC's use of the Airport Non-Aviation Land. 

4) SMC to enter into a lease and option to purchase agreement with City for 

City's use of the Buffer Land. 

5) Exercise of the option to purchase by one party would automatically trigger 

the other party’s purchase. 

6) If either lease is terminated, both leases would terminate. 

7) SMC would have an option to long-term lease an additional small, adjacent, 

remnant portion of Airport Non-Aviation Land at appraised value.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions 

The terms of the agreements would commit the City, Santa Monica College and Expo to 

mutual land lease agreements for comparably valued land. As the leases are of equal 

value, no cash would be exchanged. 

Beginning July 1, 2015, the City would no longer collect lease payments from the 38 

tenants who would be displaced from Parcel A when SMC begins its lease. These lease 

payments, which are counted as revenue to the Airport Fund, would have reached an 

annual amount of $565,651 in FY 2014-2015. Depending on the circumstances at the 

time and the law that may then apply, one future option for the City may be that, if the 

Airport Fund has to be made whole for this loss in revenue, any lost revenue to the 

Airport Fund may be accounted for and recovered as part of the repayment of the loan 

from the General Fund to the Airport Fund, which is expected to have reached a total of 

over $16 million by FY 2014-15. 

If Santa Monica College elects to lease parcel B, they would make a lease pre-payment 

for the term of the lease of $130 per square foot or an equivalent annual lease payment. 

Prepared by: 

Approved: 

Kathryn Vernez, Deputy City Manager, Special Projects 


Joseph Lawrence, Assistant City Attorney 


Kathryn Vernez 

Deputy City Manager 

Rod Gould 


Attachment A: Proposed Expo/City/SMC Land Swap Maps 

Attachment B: Site Plan: Expo Maintenance Facility & Buffer Park

PROPOSED EXPO / CITY / SMC 

LAND SWAP MAPS 

Attachment A 

2909 

Exposition 

West 

±2.35 ac 

SMC >>> 

City >>> 

Expo CA 

3400, 

3500 

Airport 

Avenue 

±2.71 ac 

City >>> 

SMC 

(long-term 

lease with 

purchase 

option) 

2909 

Exposition 

South 

±2.35 ac 

Expo CA 

>>> City

Attachment B


To: 

From: 

Subject: 



David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development 


Discussion of Concept Plans for a proposed Development Agreement at 

3402 Pico Boulevard by TC Pico Development, LLC 


Staff recommends the City Council: 

1. Discuss the applicant‟s Development Agreement proposal and provide direction 

regarding the appropriateness of the site development and potential community 

benefits; 

2. Initiate the Development Agreement negotiation and review process between the 

City and Developer. 


Trammell Crow Company (TC Pico Development, LLC) is proposing that the City 

consider a Development Agreement to permit a new mixed-use project at 3402 Pico 

Boulevard. The project involves the construction of four new buildings ranging between 

two and four stories in height that would include a total of 260 residential units, 

approximately 2,999 square feet of ground floor commercial area, and approximately 

505 parking spaces within a two-level subterranean parking garage. The project site 

consists of three contiguous parcels with a total of 112,056 square feet located on the 

south side of Pico Boulevard between 34 th Street and Centinela Avenue. The site is 

currently developed with a vacant three-story office building facing Pico Boulevard and 

34 th Street, surface and below-grade parking, and a vacant cluster of residential units 

facing Centinela Avenue. 

Pursuant to the City‟s Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2407 (CCS) (“IZO”), this project 

requires approval of a Development Agreement as it is a Tier 3 project based on 

portions of the proposed project reaching 47 feet in height. Tier 3 level projects in the 

subject land use designation are buildings that exceed 36 feet in height. 

The proposed residential and neighborhood-serving commercial uses are consistent 

with the C2 (Neighborhood Commercial) and R2 (Low Density Multiple Residential) 

zoning and Mixed-Use Boulevard Low and Low Density Housing land use designations. 

Project compliance is limited to the Land Use and Circulation Element, while other 

aspects of the project such as density, height, parcel coverage, floor area ratio, 

1

setbacks, and other standard zoning requirements would be established by the 

Development Agreement. 

The applicant has worked with staff to modify the proposal by reducing the overall 

project density and improving the project design to better fit within the neighborhood 

context and would continue to further modify the proposal in response to Council‟s 

comments. 

Staff recommends that the Council focus on the following items in considering this 

matter and provide comments on: 

a. Appropriateness of the project as a Development Agreement; 

b. Compatibility with the neighborhood context; 

c. Consistency with the Land Use and Circulation Element; 

d. Consideration of alternatives; 

e. Identification of negotiating points; 

f. Discussion of desirable community benefits. 

If a Development Agreement is initiated, the negotiations between the applicant and the 

City should: 

1) Achieve a building density, layout, and design with uses that are consistent with 

the LUCE, with an emphasis on ground floor pedestrian orientation and uses, 

building mass, scale, and neighborhood compatibility of new construction. 

2) Identify community benefits including but not limited to new affordable and 

workforce housing, physical improvements to create connections and open 

space, and social and cultural facilities. 

3) Identify Transportation Demand Management measures to reduce singleoccupant 

vehicle trips. 

Background 

The project site consists of three contiguous parcels with a total of 112,056 square feet 

located on the south side of Pico Boulevard between 34 th Street and Centinela Avenue. 

Approximately one-third of the site, at the north end, is located in the C2 Neighborhood 

Commercial district, and the remainder of the site is located in the R2 Low Density 

Multiple Residential district. The site currently contains an existing three-story office 

building that formerly housed the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences at 

the northwest corner of the site and 11 vacant multi-family residential units located at 

the southern end of the site. 

2

Project site – 3402 Pico Boulevard 

Existing front elevation along Pico Boulevard 

Discussion 

Development Agreements are negotiated contracts between the City and an applicant 

that specify the design details and requirements of a project. The purpose of this review 

(float-up) is to enable a pro-active preliminary discussion with the City Council regarding 

the proposed land use, project design, compatibility, and potential community benefits 

of the project, and to evaluate whether the City desires to enter into a Development 

Agreement. The Council‟s recommendations will inform staff and the developer on 

project development and development agreement negotiations. 

3

Project Description 

The proposed conceptual project involves four separate buildings ranging between two 

to four stories in height with 260 residential units, approximately 2,999 square feet of 

ground floor commercial space along Pico Boulevard, and 505 parking spaces within a 

two-level subterranean parking garage. Vehicular access to the subterranean parking 

garage would be provided along 34 th Street and Centinela Avenue. The originally 

proposed project design for the DA application included 300 units, 5,000 square feet of 

commercial space, and 554 parking spaces. 

Conceptual site plan – Planning Commission float-up 

In response to concerns by the Planning Commission, staff, and community regarding 

the proposed project density, the applicant has reduced the scope of the project by 

eliminating 40 residential units, approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial floor 

area, and 49 parking spaces. 

4

The proposed 260 residential units would be as follows: 

74 studio units 

109 one-bedroom units 

59 two-bedroom units 

16 three-bedroom units 

27 units (or 10.4% of the total units) are proposed as very-low income affordable units. 

Site Location and Neighborhood Context 

The project site is located on the south side of Pico Boulevard between 34 th Street and 

Centinela Avenue at the east end of the City adjacent to the border with the City of Los 

Angeles. Adjacent uses along 34 th Street include one and two-story multi-family 

residential buildings located to the south of the project site transitioning to 

predominantly single-family residences further south. One and two-story commercial 

uses are located along Pico Boulevard to the west. An elevated portion of the Santa 

Monica Freeway is located to the north and east, and a three-story affordable housing 

project is located adjacent to the south on Centinela Avenue. A new 95-unit mixed-use 

building is currently under construction on the northeast corner of Pico Boulevard and 

Centinela Avenue in the City of LA. The project site is served by existing public 

transportation with two Big Blue Bus lines and three MTA bus lines servicing Pico 

Boulevard. The anticipated Expo Line Bundy station will be located within a half-mile of 

the project site. Bike facilities are also located along Pearl Street, Stewart Street, and 

28 th Street. 

Review of Conceptual Building Design 

The heights of the buildings range between two and four stories and are designed so 

that the highest portions are located adjacent to the freeway and within the center of the 

project site. The buildings are designed to transition in height, with the lower buildings 

placed towards the south adjacent to existing neighboring two and three story buildings. 

5

Revised site plan – City Council float-up 

Building „A‟, facing Pico Boulevard and an elevated portion of the Santa Monica 

Freeway, is currently proposed at four stories with a height of 47 feet. Approximately 

2,999 square feet of ground floor commercial space would be located adjacent to Pico 

Boulevard with studio and one-bedroom units located on all four floors. 

Building „B‟ is located along 34 th Street with portions of the building containing four 

stories at a height of 47 feet towards the interior of the site and portions containing three 

stories along 34 th Street and adjacent to existing residential buildings to the south. 

Building „B‟ would contain one and two-bedroom units. 

Building „C‟ is located towards the center of the site with the end of the building fronting 

Centinela Avenue. The majority of the building contains four stories at a height of 47 

feet with the southern portion of the building at three stories in height. Studio, onebedroom, 

and two-bedroom units would be located within Building „C‟. 

6

Building „D‟ would contain 16 three-bedroom units within a two-story building that would 

measure 30 feet in height due to a mezzanine level between the stories. The four 

buildings would be separated by a series of landscaped open spaces and pathways. 

During float-up review of the project, the Planning Commission, staff, and community 

expressed concerns with the project‟s density and design. The proposed number of 

units (300) was generally regarded as being too high, while the massing of the project 

was regarded as being too large and inconsistent with the pattern of existing 

development found in the primarily residential neighborhood. In response to staff and 

Commission comments, the applicant re-evaluated the initial project design and revised 

the project‟s design concept. The current proposal includes 40 less units, or 260 total, 

and redesigned features as shown on the revised floor plan shown on the following 

page. Further, the applicant has expressed a willingness to continue to work with staff, 

the community, Planning Commission, and the Council to further develop and refine 

these concept plans. Below is the project‟s initial first floor plan, followed by the revised 

drawing of the new conceptual first floor plan. 

10 FWY 

Initial first floor plan – Planning Commission float-up 

7

Smaller 

retail space 

and larger 

pedestrian 

plaza 

New 

exterior 

courtyard 

facing street 

Additional 9‟ 

setback 

from 

property line 

10 FWY Additional 5‟ setback 

between building 

and freeway to allow 

landscaping to be 

planted above nonexcavated 

area 

Larger 

usable open 

space area 

Revised first floor plan – City Council float-up 

An architectural design style has not yet been identified during this conceptual phase of 

the process, and specific design features, colors, and materials have not been provided. 

The heights of the buildings range between two and four stories (30‟ – 47‟) and are 

designed so that the highest portions are located adjacent to the freeway and within the 

center of the project site. The buildings are designed to transition in height and be lower 

towards the south adjacent to existing neighboring two and three story buildings 

including the use of upper-level stepbacks on the fourth floor. Staff would continue to 

work with the applicant to foster a design style that is unique but fits within the primarily 

residential context and development pattern of the neighborhood. 

Preliminary Design Comments 

Overall architectural design discussions between the applicant and the City design team 

have been kept to a general level during the conceptual phase of the proposed project. 

The applicant has not identified any specific architectural design styles or features at 

this early point in the process. Comprehensive project plans would be refined during the 

Development Agreement process based on direction from staff, Planning Commission, 

8

and City Council pertaining to the project‟s design, scale, pedestrian orientation, and 

streetscape design. 

However, the following initial design issues are identified below to help guide the 

Council‟s discussion and comments: 

 

 

 

 

 

Gateway Presence: The project serves as an entry presence for motorists and 

pedestrians entering west into Santa Monica along Pico Boulevard. The 

proposed project should address, through form and design, shaping this gateway 

opportunity. 

Massing: The subject lot is considerably larger than the surrounding properties. 

The massing of the project, particularly along 34 th Street and its existing one and 

two-story multi-family residential buildings, should be broken up to be consistent 

with the width of the parcels and residential buildings in the adjacent areas. 

Building heights for the project should transition with the existing adjacent 

residential and commercial buildings, and open space areas should be 

incorporated. The applicant has revised the plans, most notably Building „B‟ 

along 34 th Street, to break up the mass of the previous building design. The 

revised design utilizes an open courtyard facing 34 th Street, creating building 

façade widths that are more consistent with the existing development pattern 

along 34 th Street. 

Setbacks and Step-backs: While the proposed project is still in its conceptual 

design phase, use of setbacks, step-backs, and mass modulation (i.e. breaks in 

plane, changes in material, variety of design, etc.) should be considered. The 

applicant has revised the plans to set back Building „B‟ nine feet from the 

property line to be more consistent with the existing development pattern along 

34 th Street. The applicant has also increased the setback between Building „A‟ 

and the freeway by five feet allowing for additional landscaping between the 

building and the freeway. 

Façade and Building Plane Quality and Interest: Building facades should create 

interest through purpose and function, while considering existing building planes, 

heights, and surrounding design features, and have a sense of internal interest 

created through the use of materials, design modulation, and/or articulation. The 

facades of the proposed project should have a sense of quality and interest, in 

part, created through detailing of a base, middle, and top. 

Pedestrian-Orientation: The ground floor design along Pico Boulevard should 

establish a strong relationship with the sidewalk and pedestrians. Particular 

attention should be paid to the Pico Boulevard/34 th Street corner and how it 

wraps around from Pico Boulevard to 34 th Street. Active uses and building entries 

should be located adjacent to the sidewalk. Blank walls at the ground floor should 

be avoided. Residential unit entries along 34 th Street should be considered to 

reinforce the existing streetscape environment. The applicant has set back 

9

Building „B‟ from the 34 th Street property line and reoriented the building to 

provide a courtyard facing the street. However, the focus of the project design is 

predominantly inward-oriented towards the internal open spaces, and any 

opportunities to further open the project towards the streets and create 

permeability into the site are encouraged. 

 

Ground Floor Commercial Component: Neighborhood-serving ground floor 

retail/food/drink establishments that could cater to pedestrians and tenants of the 

project would contribute to enhancing the pedestrian experience. The applicant 

has created a larger pedestrian plaza at the corner of Pico Boulevard and 34 th 

Street adjacent to the commercial space. 

Parking | Vehicular Access 

The two-level subterranean garage would span over all three parcels, and is currently 

designed with access from 34 th Street and Centinela Avenue. The garage would provide 

approximately 505 vehicular parking spaces for residential tenants and commercial 

guests. Pursuant to City Parking Standards, the project requires approximately 415 

parking spaces and is therefore compliant with parking standards. A Transportation 

Demand Management plan would be established that would reduce the parking demand 

generated by the project. The Council should consider whether public or a potential 

shared parking arrangement at this location would be appropriate. 

Planning Commission Action 

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this proposal on July 18, 

2012. The Planning Commission voted to recommend that a Development Agreement 

be formally initiated, with the recommendation that the Council focus particularly on the 

Commission‟s concerns related to project density, design, and the relationship of the 

proposed project to vehicle trip generation. The Planning Commission‟s discussion is 

summarized below. 

Project Density and Trip Generation 

The Planning Commission recognized the uniqueness of the large project site and its 

location but believed the proposed density of 300 units was too high for the subject site. 

Suggestions of a maximum density of approximately 100 units per acre were proposed, 

but was not a majority viewpoint. The applicant‟s reduction of the project density to 260 

units represents a revised density approximately equal to 100 units per acre density. 

Concerns regarding the relationship of the project density and potential traffic impacts 

10

and trip generation were also raised with the understanding that a full traffic analysis 

would be conducted during the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. 

Project Design 

The Commission expressed that the building design and massing could be improved, 

and along with it, the perceived density of the project. The Commission stated their 

concern with the massing of the proposed project, particularly with Building „B‟ along 

34 th Street. The massing of Building „B‟, with no setback from the property line, created 

an expansive four-story façade fronting 34 th Street with no breaks in building plane or 

visual permeability into the site. In response, the applicant has set the building back 

nine feet from the property line and created an open courtyard facing 34 th Street, 

breaking up the building massing and creating building façade widths and openings that 

are more consistent with the existing development pattern of residential buildings along 

34 th Street. The Commission was also concerned with the proximity of Building „A‟ to the 

freeway. Based on the Commission‟s feedback, the applicant has set back Building „A‟ 

five additional feet from the property line to allow for the planting of landscaping and 

creating a 19-foot separation between the building and the freeway at its closest point. 

The Commission also recommended additional open space throughout the project. The 

applicant has addressed this comment by reconfiguring the interior of the site to provide 

a larger usable central open space in addition to the exterior courtyard facing 34 th 

Street. 

LEED Certification 

The Commission recommended that the project be designed and constructed to 

achieve a minimum LEED® Gold Certification. 

Community Benefits 

The LUCE identifies five priority categories of community benefits: Affordable and 

Workforce Housing, GHG Emissions and Future Congestion Reduction Requirement, 

Community Physical Improvements, Social and Cultural Facilities, and Historic 

Preservation. Considering these categories, the following is an additional baseline list 

of potential community benefits to initiate the Council‟s discussion on this topic: 

11

1. Affordable Housing: The provision of on-site affordable housing beyond the 

minimum required by the project would be considered a community benefit. 

2. Transit Impact Fee Contribution: A provision of a transportation and circulation 

infrastructure contribution to the City that would support a range of transportation 

and pedestrian improvements. However, the Council is currently considering 

implementing a required Transit Impact Fee for new projects such as the subject 

project, at which point such a contribution would no longer be considered a 

community benefit. 

3. Urban Design / Physical Improvements: Considering the project is located at a 

gateway location at the east end of the City and on a street corner that would 

have considerable pedestrian activity, providing additional space for pedestrian 

access and passive use of the property would improve the existing sidewalk 

conditions and pedestrian circulation adjacent to and off of the subject site. The 

provision of open spaces on the perimeter and within the project site would also 

benefit the project and community. 

4. Neighborhood-Serving Ground Floor Commercial: Establishment of small-scale, 

neighborhood-serving ground floor commercial uses available to the public and 

tenants of the project would be considered a community benefit. 

5. LEED® Gold Certification: Developer should design and construct the project to 

achieve a minimum LEED® Gold certification as established by the LEED® 

Rating System. 

6. Transportation Demand Management Program: The program may include, but 

not be limited to, the following measures: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Secured bicycle parking for residents and employees, including shower and 

locker facilities for employees. 

Shared bicycle program that would include available bicycles on-site that 

could be utilized (at no cost) by tenants. 

A transportation information center with information for employees, tenants, 

and visitors. 

Developer participation in a Transportation Management Association (TMA). 

Vehicle sharing technologies made available to occupants of the project. 

Shared parking. 

7. Local Hiring Provision: A local hiring provision to facilitate the hiring of local 

workers during construction and commercial employees could be negotiated 

A number of community benefits were discussed and suggested at the Planning 

Commission and community meeting. The following is a list of suggested community 

benefits provided by the Planning Commission and members of the community: 

Improvements and contributions to neighboring schools 

Contributions to historic preservation 

12

Contributions to parks 

A new police substation in the neighborhood 

Reduced parking spaces and increased bike facilities and storage 

Pedestrian considerations including off-site improvements for pedestrians and 

improvements to pedestrian infrastructure towards the future Expo/Bundy Metro Rail 

station 

Alternative transportation opportunities 

More usable green open spaces and or park space for neighborhood residents 

Accessible green roofs, gardens, and roof decks 

A running track on the roof 

Free parking to limit impacts to street parking 

Community pool/gym access 

The project‟s community benefits would be negotiated during the Development 

Agreement process based on comments and direction from the Planning Commission 

and City Council. Staff recommends that the Council consider the adequacy and level 

of potential benefits to be negotiated in this process. 

Community Meeting and Public Input 

On January 26, 2012, approximately 80 members of the public attended an initial 

community meeting at the Fairview Branch Library to learn about and provide feedback 

on the proposed project. City staff explained the Development Agreement process to 

the participants and how the project is in the initial phases of conceptual review. After a 

detailed project presentation by the applicant, the majority of the meeting was spent 

allowing members of the community to provide their initial thoughts on the project. Most 

of the comments were related to concerns with the project‟s density, height, potential 

traffic impacts, and the need for adequate community benefits to be provided. 

Zoning Ordinance and LUCE Consistency 

The LUCE sets goals and policies to guide development within the City over the next 

20-30 years and emphasizes neighborhood conservation and vehicle trip reduction. 

Encouraging compact, transit-oriented growth and new housing is integral while 

conserving the scale and character of the City‟s neighborhoods. 

The majority of the project site is located in the Mixed Use Boulevard Low land use 

designation, and a small portion is located in the Low Density Housing designation. The 

LUCE vision for the Mixed Use Boulevard Low land use designation seeks to encourage 

13

vibrant, highly walkable areas and local-serving uses. New buildings should step down 

in relationship to the scale and character of adjacent low density neighborhoods and 

include a diverse mix of uses and housing types designated to complement and serve 

the existing residential neighborhood. The Low Density Housing designation 

encourages the preservation of low-density housing. New development should transition 

in mass and scale to adjacent structures in a way that protects the aesthetics and 

livability of the neighborhood. 

The proposed Development Agreement must be consistent with the objectives, policies, 

general land uses and programs specified in the general plan. The project is consistent 

with LUCE Policy LU11.1 in that providing a range of housing choices to meet the 

needs of residents continues to support healthy, diverse neighborhoods. Policy B18.4 

encourages buildings with a variety of heights, architectural elements, and shapes to 

create visual interest along Pico Boulevard. Policy B18.10 encourages affordable and 

workforce housing in proximity to transit and major employment centers. The project is 

also consistent with Policy N1.8 to make a range of housing options available in multifamily 

neighborhoods to suit the spectrum of individual lifestyles and space needs. 

These LUCE goals and policies should be considered when shaping the proposed 

project. 

The implementation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to reduce 

vehicle trips in the area and reduce associated parking demand would be consistent 

with LUCE Circulation Policy T19.2 which seeks appropriate TDM requirements for new 

development. Furthermore, the LUCE‟s overall land use policies include providing 

community benefits for the area, including but not limited to, a transit and circulation 

improvement contribution and a TDM plan that provides bicycle facilities for employees. 

Staff recommends that the Council focus on the following project-related areas: 

1. Whether the proposed unit density, building mass, size, and scale is appropriate 

for this location and within the neighborhood context. 

2. How the commercial ground floor along Pico Boulevard should be designed for 

this corner lot and the types of uses that are appropriate considering the types of 

uses and users in the general area. 

14

3. Whether the project design is consistent with LUCE policies to enhance the 

quality of the streetscape and create an open space environment that 

encourages pedestrian activity and interaction. 

4. Discussion on community benefits that would be appropriate for this project. The 

Council should discuss community benefits to be negotiated, given the proposed 

development. 

Alternatives 

In place of the recommended action, the Council could consider the following with 

respect to the project: 

Continue discussion with the applicant regarding additional project options. 


There are no immediate financial or budget impacts associated with the actions 

recommended in this report. 

Prepared by: Tony Kim, Senior Planner 

Approved: 


David Martin, Director 

Planning and Community Development 

Rod Gould 


Attachments: 

A. Preliminary Concept Plans 

B. Public Correspondence 

F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STRPT\2011\11DEV017 (DA - 3402 Pico Blvd)\3402 Pico Blvd (CC Float-Up).doc 

15

ATTACHMENT A 

Preliminary Concept Plans 

Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. 

available for review at the City Clerk’s office and the Libraries. 

Document is 

16

ATTACHMENT B 

PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE 

Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. 

available for review at the City Clerk’s office and the Libraries. 

Document is 

17


To: 

From: 

Subject: 



Karen Ginsberg, Director of Community and Cultural Services 

Andy Agle, Housing and Economic Development Director 

Jacqueline Seabrooks, Chief of Police 

Scott Ferguson, Fire Chief 


Public Hearing of the Annual Review of the City’s Plan for Homeless 

Services 


Staff recommends that the City Council: 

1) Hold a public hearing and receive public comment on the Annual Review of the 

City’s Plan for Homeless Services, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2.69.030. 

2) Review and comment on strategies to address homelessness. 

3) Direct staff to proceed with next steps. 


This staff report meets the requirements of the City’s Public Safety Initiative by providing 

the Annual Review of the City’s Plan for Homeless Services (Annual Review) for FY 

2011-2012. The public hearing affords the public and the City Council an opportunity to 

comment on the Annual Review and provide input on strategies to address 

homelessness. 

The required Annual Review reports on: (a) local impacts and perceptions of 

homelessness; (b) local resources and responses; (c) continuing challenges; (d) 

regional coordination and advocacy; and (e) next steps. 

1

Background 

Public Safety Initiative 

In 1994, the City Council adopted the Public Safety Initiative (SMMC Sections 2.69.010 

through 2.69.030) calling for the City to adopt a plan for homeless services based on 

the following goals: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Effectively assist the homeless in returning to a self-sufficient status, 

Monitor the progress of individual recipients, 

Eliminate unnecessary duplication of services, 

Emphasize long-term solutions to homelessness by combining housing, 

counseling, and job training, 

Provide non-housing services for approximately the same number of homeless 

individuals as can be temporarily sheltered in the City, 

Prevent an increase and, wherever feasible, reduce overall City expenditures 

relating to homeless services, and 

Impose reasonable time limits on the provision of services to the same 

individuals. 

The City’s plan, required by the Public Safety Initiative, is incorporated in the 2011-2014 

Action Plan to Address Homelessness, which reflects and informs current policies and 

practices and also establishes goals for addressing homelessness in the City. Elements 

of the Public Safety Initiative are also incorporated into two other City documents — the 

City’s FY2011 – 2015 Human Services Grants Program and the Consolidated Plan for 

FY 2010-2015 required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

(HUD). Additionally, program guidelines for monitoring and the issuance of Housing 

Choice Vouchers and Special Programs are delineated in the Santa Monica Housing 

Authority’s FY2012-2013 Administrative Plan, required for submission on an annual 

basis by HUD. 

2

The Public Safety Initiative also requires the City Council to conduct an annual review of 

the City’s progress in meeting the goals established by the Initiative and hold a public 

hearing to assess: 

 

 

 

 

The impact of the City’s homeless population on other residents of the City, 

The effectiveness of the delivery of services to the homeless by the City and 

various social service agencies, 

The cost of those services, and 

The changes which should be made in the Plan in order to carry out its primary 

goals and objectives. 

Notice of a public hearing for November 27, 2012, was placed in the Santa Monica Daily 

Press and posted on www.surfsantamonica.com and on the City’s website. 

Action Plan to Address Homelessness 

As noted above, a guiding document designed to direct the City’s strategy is the Action 

Plan to Address Homelessness (Action Plan) adopted by the City Council on February 

26, 2008. The Action Plan established a vision statement, guiding principles, and 

refinements to the City’s homeless service system within six project areas: services, 

housing, evaluation, community education, public policy, and regional collaboration. 

The Plan was updated in 2009, 2010, and this year to reflect changing local and federal 

priorities, goals, and the impact of Assembly Bill (AB) 109, which releases prison 

inmates back into their communities of origin. In 2010, the format of the Action Plan 

changed to become a multi-year plan to coincide with the City’s Human Services Grant 

Program (HSGP) funding cycle, providing a longer-term view that emphasizes system 

changes and improvements. The Action Plan, which spans FY2011 – 2014, was framed 

upon the federal plan to prevent and end homelessness, Opening Doors, and the goals 

of the HEARTH Act for which the Federal government is developing regulations. These 

regulations will be used to further enhance the Action Plan and develop additional 

benchmarks for measuring success in addressing homelessness as a community. This 

year, the Action Plan has been updated to reflect strengthening of efforts to address 

3

emerging needs and responses for homeless individuals who are newly arrived in the 

community. 

Discussion 

The five sections of this report include: local impacts of homelessness; resources and 

responses; continuing challenges; regional coordination and advocacy efforts; and 

steps staff will take in the coming year to continue to advance the goals of the Action 

Plan. 

Local Impacts and Perceptions of Homelessness 

The two main community impacts of homelessness are on the perception of Santa 

Monica as a safe and enjoyable place to live and visit and the frequent requests for first 

responder interventions in situations involving homeless persons. Although the 2012 

Homeless Count indicated a slight increase in the number of individuals residing in 

shelters 1 , the City still maintained the 34% reduction in street homelessness 

documented in 2010, with over 150 fewer people sleeping on city streets since 2009 2 . 

Data did indicate, however, that homelessness continues to be concentrated in the 

downtown area. 

This finding was recently reinforced in concerns voiced by both Downtown Santa 

Monica, Inc. (DTSM), and the Chamber of Commerce’s Hotel Council. These entities 

reported that the presence of homeless individuals has a detrimental impact on tourist 

and customer experiences. These concerns led to the development of a special 

Downtown Initiative, coordinated by the Human Services Division (HSD) in collaboration 

with the Santa Monica Police Department’s (SMPD) Homeless Liaison Program (HLP) 

Team and DTSM. The initiative harnesses the resources of local City-funded service 

1 19 individuals were housed in motels in Santa Monica through a new county-wide Winter Shelter 

Program for families, operated by Upward Bound House. This program may not appear in the 2013 count 

if UBH does not utilize Santa Monica motels. 

2 For more information, see Attachment 1, Santa Monica Homeless Count. 

4

partners, SMPD’s HLP Team, LA County Department of Mental Health (DMH), and the 

Housing and Economic Development Department (HED) to engage and house 10 highly 

visible long-term homeless individuals known to frequent the Third Street Promenade 

area. The collaborative has created increased accountability among the partners, which 

has proven effective: since June, five of the 10 (50%) individuals are either in housing or 

have a pending housing application; three are no longer in the area; and two are 

candidates for hospitalization. 

Homelessness as a public safety issue is also reinforced by the crowds generated by 

public food distributions. While seven to nine groups are currently in regular operation 

handing out food in public places, this number is down from 13 last year. To further the 

City’s efforts on this issue, staff is currently working with one of the larger food 

distributors in Palisades Park to connect the group to OPCC for indoor meal provision at 

one of the agency’s facilities. The City continues to educate the remaining food 

distributors on the City’s approach to addressing homelessness, identify opportunities 

for moving their services indoors, and stress how their compassion might be more 

impactful within their own communities. 

City-wide, the impacts of homelessness are evident in the number of first-responder 

calls and contacts reported during FY11/12. Over 50% of SMPD jail bookings consist of 

individuals who listed their residence as transient, homeless, none, or provided an 

address of a known homeless shelter, which is a 5% increase over last year. SMPD’s 

contacts with homeless individuals are up 13% over last year. The Santa Monica Fire 

Department (SMFD) also reported an increase in homeless related calls; however, 

compared to the total emergency medical calls received, the percentage of those 

related to homeless individuals remains flat at 15%. The City Attorney’s Office (CAO) 

reports an 11% decrease in the number of cases received involving arrests and 

citations in which the subjects involved were primarily homeless persons 3 . 

3 For more information, see Attachment 1, First Responder Calls and Contacts. 

5

As part of the unique interdepartmental collaboration between CCS, SMPD, SMFD, and 

the CAO, frequent users of police and fire services are identified for more intensive 

engagement, using social service agencies and county resources to connect to 

appropriate treatment. The vast majority of these contacts are truly transient, coming 

into town for a month or two, generating a high volume of calls for services then moving 

on. The City focuses its limited resources on those individuals who are long-term 

residents with chronic conditions that make them more likely to die on the streets 

without intervention. To assist individuals who are new to the community, HSD and the 

HLP Team have been strengthening partnerships with regional providers such as PATH 

(People Assisting the Homeless), who has sent outreach staff to Santa Monica to reengage 

individuals who are on the Hollywood Service Registry. One partnership that is 

still challenging is with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs West LA Medical Center 

(WLA VA). Although the WLA VA is implementing improved case management and 

community outreach programs, there is still a lack of commitment to providing adequate 

and appropriate permanent housing options for the most chronically homeless veterans. 

Resources and Responses to Homelessness 

Local Investment in Social Services: In addition to unifying the community response to 

homelessness, the City maintains a high level of direct investment in homeless 

services, funding six core non-profit agencies with $2.3 million in FY 2011-2012 through 

a combination of City General Funds, Federal Community Development Block Grant 

(CDBG) funds, Federal Supportive Housing Program (SHP) funds, and County 

Proposition A funds. These six homeless service agencies raised an additional $5.9 

million in other public and private funding, providing Santa Monica participants over 

$3.50 worth of services for every City dollar invested. In addition, another six agencies 

provide case management, health care, legal assistance, and other support to augment 

the core homeless services of the continuum. Finally, the City expended $517,874 for 

Project Homecoming (a reunification project); clinical consultant services for the most 

chronically homeless vulnerable individuals on the Service Registry; and centralized 

data management through the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). 

6

Housing: To successfully address homelessness, services must be tied to housing. 

Permanent supportive and affordable housing is the most effective method of ending 

homelessness. The City’s Housing Division provides a diversity of housing options, 

including permanent supportive housing, which includes rental subsidy vouchers and 

loans to non-profit organizations to develop affordable and supportive housing. The 

Division’s resources also help keep vulnerable populations who are risk of 

homelessness housed 4 . 

Loss of Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Funding: The 2012 dissolution of California 

Redevelopment Agencies greatly impacts the City’s ability to provide funding for the 

development of affordable housing by significantly reducing the amount of funds that the 

Housing Division has available to finance the construction of future supportive housing 

developments. The Housing and Economic Development Department will continue to 

investigate alternative funding sources. 

Data Driven Strategies: The Action Plan functions as a roadmap for targeting resources 

and evaluating the effectiveness of services. Data is a critical component of the Plan, 

and the data collected in HMIS shows how well the City is managing limited resources. 

Data is also used to measure how effective programs are at achieving the goals of the 

Action Plan, the main goal of which is to secure and maintain permanent housing for the 

City’s Priority participants 5 . City staff is also working to align resources with programs 

and activities that best advance the goals of the Action Plan. This includes a possible 

shift in funding towards services that ensure that high-need individuals can continue to 

be safely and successfully housed. To this end, City staff is exploring the feasibility of 

creating hybrid contracts for the 2015 funding cycle that may in part contain outcome- 

4 For more information, see Attachment 1, Housing Resources. 

5 For more information, see Attachment 1, Santa Monica Homeless Individuals That Access Services. 

7

ased fee-for-service payments for housing placements. In addition, the City operates 

special initiatives that target resources to address more general needs 6 . 

Continuing Challenges 

Santa Monica is one of 88 cities within a large and populous county. The policies and 

practices in the region directly impact the number of homeless people in Santa Monica. 

In addition to the inflow of homeless individuals, changes in Los Angeles City and 

County policies may also be dislocating individuals from surrounding areas into Santa 

Monica. Early 2012 saw a closure of the Venice Boardwalk from midnight to 5:00 A.M, 

which displaced hundreds of homeless individuals. Mapping of individuals during the 

January 2012 Homeless Count supports the theory that some of Venice’s homeless 

population may have migrated to the southwestern Santa Monica border for the 

purposes of sleeping in the City. 

The City is also impacted by regional and state-wide issues that can contribute to 

homelessness. Last October, AB 109, also known as the Public Safety Realignment 

Program, went into effect and has resulted in the release of approximately 9,500 

individuals from prison to Post-Release Community Supervision (PCS) in Los Angeles 

County in FY2011-12. It is estimated that 1,000 to 1,200 of those released are 

homeless. SMPD is working closely with the County’s Public Safety Realignment Team 

to monitor the impact of AB109 on Santa Monica. 

At the County level, another policy change has the potential to drive more non-Santa 

Monica homeless households into the City. In response to the U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) new mandate to develop ―coordinated or 

centralized intake,‖ the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) is piloting 

regional intake ―hubs‖ that would direct all homeless individuals to single locations in 

each region. Currently, this ―centralized intake‖ model is being piloted for families and 

6 For more information, see Attachment 1, Special Initiatives. 

8

will be administered for the Westside by St. Joseph Center in Venice. However, this 

LAHSA model may be expanded to include all homeless persons in the near future. A 

Westside ―hub,‖ were it to be located in the City, would be contrary to the goals of the 

Action Plan. 

In response to the regional challenges beyond Santa Monica’s direct control, the City’s 

interdepartmental and interagency approach is strong. This includes tight oversight of 

the allocation of the 331 emergency and transitional housing units operating in the City. 

The majority of clients utilizing those beds come from outside of the City limits and 

funding for most programs come from a range of county, state, federal and private 

sources. Additionally, City staff carefully reviews requests from agencies for letters of 

support and certifications for consistency with local priorities and declines support for 

those that do not align with the City’s goals. The City is also reviewing lease 

agreements to ensure capital resources are prioritized for local needs. 

Regional Coordination and Advocacy 

The City continues to expand its role as a regional stakeholder. FY 2011-2012 brought 

new opportunities and challenges including: 

 

 

 

Veterans: The lack of permanent housing for veterans continues to be a 

challenge. The lawsuit brought against the VA in June 2011 for failing to commit 

adequate resources to house homeless veterans is moving forward and, 

although Congress appropriated approximately $20 million for the rehabilitation 

of one building, no work has been done to date, and there are no plans for the 

appropriation of funds for two additional buildings. 

United Way of Greater LA’s Home for Good: This regional initiative recently 

integrated city and county resources with over $5 million in private donations to 

help local agencies permanently house chronically homeless individuals in the 

coming year. The City is exploring the possibility of aligning a portion of existing 

funding to be part of a future Request for Proposal. 

Federal Policy & Funding Changes: As the Los Angeles Continuum of Care 

(CoC) prepares to implement the 2012 HUD interim rules, LAHSA has developed 

a tool to evaluate existing HUD program grants. The tool includes a measure for 

geographic need that will deduct points and reduce funding for all projects in 

Service Planning Area (SPA) 5, which includes the Westside, in order to 

9

edistribute funding more evenly across the County. City staff will continue to 

advocate against taking funding away from high performing areas and monitor 

these CoC policy developments. 

Santa Monica’s Affordable Housing: The City’s affordable housing development 

program, including supportive housing for homeless persons, is presently funded 

with CDBG, HOME, Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers, and Redevelopment 

funds. In FY 2011-2012, CDBG and HOME funds were cut by 20% and 29%, 

respectively, and the State of California dissolved Redevelopment Agencies, 

which will impede the development of new affordable and special needs housing. 

Next Steps 

City staff is working on several fronts to ensure that resources are available to support 

the growing number of formerly homeless people in permanent housing. These include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Refine, monitor and share the Action Plan, with funders (Federal, regional, 

public, private) to determine how their funding of local agencies might better 

support the Plan; 

Collaborating with local agencies as they apply for new resources to develop 

requests that advance the goals of the Plan; 

Working with agencies to redirect non-Santa Monica participants to other 

regional resources in order to target locally designated funding to local priority 

populations; 

Focusing City resources on permanent supportive housing placement activities 

and the intensive and long-term services needed to keep people housed; and 

Continuing to advocate for a fair share of VA resources for the Westside with a 

focus on the creation of more permanent supportive housing. 

Incorporate lessons learned from the Downtown Initiative to add greater 

accountability to HSGP funding and targeting resources to high impact areas. 

Work with the community to establish measurable benchmarks consistent with 

the Action Plan and the federal plan, Opening Doors, as well as the HEARTH Act 

and begin collecting data for a baseline in FY13/14. 

Analyze options and continue discussions with local service providers and others 

regarding the City’s participation in the LA Continuum of Care. 

Provide periodic updates to the City Council. 

10


There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the 

recommended actions. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required 

in the future. 

Prepared by: 

Setareh Yavari, Acting Human Services Manager 

Approved: 


Karen Ginsberg 

Director 

Community and Cultural Services 

Rod Gould 


Attachment I: Summary of Homeless Data FY2011-12 

11

Annual Homeless Review 

Supplemental Data for FY2011-12 

Attachment 1 

This attachment contains data collected by the following City of Santa Monica Divisions 

and Departments: Community and Cultural Services Department’s Human Services 

Division, the Housing and Economic Development Department, the Police Department, 

the Fire Department and the City Attorney’s Office. 

Santa Monica Homeless Count 

Santa Monica’s street census remained flat in 2012, and the significant reduction first 

observed in 2010 was maintained: 

o 2009 total = 915 (Street Count = 480/Sheltered Count = 435) 



The 2012 point-in-time homeless count is 769. This number consists of a point-in-time 

street homeless population of 264, a shelter and institution population of 453 

individuals, and 52 cars/encampments. The shelter/institution count increased by 6% 

over 2011, due primarily to a new temporary Upward Bound House Winter Shelter 

Program for homeless families. 

First Responder Calls and Contacts 

First-responder calls and contacts reported during FY11/12: 

 

In FY 2011-12, SMPD conducted 3,798 jail bookings, of which 1,941 (51%) listed 

their residence as transient, homeless, none, or provided an address of a known 

homeless shelter.1 Beginning in FY 2012-2013, SMPD implemented a more 

comprehensive examination of arrest booking data. Using the refined search 

method, the department then reexamined the booking data for FY 2010-11. Out 

of the 3,726 bookings conducted, the corrected number where the person listed 

themselves as transient was 1,730 (46%).2 

1 These numbers reflect number of bookings, not number of persons booked; a portion of this number 

includes persons with two or more arrests. 

2 The previous data in this category for FY 2010/11 was 1,540 bookings of persons listed as homeless out 

of 3,726 total bookings. 

1

SMPD’s HLP team made 3,018 duplicated contacts with homeless individuals 

and approximately 1,759 periodic checks on property and open space, 

representing a 13% increase in contacts and a 28% decrease of periodic checks 

in FY 2011-12. In order to free the HLP team to place greater focus on 

community livability operations, response to specific homeless related calls for 

service, and other more directed strategies in FY 2011-12, the department 

expanded the focus on homelessness to include the Patrol Division. Patrol 

officers conducted 206 periodic checks in FY 2011-12, which brought the total 

number for the fiscal year to 1,965. Although this is a 20% decrease in the overall 

number of periodic checks compared to the previous year, the focus adjustment 

enabled the HLP team to increase the time spent on in-person contacts with 

homeless persons. 

SM Fire Department’s paramedics responded to 10,295 incidents, 1,612 of these 

incidents (15%) were to homeless persons needing assistance. The number of 

homeless-related calls as a percentage of overall SMFD calls has remained flat 

since FY 2010-11. 

The City Attorney’s Office received 1,950 cases involving arrests and citations in 

which the subjects involved were primarily homeless persons. The number of 

cases decreased 11% compared to FY 2010-11. 3 

Housing Resources 

During FY2011-12: 

 

 

 

$17.2 million in Federal and local funds administered by the Santa Monica 

Housing Authority (SMHA) were spent on approximately 1,400 active housing 

vouchers, inclusive of Section 8, Special Needs Programs, HOME and RDA 

(Redevelopment Agency) vouchers. 

$5.4 million in loans were committed to Step Up on Colorado to finance the 

construction of 34 new units for homeless and disabled individuals along with 

an additional $234,000 in Administrative Grant funds to maintain clinical and 

support staff at Step Up on Second. 

Six HUD permanent supportive housing grants continue to be administered 

(since 2006). SMAH was awarded approximately $3.1 million in Federal funds 

to provide permanent housing rental subsidies to approximately 230 formerly 

homeless and disabled individuals and families under the Shelter Plus Care 

and Serial Inebriate Programs. Supportive services are delivered by OPCC, 

St. Joseph Center, and Step Up On Second. Of those served, an average of 

3 The number of cases received reported by the CAO is based on a small set of specific municipal code 

violations which have a high rate of homeless offenders. This number should not be compared to the 

number of jail bookings reported by SMPD, which encompasses violations of all municipal codes. 

2

more than 94% of program participants remained in permanent housing for at 

least six months, which exceeds HUD’s performance standard requirement. 

Utilization of funds averages 98% across all programs. 

SMHA also administers the HOME Program, a tenant-based rental assistance 

(TBRA) program designed for individuals and families who are disabled 

and/or homeless. In FY 2011-2012, approximately 25 households received 

rental subsidies through the HOME program. 

Recognizing the need for a program to assist homeless adults who are 55 

years of age and older, the SMHA administered the RDA Homeless 

Prevention and Rental Subsidy program. Part of this program previously 

provided a one-time grant of up to $2,000 to Santa Monica residents who 

were at risk of eviction for non-payment of rent due to a financial hardship. 

The rental subsidy component of the RDA program provided rental assistance 

to applicants who were homeless and part of the City’s continuum of care for 

the chronically homeless for at least one year prior to receiving assistance. In 

FY 2011-2012, approximately 80 households received rental assistance. As a 

result of the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies, the 80 RDA households 

are now at-risk. The SMHA is pursuing alternate sources of funding, including 

the transfer of eligible RDA voucher holders to the Section 8 voucher program 

in FY 2012-2013, in order to continue housing assistance. 

Santa Monica Homeless Individuals That Access Services 

 

Total Active Clients: Based on data from the City’s HMIS, agencies provided 

some level of assistance to 4,334 4 persons identified as homeless during FY 

2011-2012. Further analysis of this data has helped to better understand where 

individuals originated prior to accessing services in Santa Monica. Of those 

individuals served this year who identified a ―last permanent address,‖ 11% 

reported living in Santa Monica. Twenty-five percent of these individuals are of 

unknown origin, and the remaining 64% reported becoming homeless outside of 

Santa Monica: 

• 22% originated from Los Angeles City 

• 18% originated from Los Angeles County (non-LA City) 

• 9% originated outside Los Angeles County, within California 

• 15% originated outside of the State of California 

4 Assistance may have been one-time or ongoing, including intake, basic services, case management, and temporary and 

permanent housing, addiction recovery, mental health services, and employment assistance. While the 3,609 persons in HMIS 

represent individuals who received an intake or services from a City-funded agency, these individuals may or may not have become 

homeless in Santa Monica and may have only received one service and never returned. The significant decrease of over 52% from 

the total number of clients served during the FY 2010-2011 is a result of improved data quality efforts that were started in FY 2011- 

2012. 

3

Santa Monica Priority Population: Within the 4,334 Total Active Clients 

identified in the HMIS, 1,246 (29%) meet the City’s definition of Priority 

Population. The effectiveness of programs is measured by their success in 

targeting resources to this population. Of these: 

• 193 permanent housing placements were made. 

• 320 emergency or transitional housing placements were made. 

Special Initiatives 

 

Within the Priority Population, there are 346 individuals that comprise the 

Service Registry: 

• 242 of the 346 are ranked as vulnerable. Of these individuals, 41 are 

vulnerable veterans. Although the Registry is expanding, the number of 

veterans has remained stable. 

• 213 individuals (62%) of the 346 are now in permanent housing. Of 

these, 164 were ranked as vulnerable. This is a 20% increase over last 

year. 

• Of the 213 individuals in permanent housing, 30 are vulnerable 

veterans, including 16 that were housed in FY2011-12. 

Homeless Community Court (HCC): 

Since the program began: 

• 236 chronic offenders have participated in the program 

• 153 (65%) have successfully completed the court’s 

requirements and had their cases successfully adjudicated 

• 97 (63%) have moved into permanent housing utilizing Shelter + 

Care, HOME Chronic Homeless Program, RDA, and Support 

Intensive Program (SIP) vouchers. 

 

Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP): The City 

received $553,576 in Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

(ARRA) funds from HUD for the City’s Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re- 

Housing Program, Eviction Prevention and Rehousing Assistance (EPRA) in 

2009. The program expended all funds and ceased services in March 2012. 

o 990 individuals (652 households) applied for assistance and were 

screened for eligibility. Of those: 

4

‣ 147 individuals (74 households) were eligible for and received 

financial assistance and case management services. 

‣ Approximately 75 additional households met the basic eligibility 

criteria but, due to limited funds, were not able to be enrolled in 

the program. These households were connected to nonfinancial 

assistance such as case management and food 

services to support their basic needs and promote household 

stability. 

‣ 93% of participants remained in stable permanent housing for at 

least six months after their last financial assistance. 

 

 

Project Homecoming: For individuals who do not meet the priority participant 

definition, the City provides opportunities for households to reconnect to 

housing and services in their community of origin. In FY 2011-2012 this 

program assisted 272 individuals to relocate and reunite with family or friends 

in their community of origin at an average cost of $230 per participant. The 

destinations for the participants are as follows: 

o 33% in the South 

o 20% in the Mid-West 

o 21% in the West (excluding California) 

o 15% in the Northeast 

o 9% California 

o 2% outside of the United States 

West Coast Care: This outreach team partnered with the Santa Monica Police 

Department’s HLP Team, making 2,010 duplicated contacts, and assisting 

353 individuals to reunite with family and friends. While 129 of those utilized 

the City’s Project Homecoming program, 224 people were housed through 

resources provided by loved ones. 

5


To: 

From: 

Subject: 





Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice 


Staff recommends that the Council review the attached Draft Analysis of Impediments to 

Fair Housing Choice and hold a public hearing, receive public comment and approve 

the Draft. 


An Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) provides a review of public and 

private sector regulations, policies, procedures, practices and laws to determine the 

associated impact on access to fair housing choice. A variety of public and private 

stakeholders and practitioners associated with housing in Santa Monica were consulted 

during the preparation of the draft AI discussed in this report. The draft AI is the 

culmination of this effort over the last year and identifies 15 potential public and private 

sector impediments to fair housing choice and 27 actions that can be taken to address 

them. 

Background 

The City of Santa Monica receives federal Community Development Block Grant and 

Home Investment Partnership Program grant funds from the United States Department 

of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which require an analysis of impediments to 

fair housing to be conducted every five years as a part of the Santa Monica 

Consolidated Plan for housing and, if impediments are identified, a plan to address 

impediments to fair housing. 

HUD defines fair housing as: 

 

a condition in which individuals of similar income levels in the same housing 

market have a like range of choice available to them regardless of race, color, 

ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, or 

any other arbitrary factor. 

1

HUD defines impediments as: 

 

Any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, ancestry, 

national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, or any other 

arbitrary factor which restricts housing choice or the availability of housing 

choices; or 

 

Any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing 

choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, 



Community Process 

Staff began working with Karen Warner Associates in September 2011 to gather 

information for the AI. Presentations were made before the following five City 

Commissions in November and December 2011 to communicate that the AI process 

was underway and to seek input regarding potential impediments to fair housing choice: 

Housing Commission 

 

 

 

 

Social Services Commission 

Commission on the Status of Women 

Disabilities Commission 

Commission for the Senior Commission 

Commissioner concerns and comments were incorporated into the AI. 

To ensure that the AI captured community concerns, a workshop was conducted to 

gather input from public and private agencies. The workshop was attended by 

affordable housing providers, agencies representing special needs populations, the real 

estate community and staff from key City Departments. Interviews were also held with 

key service providers, housing industry representatives and the five most active 

mortgage lenders in Santa Monica. Additionally, staff provided a preliminary draft of the 

AI to the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles for review and comment. 

After the draft AI was prepared, a public notice was published on the City website and in 

the Santa Monica Daily Press. The draft AI was made available for a 30-day review and 

comment period from August 22, 2012 to September 20, 2012. As part of the public 

2

eview process, the Housing Commission conducted a public hearing as an additional 

forum for public comment. Comments received during the 30-day public review, 

including this public hearing, will be incorporated into the AI. 

Discussion 

The draft AI contains a comprehensive community profile of Santa Monica with 

demographic information, including household composition, income, growth trends, 

housing types, affordability, employment and transportation. Highlights of the Santa 

Monica community profile include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senior citizens comprise 20 percent of Santa Monica’s households. Sixty 

percent of the City’s senior households live alone, 58 percent are renters, and 

40 percent of seniors have a disability. Almost one-third of seniors earned 

extremely low or very low incomes. 

An estimated 16 percent of Santa Monica’s population has some type of 

disability, encompassing physical, mental and developmental disabilities 

The City has a very high proportion of single individuals living alone, comprising 

48 percent of all households in the community. 

In the 2010 Census, Santa Monica had 1,419 large households of five or more 

members of which just under half (47 percent) were renter households. It is 

estimated that Santa Monica has 7,004 owner-occupied units and 2,735 renteroccupied 

units of three or more bedrooms. 

Approximately 45 percent of Santa Monica renters pay over 30 percent of their 

income for housing, compared to 40 percent of owners. Renter households 

earning less than $50,000 were the most impacted by overpayment both in 

terms of the number (11,700) and proportion (70 percent-91 percent) of 

households. 

Prior to Costa Hawkins, 82 percent of Santa Monica’s rental units were 

affordable to low-income households (less than 80 percent Area Median 

Income); by 2010, only 17 percent were affordable to households earning low 

incomes. 

Santa Monica’s population remains predominately White (70 percent in 2010) 

and different racial and ethnic groups evidence areas of concentration, defined 

as census block groups exceeding the countywide average of a particular group. 

The draft AI also provides an assessment regarding the effect of local laws on the 

location, availability and accessibility of housing, and further examines how public and 

3

private practices and access to employment and transit affect fair housing choice. The 

AI identifies 15 public and private sector impediments to fair housing choice, including: 

 

 

 

 

 

With the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, redevelopment funds will no 

longer be available to support Santa Monica’s affordable housing activities, 

impeding the City’s efforts to expand housing choice among lower and 

moderate-income households. 

The City’s zoning code does not contain a definition of disability or have written 

procedures in place to allow for deviations from development standards, building 

codes or permit procedures to provide a reasonable accommodation for persons 

with disabilities. 

When rent controlled apartments are vacated, the subsequent rents are roughly 

double the previous rents, and above the level affordable for very-low and lowincome 

households. 

A review of loans over the past five years identified four census tracts in Santa 

Monica characterized by high minority or low and moderate-income population 

which experience loan denial rates above Citywide averages. 

Despite the City’s continued urging, the Santa Monica Daily Press and the Santa 

Monica Mirror do not currently publish a fair housing disclaimer in their classified 

sections. Neither the LA Times nor these two local newspapers include any 

disclaimer in advertised rental units regarding exceptions to pet prohibitions for 

disabled persons requiring a service or companion animal. 

Finally, Section E of the draft AI (Executive Summary, pages E-7 to E-10) outlines 

recommended actions to further fair housing choice in Santa Monica, including: 

 

 

 

 

Continue the proactive fair housing outreach and education, including reasonable 

accommodation issues, to Santa Monica residents, apartment owners, 

managers, and realtors, conducted through the City’s Consumer Protection Unit. 

Continue to offer counsel to tenants and landlords regarding rights and 

responsibilities under State and City codes through the City’s Consumer 

Protection Unit. 

Incorporate the following definition of “disability” within the Zoning Code 

consistent with the Fair Housing Act: “individuals with physical or mental 

impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities; has a record 

of such impairment; or is regarded as having such impairment.” 

Continue to provide financial and regulatory incentives to facilitate the provision 

of affordable housing throughout the community, particularly in locations near 

transit and services that promote walkability 

4

Provide affordable and accessible housing to special needs populations, 

including the disabled, seniors and persons at risk of homelessness. 

Conduct rental audits and/or testing to evaluate apparent patterns of 

discrimination related to race, familial status and disability. 

Conclusion and Next Steps 

Staff recommends that the Council hold a public hearing, receive comments, and 

approve the Draft Analysis of Impediments. Once adopted, the City will continue 

addressing the actions identified by the AI to further fair housing choice in Santa 

Monica. 


There is no financial impact to reviewing the Draft AI. 

Prepared by: Barbara Collins, Housing Manager 

Approved: 




Rod Gould 


Attachment A: Draft Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice 

5

ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE 

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 

August 2012 


Housing and Economic 

Development Department



24 CFR §570.601(a)(2) 

24 CFR 91.225(a) 

Public Review Draft 

August 2012 

KAREN WARNER ASSOCIATES, INC 

WITH BETH STOCHL ASSOCIATES




Section 

Page 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

A. What is an AI? ...................................................................................... E-1 

B. Defining Fair Housing ........................................................................... E-1 

C. Community Participation ....................................................................... E-2 

D. Summary of Report Conclusions/Findings ............................................ E-3 

E. Recommended Actions to Address Impediments ................................ E-7 

II. 

II. 

III. 

IV. 

INTRODUCTION 

A. Purpose of the Report ........................................................................... I-1 

B. Defining Fair Housing ............................................................................ I-1 

C. Organization of Report .......................................................................... I-2 

D. Data Sources ........................................................................................ I-3 

E. Community Participation ....................................................................... I-3 

F. Preparers of the Report ......................................................................... I-4 

COMMUNITY PROFILE 

A. Demographic Profile ..............................................................................II-1 

B. Household Profile ..................................................................................II-9 

C. Income Profile ..................................................................................... II-17 

D. Housing Profile .................................................................................... II-21 

E. Public and Assisted Housing .............................................................. II-32 

F. Residential Care Facilities .................................................................. II-38 

G. Transportation Profile .......................................................................... II-40 

H. Employment Profile ............................................................................. II-42 

I. Community Facilities ........................................................................... II-44 

CURRENT FAIR HOUSING PROFILE 

A. Fair Housing Services ..........................................................................III-1 

B. Landlord/Tenant Services ................................................................... III-10 

C. Input from Fair Housing Workshop and City Commissions ................. III-13 

REVIEW OF POTENTIAL IMPEDIMENTS 

A. Potential Public Sector Impediments ................................................... IV-1 

1. Local Zoning, Building and Occupancy Codes ......................... IV-1 

2. Provision for a Variety of Housing Types ................................. IV-6 

3. Zoning Regulations for Persons with Disabilities ..................... IV-8 

4. Public Policies Concerning Housing Activities ........................ IV-10 

5. Rent Control .......................................................................... IV-15 

6. Santa Monica Housing Authority ........................................... IV-22 

7. Moratoriums/Growth Management ......................................... IV-28 

8. Development Fees/Assessments ........................................... IV-28 

9. Community Representation and Participation ........................ IV-29 

ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS 

TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE 

i 

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

Section 


(Continued) 

Page 

B. Potential Private Sector Impediments ................................................ IV-30 

1. Real Estate Associations and Practices ................................. IV-30 

2. Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles ...................... IV-33 

3. Mortgage Lending Practices .................................................. IV-35 

4. Discriminatory Newspaper Advertising .................................. IV-61 

5. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions ............................... IV-62 

V. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

A. Summary of ConcIusions/Findings ....................................................... V-1 

B. Recommended Actions to Address Impediments ................................. V-5 

C. Status of Addressing Impediments in 2007/08 AI ................................. V-9 

APPENDICES: 

A. Inventory of Assisted Affordable Rental Housing ........................................ A-1 

B. Review of Zoning and Planning Codes, Policies and Practices ................. B-1 

C. Discriminatory Advertising – Examples of Words and Terms ...................... C-1 

D. Fair Housing Action Plan Matrix ................................................................ D-1 



ii 


Table 

TABLES 

Page 

II-1 

II-2 

II-3 

II-4 

II-5 

II-6 

II-7 

II-8 

II-9 

II-10 

II-11 

II-12 

II-13 

II-14 

II-15 

II-16 

II-17 

II-18 

II-19 

II-20 

II-21 

II-22 

II-23 

II-24 

II-25 

II-26 

III-1 

III-2 

Regional Population Growth Trends .......................................................................II-1 

Age Distribution ......................................................................................................II-2 

Racial and Ethnic Composition ...............................................................................II-3 

Household Characteristics ......................................................................................II-9 

Special Needs Groups .......................................................................................... II-11 

HUD Income Categories ....................................................................................... II-17 

Median Household Income .................................................................................. II-17 

Income Distribution ............................................................................................... II-17 

Income Distribution by Owner/Renter Tenure ....................................................... II-18 

Income Level by Household Type ......................................................................... II-18 

Median Income by Race/Ethnicity ......................................................................... II-19 

Regional Housing Growth Trends ......................................................................... II-21 

Housing Types ...................................................................................................... II-22 

Bedroom Mix by Tenure........................................................................................ II-22 

Age of Housing Stock by Tenure .......................................................................... II-24 

Overcrowded Households ..................................................................................... II-25 

Housing Overpayment by Tenure ......................................................................... II-26 

Santa Monica Home and Condominium Sales Prices ........................................... II-28 

Santa Monica Apartment Rents ............................................................................ II-29 

Maximum Affordable Housing Cost ....................................................................... II-30 

Maximum Affordable Rents ................................................................................... II-31 

SMHA Rent Payment Standards ........................................................................... II-32 

Characteristics of Rental Assistance Voucher Recipients ..................................... II-33 

Licensed Residential Care Facilities .................................................................... II-38 

Employment Profile ............................................................................................... II-42 

Major Employers ................................................................................................... II-43 

Discrimination Cases .............................................................................................III-4 

FBI Hate Crime Statistics .......................................................................................III-8 

IV-1 Residential Development Standards ..................................................................... IV-2 

IV-2 Permitted Housing Types by Zoning Category ..................................................... IV-7 

IV-3 Residential Relocation Fee Amounts ................................................................. IV-19 

IV-4 Status of Home Purchase, Refinance and Home Improvement Loans ............... IV-35 

IV-5 Home Purchase, Refinance and Home Improvement Loans .............................. IV-38 

IV-6 Status of Loans by Applicant Characteristics ..................................................... IV-39 

IV-7 Status of Loans by Census Tract Characteristics ............................................... IV-40 

IV-8 Home Loan Denial Rates by Census Tract ........................................................ IV-41 

IV-9 Ten Most Active Mortgage Lenders in Santa Monica ......................................... IV-45 

IV-10 Residential Loan Applications - Select Lending Institutions ................................. IV-46 

IV-11 CRA Ratings for Major Lending Institutions Active in Santa Monica .................. IV-47 

IV-12 The Cost of Foreclosures .................................................................................. IV-56 

V-1 Status of 2005 AI Impediments ............................................................................. V-9 



iii 


FIGURES 

Figure 

Page 

1 Minority Concentration ............................................................................................ II-4 

2 Hispanic Concentration .......................................................................................... II-5 

3 African-American Concentration ............................................................................. II-6 

4 Asian Concentration ............................................................................................... II-7 

5 Households with Children ..................................................................................... II-10 

6 Senior Households ............................................................................................... II-12 

7 Low and Moderate-Income Areas ........................................................................ II-20 

8 Renter-Occupied Housing Units ........................................................................... II-23 

9 Distribution of Rental Assistance Vouchers ......................................................... II-35 

10 Assisted Affordable Rental Housing .................................................................... II-37 

11 Licensed Community Care Facilities .................................................................... II-39 

12 Employment Access ............................................................................................. II-41 

13 Census Tracts with Higher than Average Loan Denials ..................................... IV-43 



iv 




A. WHAT IS THE AI? 

The Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, or “AI” for short, is a component of the 

fair housing requirement of the Consolidated Plan and Community Development Block 

Grant (CDBG) Regulations. As part of the Consolidated Plan, federal grantees such as 

Santa Monica must submit a certification which requires them to undertake Fair Housing 

Planning through: 

‣ Completion of an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) 

‣ Actions to eliminate identified impediments 

‣ Maintenance of fair housing records 

The AI reviews both public and private sector regulations, conditions or other possible 

obstacles that may impact access to fair housing choice, and involves: 

‣ A comprehensive review of Santa Monica's laws, regulations, and administrative 

policies, procedures, and practices; 

‣ An assessment of how those laws affect the location, availability, and 

accessibility of housing; and 

‣ An assessment of conditions, both public and private, affecting fair housing 

choice. 

Based on this assessment, the AI establishes an action plan to address identified fair 

housing impediments. 

B. DEFINING FAIR HOUSING 

HUD defines fair housing as follows: 

Fair housing is a condition in which individuals of similar income levels in the same 

housing market have a like range of choice available to them regardless of race, 

color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, 

or any other arbitrary factor. 

HUD draws an important distinction between household income, housing affordability and 

fair housing. Economic factors that impact housing choice are not fair housing issues per 

se. Only when the relationship between household income combined with other factors - 

such as household type or race/ethnicity - create misconceptions and biases do they 

become a fair housing issue. 


TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE E-1 



Tenant/landlord disputes are also not typically fair housing issues, generally resulting from 

inadequate understanding by the parties on their rights and responsibilities. Such disputes 

only become fair housing issues when they are based on factors protected by fair housing 

laws and result in differential treatment. 

The purpose of this report is to identify impediments to fair and equal housing opportunities. 

HUD’s Fair Housing Planning Guide defines an impediment as follows: 

‣ Any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, ancestry, 

national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, or any other 

arbitrary factor which restrict housing choices or the availability of housing 

choices; or 

‣ Any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing 

choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, 



To affirmatively promote equal housing opportunity, a community must work to remove 

impediments to fair housing choice. 

C. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 

Input from public and private agencies has played an invaluable role in providing insight into 

fair housing issues in Santa Monica during development of the AI. To ensure the AI 

responds to community concerns, an outreach program was conducted consisting of the 

following: 

‣ A consultation workshop with affordable housing providers, agencies 

representing special needs populations, the real estate community and key City 

Departments 

‣ Presentations before the following City Commissions and solicitation of 

Commissioner input: 

o Commission for the Senior Community 

o Housing Commission 

o Disabilities Commission 

o Commission on the Status of Women 

o Social Services Commission 

‣ Interviews with key service providers and housing industry representatives 

‣ Interviews with five most active mortgage lenders in Santa Monica 





D. SUMMARY OF REPORT CONCLUSIONS/FINDINGS 

The following summarizes the key findings from the AI: 

1. Community Profile 

‣ While Santa Monica’s population remains predominately White (70% in 2010), 

different racial and ethnic groups evidence areas of concentration, defined as 

census block groups which exceed the countywide average of a particular group. 

A small area of Hispanic concentration is located between Pico and the 10 

freeway 

African American concentrations are present along the Olympic corridor 

from 23 rd street to Pacific Coast Highway. 

Concentrations of Asian households exist in several census block groups 

located north and west of the Santa Monica Airport. 

‣ An estimated 760 Spanish speaking households and 750 Asian speaking 

households in Santa Monica are linguistically isolated. Such households are 

defined as ones in which all members over the age of 14 have some difficulty in 

speaking or understanding the English language. Language barriers may 

prevent these residents from accessing services, information and housing, as 

well as impacting educational attainment and employment. 

‣ An estimated 16 percent of Santa Monica’s population has some type of 

disability, encompassing physical, mental and developmental disabilities. The 

living arrangements for persons with disabilities depends on the severity of the 

condition, and ranges from independent living to specialized care environments 

(group housing). Without an inventory of accessible units, it is often difficult for 

disabled individuals and organizations to locate suitable housing in the 

community. 

‣ Senior citizens comprise 20 percent of Santa Monica’s households. 60 percent 

of the City’s senior households live alone, 58 percent are renters, and 40 percent 

of seniors have a disability. Seniors face housing needs related to housing 

maintenance, accessibility, and cost. Many elderly are on limited, fixed incomes 

and are particularly vulnerable to rent increases and other changes in living 

expenses. 

‣ While Hispanics, African-Americans, persons with disabilities and seniors are all 

well represented in SMHA rental assistance programs, Asians are 

underrepresented relative to their presence in the community. With 1,400 

households receiving rental assistance vouchers, approximately 18 percent of 

Santa Monica’s eligible renter population is served by rental assistance 

vouchers, compared with just two percent of the eligible Asian renter population.. 

‣ Since 1999 when Costa-Hawkins allowed vacancy decontrol of rent controlled 

units, 61 percent of Santa Monica’s 28,000 units subject to Rent Control have 

undergone tenant turnover and re-rented at market rate. Rents on decontrolled- 





recontrolled units are roughly double that of long-term controlled units, and are 

well above the level affordable to even moderate income (120% AMI) 

households. 

‣ Nearly 200 units in Santa Monica are in various states of foreclosure (July 

2012), and with adjusting mortgage interest rates and a slow economic recovery, 

the level of foreclosure activity is projected to remain significant. However, new 

foreclosure filings in Santa Monica are well below the ratio evidenced in other 

Westside communities relative each jurisdiction’s total housing stock, 

‣ An over-concentration of residential care facilities can be a fair housing 

concern if that over-concentration is limited to a certain area of the City. 

Residential care facilities are generally dispersed throughout Santa Monica, 

providing these types of supportive housing services in most areas of the 

community. 

‣ Santa Monica is very well served by public transit provided by the Big Blue and 

Mini Blue bus lines. Major employers, community facilities, and assisted housing 

are located within close proximity to transit routes. 

2. Fair Housing Profile 

‣ The Consumer Protection Unit within the City Attorney’s Office, the Rent Control 

Board, the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of Realtors, and the 

Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles conduct extensive fair housing 

education and outreach. As the Consumer Protection Unit reports that small 

property managers/owners are generally the major violators of fair housing laws, 

targeted outreach to this group remains critical. 

‣ Due to their specific housing needs, persons with disabilities are vulnerable to 

discrimination by landlords who many not understand the reasonable 

accommodation protections contained in the Federal Fair Housing Act. Given 

the continued prevalence of discrimination complaints from disabled households, 

there is a continued need to educate landlords on reasonable accommodation. 

‣ The race-based rental housing audit confirmed differential treatment to African 

Americans in one of four tests. An additional audit is being conducted to test 

differential treatment to families with children. The City will tailor its fair housing 

education program to address the results of the audits and any identified patterns 

of discrimination. 

3. Review of Potential Impediments 

Public Sector Impediments 

‣ While the City provides for senior housing in all its multi-family and most 

commercial zones, the age threshold for senior housing is identified as 60 years 

or older in the Zoning Code. In contrast, the Fair Housing Act and Unruh Civil 





Rights Act establish a threshold of 62 years of age for senior housing to be 

exempt from familial status protections, or 55 years of age in a senior citizen 

housing development (35+ dwelling units). 

‣ The City does not currently have written procedures in place to allow for 

deviations from development standards, building codes, or permit procedures to 

provide a reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities. 

‣ The Zoning Code does not contain a definition of disability, although specific 

disabilities are mentioned as part of a use definition, such as “terminally ill 

(hospice definition) and chronic illness/infirmity (nursing home definition). Under 

the Fair Housing Act, persons with disabilities (or handicaps) are defined as 

“individuals with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or 

more major life activities; has a record of such impairment; or is regarded as 

having such impairment.” 

‣ With the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, redevelopment funds will 

no longer be available to support Santa Monica’s affordable housing activities, 

impeding the City’s efforts to expand housing choice among lower and moderate 

income households. 

‣ Rent Control Board staff recognize that Hispanic households are 

underrepresented in the Rent Control program: the 2006 Santa Monica Tenant 

Survey identifies 6.3% of rent-controlled households as Hispanic, whereas the 

2010 Census indicates Hispanic householders comprise 10.8% of the City’s 

renter households. In an effort to increase participation, the Rent Control Board 

has established a Spanish website and conducted targeted outreach to the 

Hispanic community. 

‣ The Section 8 payment standard in Santa Monica is well below market rent 

levels, and as a consequence some landlords are not willing to accept the lower 

rents associated with Section 8 tenants. This has led to heightened competition 

for available Section 8 rentals and a longer time period for voucher holders to 

secure Section 8 units. 

Private Sector Impediments 

‣ While Santa Monica residents have good access to financing for home 

mortgage, refinance and home improvement loans, lower cost governmentbacked 

FHA loans continue to comprise a very small proportion of mortgage loan 

applications (5% FHA loans in Santa Monica in 2010, compared to 40% 

countywide). 

‣ Hispanic applicants for mortgage and refinance loans evidenced a loan denial 

rate of 31% in Santa Monica, 10% above other racial groups in the City and 6% 

above Hispanics countywide. 





‣ Review of loan status by census tract over the past five years identifies several 

areas with loan denial rates of five percent or above Citywide averages. Census 

tracts 7018.01, 7018.02, 7017.01 and 7014.02 all exhibit recent trends of higher 

than average loan denials and are characterized by high minority and/or low/mod 

populations. 

‣ The issue of subprime/high cost loans in Santa Monica is fairly non-existent. 

None of the home purchase loans made in 200 were high cost loans, and just 

two of the 1,525 refinance loans met the “high cost” threshold. 

‣ Similar to most communities, home improvement loans in Santa Monica had a 

relatively high loan denial rate (33%). Coordination with local lenders to direct 

loan applicants to the City’s rehabilitation programs could assist eligible 

households in making needed home improvements. 

‣ Predatory mortgage lending refers to the practice of making high-cost home 

loans to borrowers without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay the loan. As 

predatory lending has increased, both the federal government and State of 

California, among others, have enacted regulations in an effort to curtail 

predatory practices. The City of Santa Monica supports these actions to help low 

income and minority borrowers to avoid the pitfalls of predatory lending. 

‣ An area of lending currently subject to abuse is loan modifications for 

homeowners at-risk of foreclosure. The Housing Rights Center (HRC) – the 

largest fair housing provider in the county - reports a high volume of its calls are 

from homeowners reporting “mortgage rescue fraud,” having paid hundreds and 

even thousands of dollars to consultants who are often ineffective for a service 

provided free of charge through HUD-certified mortgage counseling agencies. 

‣ Another area of concern is the plight of existing tenants in properties 

undergoing foreclosure. While Federal legislation now provides tenants the 

right to remain in their homes for 90 days after foreclosure, HRC reports that 

some realtors representing the lenders in bank-owned properties are not 

sufficiently well versed on tenant’s rights. 

‣ Despite the City’s repeated urging, the Santa Monica Daily Press and the Santa 

Monica Mirror do not currently publish a fair housing disclaimer in their 

classified sections. Neither the LA Times or these two local newspapers include 

any type of disclaimer regarding exceptions to no pet policies in units advertised 

for rent for disabled persons requiring a service or companion animal. 





E. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TO ADDRESS IMPEDIMENTS 

The following actions are recommended to further fair housing choice in Santa Monica, and 

are primarily implemented by the Consumer Protection Unit within the City Attorney’s Office. 

1. Education and Outreach Activities 

Action 1.1: Continue the proactive fair housing outreach to Santa Monica 

residents, apartment owners/managers and realtors conducted through the 

Consumer Protection Unit. Continue co-sponsorship of fair housing workshops with 

the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, the Beverly Hills/Greater Los 

Angeles Association of Realtors, the Housing Rights Center and other community 

partners to maximize the effectiveness of fair housing education and outreach. 

Action 1.2: Conduct focused outreach and education to small property 

owners/landlords on fair housing, and familial status and reasonable accommodation 

issues in particular. Conduct property manager workshops within Santa Monica on 

an annual basis, targeting managers of smaller properties and Section 8 landlords, 

and promote fair housing certification training offered through HRC. 

Action 1.3: Coordinate with the Rent Control Board’s outreach to tenants and 

landlords to incorporate information on fair housing. 

Action 1.4: Conduct targeted outreach to Hispanic households to solicit 

participation in the Rent Control Program. Re-evaluate and expand previous 

outreach techniques with the goal of gaining greater involvement. 

Action 1.5: Further evaluate the under-representation of Asian households in 

SMHA Rental Assistance Voucher Programs. As warranted, conduct targeted 

outreach as defined in the Administrative Plan. 

Action 1.6: Designate a staff disability coordinator at City Hall to assist disabled 

residents in reasonable accommodation, locating accessible units, accessibility 

grants, etc. 

2. Enforcement Activities 

Action 2.1: Continue to provide investigation and response to allegations of illegal 

housing discrimination through the Consumer Protection Unit. For cases which 

cannot be conciliated, refer to the Department of Fair Housing and Employment 

(DFEH), U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), small claims 

court, or to a private attorney, as warranted. 

Action 2.2: On an annual basis, review discrimination complaints to assess 

Santa Monica trends and patterns over time, and tailor fair housing education and 

outreach accordingly. 





Action 2.3: Continue to enforce (and make the public aware) of the City’s antihousing 

discrimination policies in the Municipal Code (Chapter 4.28, Families with 

Children; Chapter 4.40, Sexual Orientation or Domestic Partnership; and Chapter 

4,52, Persons Living with AIDS). 

Action 2.4: Continue to enforce and promote Santa Monica’s just cause eviction 

and tenant harassment laws which offer protections to tenants in buildings 

regardless of rent control status. 

Action 2.5: Continue to offer counsel to tenants and landlords regarding rights 

and responsibilities under State and City codes through the Consumer Protection 

Unit, and mediate disputes arising from rent control law through the Rent Control 

Board. Provide referrals to The Center for Civic Mediation, Legal Aid and other 

agencies for issues outside the City’s purview. 

Action 2.6: Coordinate review of hate crime data on an annual basis between the 

Santa Monica Police Department and City Attorney’s Office, and evaluate as a 

potential fair housing issue. When appropriate, refer victims to the County Hate 

Crime Victim Assistance & Advocacy Initiative. 

3. Monitoring Lending, Housing Providers, and Local Real Estate Practices 

Action 3.1: Coordinate with the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of 

Realtors in conducting outreach on predatory mortgage lending practices, loan 

modification scams, and the rights of tenants in foreclosed properties. Disseminate a 

Fact Sheet via the City’s website and in public locations throughout the community. 

Action 3.2: Monitor mortgage loan denial rates among Hispanic households and 

in census tracts with higher than average loan denials and high minority and/or 

low/mod populations (tracts 7018.01, 7018.02, 7017.01 and 7014.02) through annual 

review of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data. Contact the City’s major 

mortgage lenders to discuss the City’s concerns. 

Action 3.3: Follow-up with Santa Monica’s major mortgage lenders to discuss 

opportunities for expanded marketing of: 

Lower cost, government-backed mortgage products 

Available first-time homebuyer education and loan products 

Foreclosure prevention programs 

Transfer of REOs to non-profits for affordable housing 

Action 3.4: Contact local lenders to request they direct applicants ineligible for 

privately financed home improvement loans to the City’s rehabilitation loan program. 

Action 3.5: Continue to encourage the Santa Monica Mirror and Santa Monica 

Daily Press to publish a fair housing disclaimer with reference to City fair housing 

services, and encourage these newspapers, as well as the LA Times, to publish a 

“no pets” disclaimer. 





Action 3.6: Continue to include non-discriminatory and fair housing language in 

all City affordable housing contracts and agreements. Enforce the Affirmative 

Marketing Policies that are required as part of HOME-assisted rental developments. 

4. Investigative Testing and Auditing Local Real Estate Markets 

Action 4.1: Conduct rental audits and/or testing to evaluate apparent patterns of 

discrimination related to race, familial status and disability. To the extent such audits 

reveal significant discrimination, widely publicize the results and require remediation 

to serve as a deterrent to other property owners and landlords. 

5. Land Use Policies to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing 

Action 5.1: Amend the current 60 year age threshold for senior housing in the 

Zoning Code to be consistent with those in the Fair Housing Act and Unruh Civil 

Rights Act. These Acts reference a 62 year age threshold, or 55 year threshold in a 

senior citizen housing development (35+ dwelling units) for allowing a senior housing 

exemption to the law’s familial status requirements. 

Action 5.2: Incorporate the following definition of “disability” within the Zoning Code 

consistent with the Fair Housing Ac:. “individuals with physical or mental impairments 

that substantially limit one or more major life activities; has a record of such 

impairment; or is regarded as having such impairment.” 

Action 5.3: Develop and adopt reasonable accommodation procedures to facilitate 

accessibility improvement requests through modifications in zoning (including use 

permissions and development standards), building codes, and permit processing 

procedures. 

Action 5.4: Develop an inventory of publicly-assisted accessible units in Santa 

Monica and make available on the City’s website for use by interested parties. 

Encourage apartment owners utilizing the Rent Control Board’s Apartment Listing 

Service to identify accessible units. 

6. Increasing Geographic Choice in Housing 

Action 6.1: Continue to provide financial and regulatory incentives to facilitate the 

provision of affordable housing throughout the community, particularly in locations 

near transit and services that promote walkability Provide affordable and accessible 

housing to special needs populations, including the disabled, seniors and persons atrisk 

of homelessness. 

Action 6.2: Support the integration of affordable units within market rate projects 

through implementation of the Affordable Housing Production (inclusionary) 

Program. 

Action 6.3: Pursue alternative funding sources for affordable housing activities 

previously funded through the Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency, including 





replacement funding for the 70 families assisted under the former Redevelopment 

Agency’s Rental Assistance Program. 

Action 6.4: If eligible, apply to HUD for an increase in the Section 8 payment 

standard to provide greater parity with market rents. Evaluate adoption of an 

ordinance prohibiting discrimination against Section 8 voucher holders. 




INTRODUCTION 

I. INTRODUCTION 

A. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is committed to eliminating 

racial and ethnic segregation and other discriminatory practices in housing, and will use all 

the programmatic and enforcement tools available to achieve this goal. The fundamental 

goal of the Department’s fair housing policy is to make housing choice a reality through Fair 

Housing Planning (FHP). 

As part of the Consolidated Plan, and pursuant to federal regulations (24 CFR 

§570.601(a)(2) and 24 CFR 91.225(a)) grantees such as Santa Monica must submit a 

certification which requires them to undertake fair housing planning through: 

‣ Completion of an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) 

‣ Actions to eliminate identified impediments 

‣ Maintenance of fair housing records 

This report constitutes the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) for the City 

of Santa Monica. The AI is a review of impediments to fair housing choice in the public and 

private sectors, and involves: 

‣ A comprehensive review of Santa Monica's laws, regulations, and 

administrative policies, procedures, and practices; 

‣ An assessment of how those laws affect the location, availability, and 

accessibility of housing; and 

‣ An assessment of conditions, both public and private, affecting fair housing 

choice. 

The scope of analysis and the format used for this AI adhere to recommendations contained 

in the 1998 Fair Housing Planning Guide developed by the U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD). 

B. DEFINING FAIR HOUSING 

HUD defines fair housing as follows: 

Fair housing is a condition in which individuals of similar income levels in the same 

housing market have a like range of choice available to them regardless of race, color, 

ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, or any 

other arbitrary factor. 

HUD draws an important distinction between household income, housing affordability and 

fair housing. Economic factors that impact housing choice are not fair housing issues per 

se. Only when the relationship between household income combined with other factors - 


TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE I-1 


INTRODUCTION 

such as household type or race/ethnicity - create misconceptions and biases do they 

become a fair housing issue. 

Tenant/landlord disputes are also not typically fair housing issues, generally resulting from 

inadequate understanding by the parties on their rights and responsibilities. Such disputes 

only become fair housing issues when they are based on factors protected by fair housing 

laws and result in differential treatment. 

The purpose of this report is to identify impediments to fair and equal housing opportunities. 

HUD’s Fair Housing Planning Guide defines an impediment as follows: 

‣ Any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, ancestry, 

national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, or any 

other arbitrary factor which restrict housing choices or the availability of 

housing choices; or 

‣ Any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting 

housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, 

color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial 

status, or any other arbitrary factor. 

To affirmatively promote equal housing opportunity, a community must work to remove 

impediments to fair housing choice. 

C. ORGANIZATION OF REPORT 

The Santa Monica AI contains the following five chapters: 

I. Introduction. This chapter defines “fair housing” and explains the purpose of the report. 

II. Community Profile. This chapter presents the demographic, housing, and income 

characteristics of Santa Monica residents. An analysis of accessibility of transit to 

community facilities and major employment centers is also included. The purpose of this 

section is to provide a broad overview and understanding of the community so that housing 

needs are clearly defined. 

III. Current Fair Housing Profile. This chapter evaluates the fair housing and tenant/landlord 

services available to residents and identifies fair housing complaints and discrimination 

issues in Santa Monica. A summary is provided of public comments received from the City’s 

community outreach efforts. 

IV. Review of Potential Impediments. This chapter begins with an analysis of public policies 

that may impede fair housing choice, such as zoning regulations, building and accessibility 

codes, and representation on City Commissions. The chapter then goes on to evaluate 

potential private sector impediments, including an in-depth analysis of mortgage lending 

activity and the specific fair lending related activities of the City’s top 5 mortgage lenders. 




INTRODUCTION 

V. Findings and Recommendations. This chapter summarizes the major findings from the 

prior sections and provides recommended actions to further fair housing in Santa Monica. A 

review of the City’s actions to address impediments identified in the prior 2007/08 AI is also 

provided. 

A summary matrix of the AIs actions is included in Appendix D, and constitutes the City’s 

2012-2016 Fair Housing Action Plan. This matrix can be used as part of Santa Monica’s 

annual reporting to HUD in its Consolidated Annual Performance Report (CAPER). 

D. DATA SOURCES 

The following data sources were used to complete this AI. Sources of specific information 

are identified in the text, tables, and figures. 

‣ 1990, 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census 

‣ 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 

‣ 2008-2013 Santa Monica Consolidated Plan 

‣ 2008-2014 Santa Monica Housing Element 

‣ City of Santa Monica Municipal Code 

‣ 2000 HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Databook 

‣ Dataquick housing sales activity data, 2011 

‣ Santa Monica Housing Authority, Rental Assistance Voucher data 

‣ Santa Monica Housing Authority, Administrative Plan 2011 

‣ Rent Control Annual Report 

‣ Impact of Market Rate Vacancy Increases, 12th Year Report 

‣ State Dept. of Social Services, Community Care Licensing, 2011 

‣ Santa Monica Consumer Protection Unit, Discrimination Case data 

‣ Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data on lending patterns in 2010 

E. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 

Input from public and private agencies has played an invaluable role in providing insight into 

fair housing issues in Santa Monica during development of the AI. 

A consultation workshop was conducted with affordable housing providers, agencies 

representing special needs populations, the real estate community and key City 

Departments to discuss potential impediments to fair housing, and to brainstorm potential 

strategies for the City and its community partners to address. Approximately 20 agencies 

and City Departments were invited, with the following in attendance: 

Agencies 

CLARE Foundation 

Community Corporation of Santa Monica 

Ocean Park Community Corporation 

Realtor, Rent Control Board 

St. Joseph Center 

Westside Center for Independent Living 

Westside Regional Center 

City Departments 

City Attny’s Office, Consumer Protection Unit 

Housing Division 

Santa Monica Housing Authority 

Rent Control Department 

Human Services Division 




INTRODUCTION 

In addition to the workshop, the Housing Division and AI consultant met with the following 

City Commissions to discuss fair housing issues: 

‣ Commission for the Senior Community 

‣ Housing Commission 

‣ Disabilities Commission 

‣ Commission on the Status of Women 

‣ Social Services Commission 

A summary of the comments received at the consultation workshop and commission 

meetings is included in Section III.C of this report. 

The Draft AI will be made available for public review for a period of 30 days, from August 22 

to September 20, 2012, and is available on the City’s website, at City Hall and at the 

Housing Division offices. The Housing Commission will conduct a public meeting on 

September 20 th to discuss the AI, followed by a public hearing before the City Council in 

November, providing residents and other interested parties a final opportunity to comment 

on the AI prior to adoption. 

F. PREPARERS OF THE REPORT 

This report has been prepared through a collaborative effort between Santa Monica Housing 

Division staff, staff from the Consumer Protection Unit of the City Attorney’s Office, and 

Karen Warner Associates, Inc. under contract to the City of Santa Monica. 





II. COMMUNITY PROFILE 

Section II provides background information on demographics, housing, employment, 

community facilities, and transportation services in Santa Monica. All of these factors can 

affect housing choice and the type of fair housing issues a community may encounter. 

A. DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 

Demographic changes, such as rapid population growth or changes in the racial/ethnic 

composition of a community may affect a household’s access to housing or raise fair 

housing concerns. Thus, this section of the AI provides an overview of the population, 

including the age, race and ethnic characteristics of Santa Monica residents. 

1. Population Trends 

Located on the Pacific Ocean, Santa Monica is one of the most densely populated urban 

areas in California. Consisting of 8.3 square miles, the city has grown from a population of 

1,580 in 1890 to a population of 89,736 as of the 2010 Census. 

Table II-1 presents population growth trends since 1980 for Santa Monica, and compares 

this growth to other Westside jurisdictions and the City and County of Los Angeles. For 

each decade between 1980 and 2000, Santa Monica experienced a slight decrease in its 

population. The smaller comparison cities also had low or negative growth rates between 

1980 and 2000, with the exception of Beverly Hills which evidenced a 5.7 percent increase 

in population during the 1990’s. However, since 2000, Santa Monica has experienced an 

increase of 5,652 people or 6.7 percent. This is a higher percentage than the smaller 

comparison cities as well as both the City and County of Los Angeles during that same 

period of time. Most of Santa Monica’s growth has occurred as lower-density land uses 

have been recycled to higher-density uses, as well as significant residential development in 

its commercial zones. 

Table II-1: Regional Population Growth Trends 

Jurisdiction 1980 1990 2000 2010 

1980- 

1990 

Percent Change 

1990- 

2000 

2000- 

2010 

Santa Monica 88,314 86,905 84,084 89,736 -1.6% -3.2% 6.7% 

Beverly Hills 32,367 31,971 33,784 34,109 -1.2% 5.7% 1.0% 

Culver City 38,139 38,793 38,816 38,883 1.7% 0.1% 0.2% 

West Hollywood* * 36,118 35,716 34,399 n/a -1.1% -3.7% 

Los Angeles City 2,966,850 3,485,398 3,694,820 3,792,621 17.5% 6.0% 2.6% 

Los Angeles County 7,477,503 8,863,164 9,519,338 9,818,605 18.5% 7.4% 3.1% 

Source: U.S. Census 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2010 

*West Hollywood did not become an incorporated City until1984. 



II-1 



2. Age Characteristics 

Santa Monica’s housing needs are determined largely by the age characteristics of 

residents. For instance, each age group has distinct lifestyles, family type and size, income 

levels, and housing preferences. As people move through each stage, their housing need 

and preferences also change. As a result, evaluating the age characteristics of a community 

is an important factor in addressing housing needs of residents. 

Table II-2 illustrates the age characteristics of residents in 1990, 2000 and 2010. Between 

1990-2010, most age groups in Santa Monica remained fairly consistent in both number and 

percentage of total population with the exception of Young Adults and Middle Age. 

Like many communities nationwide, Santa Monica’s population is growing older, as 

evidenced by a continued increase in the median age from 37.9 years (1990) to 39.3 years 

(2000) to 40.4 years (2010). Over the past two decades, the Young Adults age group 

experienced a significant decline of 4,623 persons or 12 percent; while the Middle Age 

group experienced a significant increase of 7,582 persons or 44 percent. Middle-aged adults 

typically prefer larger homes as they form families and raise children. Seniors typically live in 

single-family homes, but may begin to require more supportive housing options as they age 

and become more frail. Senior citizens can be expected to continue to comprise a growing 

segment of Santa Monica’s population as the City’s middle age “baby boomers” (45 to 64) 

age in place. This anticipated shift in the age demographic could lead to less pressure on 

the housing market for larger homes and greater need for smaller, more affordable rental 

and ownership housing. 

Table II-2: Age Characteristics and Trends 

1990-2010 

1990 2000 2010 

Age Group 

Change 

Persons % Persons % Persons % Persons % 

Preschool (


3. Race and Ethnicity 

A person’s racial or ethnic background can, in some cases, affect his or her ability to find 

housing, obtain home financing, or have unrestricted access to the housing of their choice. 

Table II-3 illustrates the relative stability of Santa Monica’s racial and ethnic population. 

The 2010 Census documents that White persons continue to make up the majority of Santa 

Monica’s population, comprising approximately 70 percent of City residents in comparison to 

just 28 percent Countywide. Over the most recent decade, only the Asian/Pacific Islander 

racial/ethnic category showed a significant increase in both actual number (2,033 persons) 

and proportion (from 7% to 9%). Though the White population increased by 2,435 persons 

during this same period, the percentage of Whites to the total population declined from 72 to 

70 percent. Similarly, the Hispanic population increased by 412 persons, remaining at 13 

percent and the African American population increased by 283 persons maintaining four 

percent of the population. 

Table II-3: Racial and Ethnic Composition 

1990 2000 2010 

Racial/Ethnic Group 

LA Co. 

Persons Percent Persons Percent Persons Percent 

% 

White 65,337 75% 60,482 72% 62,917 70% 28% 

Asian/Pacific Islander 5,364 6% 6,043 7% 8,076 9% 14% 

Hispanic 11,842 14% 11,304 13% 11,716 13% 48% 

African American 3,842 4% 3,081 4% 3,364 4% 8% 

Other Race 532

Figure 1. 

SAN VICENTE 

P a c i f i c O c e a n 


PALISADES BEACH 

SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

1 

7012.01 

LINCOLN 

3 

2 

SANTA MONICA SANTA MONICA 

PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

7013.04 4 

1 

1 

2 

1 3 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

7013.02 

2 

7015.01 

2 

1 

3 

3 2 

7015.02 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

4 3 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 

Municipal Santa Monica 

2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 

4 

2 2 

3 

5 5 

4 3 

7022.02 3 

Crescent 

4 

Bay Park 7020.02 

6 1 

2 

1 

5 3 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 2 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

7013.02 

4 

3 

1 

OCEAN 

MONTANA 

OCEAN 

20TH 20TH 

MONTANA 

COLORADO COLORADO 

1 

1 

20TH 

BUNDY 


MINORITY CONCENTRATION 

2010 Census 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

Concentration (Exceeds L.A. County 

Average of 72.2%) 

Census Tract 

Census Block Group 

Source: U.S. Census 2010 

DIVERSA CONSULTING 101711

Figure 2. 

SAN VICENTE 




SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

1 

7012.01 

LINCOLN 

3 

2 


PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

7013.04 4 

1 

1 

2 

1 3 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

7013.02 

2 

7015.01 

2 

1 

3 

3 2 

7015.02 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

4 3 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 

4 

2 2 

3 

5 5 

4 3 

7022.02 3 

Crescent 

4 


6 1 

2 

1 

5 3 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 2 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

7013.02 

4 

3 

1 

OCEAN 

20TH 20TH 

MONTANA MONTANA 

OCEAN 


1 

1 

20TH 

BUNDY 


HISPANIC CONCENTRATION 

2010 Census 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 



Census Tract 




Figure 3. 

SAN VICENTE 




SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

1 

7012.01 

LINCOLN 

3 

2 


PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

7013.04 4 

1 

1 

2 

1 3 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

7013.02 

2 

7015.01 

2 

1 

3 

3 2 

701502 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

4 3 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 

4 

2 2 

3 

5 5 

4 3 

7022.02 3 

Crescent 

4 


6 1 

2 

1 

5 3 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 2 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

7013.02 Census Tract 

4 

3 Census Block Group 

1 

OCEAN 

20TH 20TH 


OCEAN 

COLORADO 

1 

1 

COLORADO 

20TH 


AFRICAN-AMERICAN CONCENTRATION 

2010 Census 

BUNDY 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 





Figure 4. 

SAN VICENTE 




SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

1 

7012.01 

LINCOLN 

3 

2 


PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

7013.04 4 

1 

1 

2 

1 3 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

7013.02 

2 

7015.01 

2 

1 

3 

3 2 

7015.02 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

4 3 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 

4 

2 2 

3 

5 5 

4 3 

7022.02 3 

Crescent 

4 


6 1 

2 

1 

5 3 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 2 

0 0.5 1 Miles 


4 


1 

OCEAN 

20TH 20TH 


OCEAN 


1 

1 

20TH 

BUNDY 


ASIAN CONCENTRATION 

2010 Census 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 






a. Household Language and Linguistic Isolation 

The 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates that approximately 23 

percent of residents in Santa Monica were foreign born. A linguistically isolated household 

is one in which all members over 14 years of age has some difficulty with speaking or 

understanding the English language. In Santa Monica, 3,990 households spoke Spanish 

(8.6 percent of all households), of which 19 percent were linguistically isolated (Spanishspeaking 

only). Of Santa Monica’s 2,499 households that spoke Asian languages, the ACS 

estimates that 30 percent were linguistically isolated. 

Language barriers may prevent residents from accessing services, information and housing, 

and may also effect educational attainment and employment. Executive Order #13166 

(“Improving Access to Services by Persons with Limited English Proficiency”) was issued in 

2000, requiring federal agencies to assess and address the needs of otherwise eligible 

persons seeking access to federally conducted programs and activities who, due to Limited 

English Proficiency (LEP), cannot fully and equally participate in or benefit from those 

programs and activities. This requirement passes down to grantees of federal funds as well, 

and thus as a federal entitlement jurisdiction, Santa Monica is responsible for ensuring 

compliance with this regulation. 

In order to ensure equal access to LEP persons for the planning and program 

implementation of the federal CDBG program, the City of Santa Monica provides public 

notices and program applications in both English and Spanish. In addition, translators are 

available at all public meetings and available to respond to questions pertaining to draft and 

final documents prepared as part of the CDBG program, including the Consolidated Plan, 

Annual Action Plan, CAPER, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI). 

The Santa Monica Housing Authority (SMHA) has prepared a Language Assistance Plan 

(LAP) as part of its 2012 Administrative Plan. The LAP identifies the following resources 

that SMHA staff will continue to make available to LEP individuals and families: 

• Bilingual staff in designated positions to provide oral translation services 

• Program documents translated into Spanish 

• HUD website (www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/promotingfh/lep.cfm) containing LEP 

documents 

In addition, the SMHA will: 

• List the telephone extension on all notices addressing language assistance. 

• Utilize language identification flashcards to assist limited English proficient 

individuals to inform staff of the language they are most comfortable using to 

communicate. 

• Utilize signage in the lobby of the Housing Authority and on the website informing the 

public of translation and interpreter service. 

• Inquire as to the need for, and provide qualified interpreter assistance for all required 

group meetings (i.e. briefings) at no cost to the participant 



II-8 



B. HOUSEHOLD PROFILE 

Household type, composition and size, and the presence of special needs populations are 

all factors that can affect access to housing in a community. This section identifies the 

characteristics of Santa Monica’s households. 

1. Household Type 

The 2010 Census identifies a total of 46,917 households in Santa Monica. As shown in 

Table II-4, the City has a very high 

proportion of single individuals living 

alone, comprising 48 percent of all 

households in the community. 

Families were 39 percent of total 

households, of which families with 

children were 41 percent (16 percent 

of total households). Other nonfamily 

households (i.e. roommates) 

comprise the remaining 13 percent of 

households residing in Santa Monica. 

Table II-4 also illustrates changes in 

the composition of Santa Monica 

households between 1990 and 2010. During this period, total households increased by 

2,057 or five percent, in contrast to “other” non-family households, which increased by 39 

percent, and singles, which increased by 21 percent. While total families actually declined 

by one percent, families with children increased by five percent. 

Figure 5 on the following page depicts concentrations of households with children. One 

census block group north of Pico and south of 20 th stands out as having both higher than 

average households with children (20-28.6%) and a high renter population (85-99.6%). 

Table II-4: Household Characteristics 

1990 2000 2010 Percent 

Household Type 

Change 

Hshlds % Hshlds % Hshlds % 

1990-2010 

Families 18,124 40% 16,783 38% 17,929 39% -1% 

With children 7,084 (39%) 7,045 (42%) 7,410 (41%) 5% 

Without children 11,040 (61%) 9,738 (58%) 10,519 (59%) -5% 

Singles 22,247 50% 22,786 51% 22,716 48% 21% 

Other non-families 4,519 10% 4,928 11% 6,272 13% 39% 

Total Households 44,860 100% 44,497 100% 46,917 100% 5% 

Householder Age 65+ 9,572 21% 8,113 18% 9,434 20% -1% 

Average Household Size 1.88 1.83 1.87 

Average Family Size 2.80 2.80 2.79 

Source: U.S. Census 1990, 2000 and 2010. 

Other 

nonfamilies, 

13% 

Singles, 

48% 

Families 

with 

Children, 

16% 

Families 

without 

Children, 

23% 



II-9 


Figure 5. 

SAN VICENTE 



SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 



1 

20TH 20TH 

7012.02 

3 

2 

PICO 

OLYMPIC 

OCEAN PARK 

2 

7016.01 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

1 

5 

3 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

4 

1 

7013.04 

1 

2 

2 1 

3 

', 10 

7013.02 

7018.01 2 

7015.01 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 

18 YEARS OF AGE 

4 

2 2 

3.9 - 9.9 

3 

10.0 15.8 

5 5 7022.02 

3 

3 

15.9 19.9 

4 

20.0 - 28.6 

Crescent 

4 


6 

1 

2 

1 

5 3 

7013.02 

2 

1 

3 

3 

2 

', 10 

3 

7015.02 

1 

2 

5 

4 

4 3 2 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 

3 

3 

4 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 

2 

3 

4 

1 

OCEAN 

PERCENT HOUSEHOLDS 

WITH CHILDREN UNDER 

City-wide Average: 16.7% 

MONTANA 

OCEAN 

COLORADO 

MONTANA 

1 

1 

COLORADO 

20TH 

BUNDY 


HOUSEHOLDS WITH 

CHILDREN UNDER 

18 YEARS OF AGE 

2010 Census 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

Census Tract 





2. Special Needs Populations 

Special needs populations include the elderly, persons with disabilities, female-headed 

families with children, persons with HIV/AIDS, victims of domestic violence and persons 

suffering from substance abuse. As a result of their special needs, these populations are 

more vulnerable to discrimination, which can limit their access to housing. This section 

discusses the housing needs facing each group, as summarized in Table II-5. 

Table II-5: Special Needs Groups 

Special Needs Groups Persons Households 

*Seniors (age 65+) 

Elderly Households 

Seniors Living Alone 

**Disabled Seniors 

12,078 

-- 

-- 

4,653 

-- 

9,434 

5,551 

-- 

Renter 

# (%) 

-- 

5,443 (58%) 

-- 

-- 

Owner 

# (%) 

-- 

4,001 

(42%) 

-- 

-- 

% of Total 

Households 

or Persons 

15% 

20% 

12% 

5% 

**Disabled Persons 13,202 16% 

4,097 

*Female Headed Hshlds 

18,857 14,760 (78%) 

40.2% 

(22%) 

**With Children 

1,885 1,338 (71%) 

4.0% 

547 (29%) 

*Large Households 1,419 670 (47%) 749 (53%) 3.0% 

Source: * Bureau of the Census (2010). ** Bureau of the Census (2000). 

a. Senior Households 

Many senior households (households headed by a senior person) have special housing 

needs due to income, location concerns, health care costs, and disabilities. According to the 

2010 Census, 20 percent of Santa Monica’s households are headed by seniors age 65 and 

older. The majority of Santa Monica’s senior households are renters (58%). 

Some of the special needs of Santa Monica’s seniors are as follows: 

• Disabilities. More than 38 percent of the City’s senior population have a disability. 

• Limited Income. Almost one-third of senior households earned extremely low or very 

low incomes. 

• Overpayment. More than 63 percent of senior renter-households and 31 percent of 

senior owner-households were overpaying for their housing (>30% income on 

housing costs) 

Figure 6 illustrates the percentage of senior households in Santa Monica by census block 

group. The highest concentrations of seniors are in single-family neighborhoods at the 

northern boundaries of the city, northwest of Montana. Senior renter households are 

concentrated in block groups along the southern boundary of the City, as well as between 

Wilshire and Montana where several affordable senior housing developments are located. 



II-11 


Figure 6. 

SAN VICENTE 



SAN VICENTE 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

20TH 20TH 

LINCOLN 



2 

MONTANA 

PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

7013.04 4 

1 

1 

2 

2 1 3 

7018.01 

', 10 

7013.02 

2 

7015.01 

3 

2 

1 

3 2 

7015.02 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

4 3 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 

PERCENT SENIOR 

4 

2 2 

HOUSEHOLDS 

3 

6.2 - 13.4 

3 5 5 

13.5 21.8 

4 

7022.02 3 

21.9 29.9 

Crescent 

4 

30.0 - 45.5 


6 1 

City-wide Average: 21.8% 

2 

1 

5 3 

7013.02 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 2 

3 

4 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

1 

OCEAN 

MONTANA 

OCEAN 

4 

1 

7012.01 

3 


1 

1 

20TH 

BUNDY 


SENIOR HOUSEHOLDS 

2010 Census 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

Census Tract 


GATEWAY 

Source: U.S. Census 2010, Table H17. 



b. Persons with Disabilities 

Persons with disabilities have special housing needs due to a shortage of accessible and 

affordable housing, frequently fixed incomes, and higher health costs. Some residents in 

Santa Monica have disabilities that prevent them from working, restrict their mobility, or 

make it difficult to care for themselves. The Census defines several types of disabilities -- 

employment, mobility, and self-care limitations. Disabilities are defined as mental, physical 

or health conditions that last over six months. The Census tracks the following disabilities: 

• Employment disability: refers to a condition lasting over six months which restricts a 

person's choice of work and prevents them from working full-time; 

• Mobility limitation: refers to a physical or mental condition lasting over six months 

which makes it difficult to go outside the home alone; and 

• Self-care limitation: refers to a physical or mental condition lasting over six months 

that makes it difficult to take care of one's personal needs. 

In 2000, approximately 16 percent of Santa Monica’s population (13,202 persons) suffered 

from one or more disabilities. The living arrangement of persons with disabilities depends on 

the severity of the disabilities. Many persons live at home in an independent arrangement or 

with other family members. To maintain independent living, persons living with disabilities 

may need assistance. This can include special housing design features to accommodate 

wheelchairs and persons with mobility limitations, income support for those not able to work, 

and in-home supportive services for persons with medical conditions among others. 

Services can be provided by public or private agencies. 

Due to their specific housing needs, persons with disabilities are vulnerable to discrimination 

by landlords who may not be familiar with the reasonable accommodation protections 

contained in the Fair Housing Act. Similarly, some landlords may be hesitant to rent to 

persons with an assistive animal such as a guide dog. 

Persons with more severe disabilities may require supportive housing. For those who may 

require additional care and supervision, licensed community care facilities offer special 

residential environments for persons with disabilities including physical, mental and 

emotional disabilities. Twenty-seven licensed community care facilities are located in Santa 

Monica; an inventory of these facilities along with a map is provided later in the document in 

Table II-24 and illustrated in Figure 11. 

Physically Disabled: The 2000 Census documents 5,389 persons over the age of five in 

Santa Monica with a physical disability. The majority of the supportive services and housing 

assistance for physically disabled persons are provided through local non-profit 

organizations. In addition to these supportive services, the City offers rehabilitation grants 

to persons with disabilities to make accessibility improvements to their homes. 

Mentally Disabled: According to the 2000 Census, 3,687 people over the age of five in 

Santa Monica had a mental disability. Region-wide, facilities for the mentally disabled 

include hospitals, medical centers, outpatient clinics, mental health centers, counseling 



II-13 



centers, treatment centers, socialization centers, residential facilities for children, crisis 

centers, and adolescent and adult day treatment offices. 

Severely Mentally Ill: Severe mental illness includes the diagnosis of psychoses and major 

schizoaffective disorders and qualifies as a chronic condition if it lasts at least one year. 

National estimates indicate that approximately one percent of the adult population meets the 

definition of severe mental illness, translating to an estimated 695 severely mentally ill 

persons in Santa Monica. 

Developmentally Disabled: The federal definition of developmental disability is a severe 

chronic disability caused by physical or mental impairment that is evident before the age of 

22. The National Association of Retarded Citizens estimates that between one and three 

percent of the population is affected by developmental disabilities, translating to an 

estimated 900 to 2,700 people in Santa Monica with such disabilities. 

c. Female-Headed Households 

Single-parent households often require special consideration and assistance as a result of 

their greater need for affordable housing, accessible day care, health care, and other 

supportive services. Because of their relatively lower incomes and higher living expenses, 

single-parent households usually have more limited options for affordable, decent, and safe 

housing. As a result, single parents are considered to be among the most at-risk groups 

facing poverty. 

According to the 2010 Census, there were 18,857 female-headed households, 

approximately 40 percent of total households, residing in Santa Monica. Of these femaleheaded 

households, 10 percent (1,885 households) have children. Female-headed families 

with children are a particularly vulnerable group because they must balance the needs of 

their children with work responsibilities. They may also face greater discrimination by 

landlords, particularly small landlords who may be unfamiliar with fair housing laws and may 

be reluctant to rent to families with children due to concerns about potential noise or 

property damage from children. 

d. Large Households 

Large households are defined as those with five or more members residing in the home. 

According to the 2010 Census, Santa Monica had 1,419 large households, of which just 

under half (47%) were renter households. Large households are a special need group 

because of the limited supply of adequately sized and affordable housing units. Similar to 

female-headed households with children, large renter households may also be subject to 

greater levels of discrimination by landlords based on familial status. 

The housing needs of large households are typically met through larger units. In the 2006- 

2010 ACS, it is estimated that Santa Monica has 7,004 owner-occupied units and 2,735 

renter-occupied units with three or more bedrooms that could reasonably accommodate 



II-14 



large families without overcrowding. However, overcrowding still occurs because a vast 

majority of these larger units were for sale and generally more expensive. 

e. Persons with HIV/AIDS 

The County’s Department of Public Health HIV Epidemiology Program releases a Semi- 

Annual Surveillance Summary that reports AIDS statistics in the County. As reported in 

Santa Monica’s 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan, from July 2008-December 2008, there were 

869 new cases of adults with AIDS recorded in Los Angeles County, including nine new 

cases in Santa Monica. The cumulative cases of AIDS in Los Angeles County total 54,003 

between 1982 and 2008, and 565 in Santa Monica. Of the reported AIDS cases in Los 

Angeles County, Whites had the highest percentage of cases (45%), followed by Hispanics 

(31%), African Americans (20%), and Asians (2%). 

There has been a significant downward trend in the incidence of new AIDS cases. At the 

same time, improved medical treatment for HIV/AIDS has greatly increased the life span of 

persons diagnosed with this disease. As of 2008, 3,360 people in Westside Los Angeles 

were HIV-positive and it was estimated that one in four people were unaware they were 

HIV-positive. 

Short-term housing needs for persons with AIDS may include hospice facilities, shelters or 

transitional housing. Long-term needs include affordable housing in close proximity to public 

transportation and health care facilities. As with other persons with disabilities, persons with 

HIV/AIDS may face discrimination that affects their access to housing due to fear, the need 

for reasonable accommodations or other factors. 

f. Homeless Persons 

The City of Santa Monica is part of the Los Angeles County Continuum of Care, which 

applies jointly for HUD homeless program funds for most of the county. The City works 

closely with the Continuum of Care lead agency, the Los Angeles Homeless Services 

Authority, as well as other regional leaders such as the United Way of Greater Los Angeles 

and the Westside Council of Governments, to ensure that other communities are committed 

to achieving the Continuum of Care outcomes. 

The City has conducted an annual citywide homeless count since 2009, though federal and 

regional requirements are a biannual count. The overall homeless population was 740 in 

2011 including 263 people on the streets, 426 in shelters and institutions, and 51 in cars or 

encampments. This number was nearly the same in 2010 (742), and represents a reduction 

of 19 percent from the 2009 total of 915 and a 25 percent reduction from the 2007 total of 

999. Between the 2009 and 2011 count, there were 128 fewer people counted on the 

streets (33% decrease); nine fewer individuals counted in shelters and institutions (2% 

decrease); and 38 fewer people counted in cars and encampments (43% decrease). 

The City of Santa Monica adopted a comprehensive Action Plan to Address Homelessness 

in 2008. The City focuses on engaging the chronically homeless in services and assisting 



II-15 



them to become more stable in a variety of housing options. The Action Plan outlines the 

collaborative efforts by the City with all city, community, and regional public, non-profit, 

private, and community service organizations to implement the action steps adopted in the 

Plan. For example, there are 20 programs that provide a continuum of care approach to 

homelessness. These programs provide outreach, emergency shelter, transitional housing, 

case management, permanent housing and employment assistance. The programs reflect 

the involvement of several stakeholders; for example, faith-based organization are integral 

to the provision of homeless services and emergency shelter in Santa Monica, and the 

business community supports the community’s efforts to end homelessness through 

fundraisers, donations of resources, and encouragement of volunteer efforts. 

The City has also established several innovative programs, including the Homelessness 

Community Court, Project Homecoming, and the Service Registry. The Homeless 

Community Court treats the criminal justice system as an entry point to providing services, 

including mental health treatment and case management, for chronically homeless persons. 

Project Homecoming focuses on reuniting homeless persons with family or friends in their 

communities of origin. The Service Registry is a listing of chronically homeless persons that 

is distributed to government and social service agencies in order to help identify and 

connect these individuals with support services and permanent housing. A key use of the 

Service Registry is to identify sub-populations such as chronically homeless veterans who 

are eligible for special resources through the Veterans Administration (VA). 

The City of Santa Monica participates in the County of Los Angeles Continuum of Care 

consisting of the following components: 

Emergency Shelter: Shelter services provided through a homeless shelter or motel 

voucher. Outreach and assessment is provided to identify an individual’s or a family’s 

needs and connect them to the appropriate facilities and services. 

Supportive Services: Services include job training, drug and/or alcohol 

rehabilitation, mental health services and special services to specific subpopulations. 

Transitional Housing: Housing for homeless families and individuals that is 

temporary, but longer than emergency facilities, and is usually connected to 

rehabilitative services, including substance abuse and mental health care 

interventions, employment services, individual and group counseling and life skills 

training. 

Permanent Housing: Housing provided along with prevention services. Santa 

Monica is focusing on a “Housing First” approach, rather than emphasizing 

emergency shelter and services. The goal is to assist the homeless with housing 

that has teams providing case management and intervention. 



II-16 



C. INCOME PROFILE 

Income is a key factor affecting housing choice and one’s access to housing. This section 

presents a profile of the income of Santa Monica residents. Credit issues and lending are 

analyzed in Chapter IV “Review of Potential Impediments.” 

1. Income Definitions 

To facilitate analysis of income Table II-6: 2011 HUD Income Categories 

distribution among households in 

Percent Area 

2011 Income 

communities, the federal Department of 

Median 

Income Group 

Threshold 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 

Income 

(LA County) 

groups households into categories by 

(AMI) 

income, depicted in Table II-6. The Extremely Low < 30% $24,850 

associated 2011 LA County income Low 31% - 50% $41,400 

thresholds for extremely low, low, and Moderate 51% - 80% $66,250 

moderate income categories are also 

Above Moderate >80% -- 

presented (HUD does not publish 

Source: 24 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 91.305. 

income thresholds for above moderate www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/rep/state/inc2k10.pdf 

income households as federal housing 

programs are not eligible to households earning greater than 80 percent of the AMI). 

Santa Monica’s inclusionary housing program utilizes different income category definitions 

than those used by HUD. These categories are: Very Low Income up to 50% AMI; Low 

Income between 51% and 60%; Moderate Income between 61% and 100%; and Above 

Moderate Income above 100% AMI. 

2. Income Characteristics 

As estimated in the 2006-2010 American 

Community Survey (ACS), Santa Monica 

residents earned a median household 

income of $68,842. Table II-7 compares 

the City's median household income with 

that of nearby communities on the 

Westside of Los Angeles County. As 

shown, all four of the smaller cities had 

higher median household incomes than 

the City of Los Angeles; while three of the 

four cities had higher median household 

incomes than Los Angeles County. 

Nonetheless, approximately 30 percent of 

all households in Santa Monica had low or 

moderate incomes, as shown in Table II-8. 

Table II-7: Median Household Income 

Jurisdiction 

Median 

Household 

Income 

Beverly Hills $ 83,463 

Culver City $ 72,199 

Santa Monica $ 68,842 

West Hollywood $ 52,009 

Los Angeles City $ 49,138 

Los Angeles County $ 55,476 

Source: 2006-2010 ACS 5-Year Estimate 



II-17 



Table II-8: Santa Monica Income Distribution 1990 and 2000 

Income Group 

1990 2000 Percent 

Households % Households % 

Change 

Extremely Low (0-30% AMI) 5,646 13% 4,778 11% -15% 

Low (31-50% AMI) 4,624 10% 3,764 8% -19% 

Moderate (51-80% AMI) 5,774 13% 4,706 11% -19% 

Above Moderate (>80% AMI) 29,081 64% 31,226 70% 7% 

Total Households 45,125 100% 44,474 100% -1% 

Source: Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data, HUDUSER, (2000). 

3. Income by Household Tenure, Type and Race 

Table II-9 details the income distribution of renters and homeowners within Santa Monica. 

The number and percentage of extremely low, low and moderate income renter households 

was significantly higher at 11,384 or 37 percent of renter households compared to residents 

who owned their own home at 1,864 or 14 percent of owner households. 

Table II-9: Income Distribution by Owner/Renter Tenure 

Income Group 

Renters Owners Total 

Households Percent Households Percent Percent 

Extremely Low (0-30% AMI) 4,150 13% 688 5% 11% 

Low (31-50% AMI) 3,358 11% 406 3% 8% 

Moderate (51-80% AMI) 3,876 12% 830 6% 11% 

Above Moderate (>80% AMI) 19,800 63% 11,426 86% 70% 

Total Households 31,184 100% 13,290 100% 100% 


While renters are more likely to have lower incomes than owners, income also varies by 

household type as shown in Table II-10. Elderly households in Santa Monica evidenced a 

much higher incidence of extremely low, low and moderate incomes than other households 

in the City. Elderly households are often on limited fixed incomes, and are particularly 

vulnerable to rent increases and other changes in living expenses. 

Table II-10: Income Level by Household Type 

Income Group Elderly 

Small Large All 

Family Family Households 

Extremely Low (0-30% AMI) 17% 5% 7% 11% 

Low (31-50% AMI) 15% 5% 7% 8% 

Moderate (51-80% AMI) 17% 8% 15% 11% 

Above Moderate (>80% AMI) 51% 82% 71% 70% 

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 


Table II-11 illustrates median incomes by race/ethnicity in both Santa Monica and the 

County as measured by the 2000 Census. In both Santa Monica and the County, median 



II-18 



income among the White population was the highest. The Asian population had the second 

highest incomes in the City and County, although the income disparity (>$7,000) between 

Asians and Whites was far more pronounced in Santa Monica. Median incomes for 

Hispanics were $18,000 below that for Whites in Santa Monica, though still above that for 

Hispanics countywide. African Americans in Santa Monica evidenced the lowest median 

income levels, and were the only racial group with incomes well below the countywide 

average. 

Table II-11: Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity 

Race/Ethnicity Santa Monica Los Angeles County 

White $54,688 $48,602 

Asian $47,409 $47,631 

Hispanic $36,683 $33,820 

African American $30,066 $36,201 

Source: Bureau of the Census ( 2000). 

4. Low and Moderate Income Concentrations 

Typically, an area of low to moderate income concentration is defined as a census tract or 

block group where 51 percent or more of the residents earn 80 percent or less of the 

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) area median income (AMI). However, in Santa Monica, 

low and moderate income areas are defined as census block groups with 38.5 percent or 

more low/mod income residents. Figure 7 depicts the 20 census block groups which meet this 

definition and are thus considered low and moderate income areas. A majority of these areas 

geographically follow Interstate 10 (Santa Monica Freeway) from the east to west borders of 

the City. These Interstate 10 corridor areas are bordered on the south by Pico Boulevard 

across the entire City and extend as far north as Washington Avenue. Four of the areas fall 

farther south within the north and south boundaries of Pearl Street and Airport Avenue and the 

east and west boundaries of Main Street and 24 th Street. 



II-19 


Figure 7. 

SAN VICENTE 



SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 



1 

7012.01 

3 

2 

PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

4 

1 

7013.04 

1 

2 

1 3 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

7013.02 

2 

7015.01 

2 

1 

3 

3 7015.02 2 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

7014.02 4 3 7017.02 

4 

5 

3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

7019.02 

3 

Airport 

7022.01 

4 

2 2 

Low/Mod area defined as Census 

3 

block groups with >38.5% of 

3 5 5 

households earning


D. HOUSING PROFILE 

This section assesses various housing characteristics and conditions that affect the wellbeing 

of City residents. Housing factors evaluated include the following: housing stock and 

growth; tenure and vacancy rates; age and condition; and housing costs and affordability. 

1. Housing Growth 

The City’s overall housing growth 

was relatively stable from 1990 to 

2000, with an increase of 110 units 

at a rate of 0.2 percent, as shown in 

Table II-12. This was the lowest 

increase of housing units in the 

surrounding area. Beverly Hills also 

experienced a growth rate less than 

one percent, while Culver City and 

West Hollywood’s growth was just 

over one percent. The City and 

County of Los Angeles grew at a 

rate of 2.9 and 3.4 percent during 

that same period of time. Between 

2000 and 2010, Santa Monica’s 

residential development increased 

from 47,863 to 50,912 units, an 

increase of 3,049 units, and at a 

rate of 6.4 percent. During this 

16% 

14% 

12% 

10% 

8% 

6% 

4% 

2% 

0% 

Housing Growth 

1990- 2000 Change % 2000- 2010 Change % 

most recent decade, Santa Monica’s growth rate was second only to Beverly Hills (13.4%), 

with the City and County of Los Angeles increasing by 5.7 percent and 5.3 percent 

respectively, while West Hollywood’s growth rate was two percent and Culver City’s was less 

than one percent. 

Jurisdiction 

Table II-12: Regional Housing Growth Trends 1990-2010 

Housing Units 

1990 2000 2010 

Percent Change 

1990- 

2000 

2000- 

2010 

Santa Monica 47,753 47,863 50,912 0.2% 6.4% 

Beverly Hills 15,723 15,855 16,394 0.8% 13.4% 

Culver City 16,943 17,130 17,135 1.1% 0.03% 

West Hollywood 23,821 24,110 24,588 1.2% 2.0% 

Los Angeles City 1,299,963 1,337,668 1,413,995 2.9% 5.7% 

Los Angeles County 3,163,343 3,270,909 3,445,076 3.4% 5.3% 

Source: U.S. Census 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2010 



II-21 



2. Housing Type and Tenure 

Table II-13 summarizes various characteristics of Santa Monica’s housing stock. The 

composition of the current housing stock reflects the recycling of lower density housing to 

higher density residential, particularly between 2000 and 2010. Multi-family units in 

buildings with two to four units have decreased by 372 units; while units in buildings with five 

or more units have increased by 2,630 units from 30,822 to 33,452. The percent of multifamily 

units has continued growing since 1990. The number of single-family detached units 

increased by 318 units from 2000-2010 while attached units decreased by 135 units. Mobile 

homes also decreased, from 289 to 201. 

Table II-13: Housing Type 1990-2010 

Unit Type 

1990 2000 2010 

Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent 

Single-Family (SF) Detached 9,159 19.2% 9,265 19.4% 9,583 19.2% 

SF Attached 1,802 3.8% 1,928 4.0% 1,793 3.6% 

Total Single-Family 10,961 23.0% 11,193 23.4% 11,376 22.8% 

2 to 4 Units 6,005 12.5% 5,559 11.6% 5,187 10.4% 

5 or more units 29,979 62.8% 30,822 64.4% 33,452 66.9% 

Total Multi-Family 35,984 75.3% 36,381 76.0% 38,639 77.2% 

Mobile Homes & Other 808 1.6% 289 0.6% 201 0.4% 

Total Housing Units 47,753 100% 47,863 100% 50,015 100% 

Vacancy Rate 6.06% -- 7.03% -- 7.85% -- 

Source: U.S. Census 1990, 2000 and 2010. 

According to the 2010 Census, 71 percent of Santa Monica households were renters and 29 

percent were homeowners. Figure 8 displays the geographic distribution of renter 

households in the City by census tract. The highest concentrations of renter households 

(85.0-99.6%) are located in the central portion of the City, north of Pico. Moving further west 

the block groups with the highest percentages expands north to Wilshire and Montana. 

TabIe II-14 summarizes housing units by tenure and unit size. Santa Monica had 2,735 

rental units with three or more bedrooms, more than adequate to house the City’s 670 large 

renter-households. However, market rental prices for larger units are well beyond the reach 

for the more than half of large renter households who earned lower incomes. 

Table II-14: Bedroom Mix By Tenure 

# Bedrooms Rental Units Owned Units Total 

Studio 3,153 98 3,251 

One-Bedroom 15,691 1,095 16,786 

Two-Bedrooms 11,488 5,279 16,767 

Three- or More Bedrooms 2,735 7,004 9,739 

Total 33,067 13,476 46,543 

Source: 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 



II-22 


Figure 8. 

SAN VICENTE 



SAN VICENTE 

7TH 7TH 


4 

WILSHIRE 

1 

20TH 20TH 

7012.02 

3 

LINCOLN 

2 


PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 

2 

2 

1 3 

7017.01 

4 

1 

7013.04 

1 

2 

3 

2 1 

', 10 

7013.02 

7018.01 2 

7015.01 

2 

1 

3 

3 

2 

', 10 

3 

7015.02 

1 

2 

5 

4 

4 3 

2 

7017.02 

4 

5 

7014.02 

3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 

7023.00 

1 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

PERCENT RENTER- 

7019.02 

7022.01 

OCCUPIED UNITS 

4 

2 2 

7.13 14.9 

3 

15.0 49.9 

3 5 5 

50.0 69.9 

7022.02 

4 

3 

70.0 - 84.9 

Crescent 

4 


6 

1 

2 

1 

5 3 

7013.02 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 

2 

3 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

4 

1 

OCEAN 

85.0 - 99.6 

City-wide: Average 71.6% 

MONTANA 

OCEAN 

COLORADO 

MONTANA 

1 

1 

COLORADO 

20TH 

BUNDY 


RENTER-OCCUPIED 

HOUSING UNITS 

2010 Census 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

Census Tract 





3. Housing Age and Condition 

Housing age is an important indicator of housing condition within a community. Like any 

other tangible asset, housing is subject to gradual deterioration over time. If not maintained, 

housing can deteriorate and depress neighboring property values, discourage reinvestment, 

and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Thus maintaining and improving 

housing quality is an important goal for the City. 

Table II-15 summarizes the distribution of housing by the year built in the City. As of 2010, 

approximately 84 percent the City's housing was over 30 years old and approximately 43 

percent was over 50 years old. A general rule of thumb in the housing industry is that 

structures older than 30 years begin to show signs of deterioration and require reinvestment 

to maintain their quality. Homes older than 50 years, unless properly maintained, require 

major renovations to keep the home in good working order. There are 28,422 renter 

occupied units over 30 years old (86%) and 10,304 owner occupied units over 30 years old 

(76%). Given the high property values in Santa Monica, much of the City’s older housing 

stock is well maintained resulting both from private investment and City rehabilitation 

assistance to income qualified households. 

Table II-15: Age of Housing Stock by Tenure 2010 

Renter 

Owner 

Percent 

Percent 

Year Structure Built Occupied 

Occupied 

Renter 

Owner 

Housing 

Housing 

Total 

Percent 

2000-2009 1,350 4% 586 4% 4% 

1990-1999 1,335 4% 1,088 8% 5% 

1980-1989 1,960 6% 1,498 11% 7% 

1970-1979 6,319 19% 2,434 18% 19% 

1960-1969 8,591 26% 1,210 9% 21% 

1950-1959 6,270 19% 1,562 12% 17% 

1940-1949 3,438 10% 2,191 16% 12% 

1939 or earlier 3,804 12% 2,907 22% 14% 

Total 33,067 100% 13,476 100% 99%* 

Source: U.S. Census 2010. Total percentage does not equal 100% due to rounding. 

The Building and Safety Division reports that substandard housing complaints average about 

300 incidences annually. Most of these complaints are related to the rental housing stock. 

Although incidences typically occur throughout the community, there is a concentration of 

complaints within the Pico neighborhood. The Division works with the property owner to 

correct any violations, and provides referrals to the City’s rental rehabilitation programs. 

Residents of rent controlled units indicated in a Santa Monica Tenant Survey (2006) the 

following physical problems in their units: defects in plumbing systems was mentioned by 

25 percent of the 750 respondents; leaks in walls or ceiling mentioned by 18 percent; and 

large holes in walls or floors mentioned by seven percent. 



II-24 



4. Overcrowding 

Overcrowding occurs when housing costs are so high relative to income that families 

double-up or take on roommates or boarders to devote income to other basic needs, such 

as food and medical care. Overcrowding also tends to result in deterioration of homes and 

shortage of on-site parking. Therefore, maintaining a reasonable level of occupancy and 

alleviating overcrowding is an important contributor to quality of life. 

HUD and the Census define overcrowding as an average of more than one person per room 

in a housing unit (excluding kitchens, porches and hallways). Table II-16 shows that 

overcrowding for all households in Santa Monica is relatively low at 2.6 percent compared to 

the incidence in Los Angeles County at 12.0 percent. Overcrowding for owner households 

was less than one percent in the City. Overcrowding affected 2.6 percent of renter 

households in 2010. This is significantly less than the incidence of rental housing 

overcrowding in Los Angeles County at 17.6 percent. 

Table II-16: Overcrowded Households 2010 

Overcrowding Households Percent L.A. Co. 

Percent 

Owners 

Overcrowding 81 0.6% 6.0% 

Severe Overcrowding 13 0.1% 1.4% 

Renters 

Overcrowding 860 2.6% 17.6% 

Severe Overcrowding 529 1.6% 7.8% 

Total Overcrowding 941 2.1% 12.0% 

Source: 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimate. 

Note: Severe overcrowding is a subset of overcrowding. 



II-25 



5. Overpayment 

Housing overpayment occurs when housing costs increase faster than income. Like most 

urban communities in California, it is not uncommon to overpay for housing. However, to the 

extent that overpayment is often disproportionately concentrated among the most vulnerable 

members of the community, maintaining a reasonable level of housing cost burden is an 

important contributor to quality of life. 

Housing overpayment is a significant problem in Los Angeles County. In 2000, 40 percent 

of County households spent too much of their incomes on housing (greater than 30% of 

income on housing costs); during the 2006-2010 period, Countywide housing overpayment 

had increased to 50 percent. Although less severe in Santa Monica (35% overpayment in 

2000, increasing to 44% during 2006-2010), the same countywide pattern of dramatic 

increases in overpayment is evident. 

Table II-17 provides information from the 2006–2010 American Community Survey related 

to overpayment for renters and owners by income range. Approximately 45 percent of 

Santa Monica’s renters overpaid for housing, compared to 40 percent of homeowners. 

Renter households earning less than $50,000 were the most impacted by overpayment both 

in terms of the number (11,700) and proportion (70%-91%) of households. While the 

proportion of overpaying owner households earning less than $75,000 is also significant 

(49%-84%), the relatively few number of owner households in these lower and moderate 

income groups makes this a less prevalent issue (2,600). 

Table II-17: Housing Overpayment by Tenure 2010 

Renter 

Owner 

Income Category # pay >30% on 

housing costs 

% of Income 

Group 

# pay >30% on 

housing costs 

% of Income 

Group 

< $20,000 5,390 91% 755 84% 

$20,000 to $34,999 3,637 87% 701 69% 

$35,000 to $49,999 2,678 70% 445 53% 

$50,000 to $74,999 2,017 36% 701 49% 

> $75,000 1,223 10% 2,789 31% 

Total 14,945 45% 5,391 40% 

Source: 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimate. 



II-26 



6. Housing Costs and Affordability 

The cost of in housing is directly related to the extent of housing problems in a community. If 

housing costs are relatively high in comparison to household income, there will be a 

correspondingly higher prevalence of overpayment and overcrowding. This section provides 

current information on housing sales prices and rents in Santa Monica, including information 

on home foreclosures, and assesses the affordability of the housing stock to Santa Monica 

residents. 

a. Housing Sales 

Housing sales prices in Los Angeles County fell during 2011, with the median single-family 

home price decreasing by 4.4 percent to $325,000. The median price of a condominium 

decreased by 8.3 percent to $275,000. “Last year ended much the way it began, with 

pitifully low new-home sales, record investor activity, drum-tight credit, and lots of potential 

buyers and sellers just sitting tight,” said John Walsh, DataQuick president. He further 

stated, “Some of the economic vital signs have improved lately and it’s sparked a renewed 

sense of optimism in housing circles,” he said. “Coupled with incredibly low mortgage rates, 

it certainly suggests 2012 might offer the ‘rock bottom’ for pricing that many buyers and 

sellers have been waiting for. But the housing drama isn’t over. Credit conditions remain 

horrible, leaving many unable to take advantage of today’s improved affordability. And 

lenders still must decide the fate of scores of borrowers who aren’t making their mortgage 

payments.” 

Table II-18 documents the single-family and condominium sales in Santa Monica from 

January through December 2011 by zip code 1 . A total of 263 single-family homes were 

sold, with median prices ranging from $548,000 to $2,141,000; and a total of 343 

condominiums were sold with median prices ranging from $299,000 to $1,015,000. The 

majority of the single-family homes were sold in two zip codes (90402 and 90405) with 110 

homes and 106 homes respectively. The 90402 zip code is a primarily single family 

residential neighborhood in the northern area of Santa Monica with a median home price of 

$2,141,000 while the 90405 zip code encompasses both a single-family area as well as 

multi-family zoning in the southern area of Santa Monica. The median home sales price in 

the 90402 zip code was $2,141,000 which was a decrease of 8.5 percent from the 2010 

sale; while the median home sales price in 90405 was $983,000, an increase of 5.2 percent 

from 2010. Single-family home median sales prices in two additional zip codes decreased 

between 9 and 25.5 percent since 2010. The fifth area (zip code 90401) did not have 

sufficient comparison data. 

1 Zip Code Boundaries: 

90401 – Pacific Ocean-Wilshire-12 th to 7 th along Colorado-Pico 

90402 – Pacific Ocean-Northern City Boundary-26 th -Montana 

90403 – Pacific Ocean-Montana-Centinela-Wilshire 

90404 – 12 th to 7 th along Colorado -Wilshire-Centinela -Pico 

90405 – Pacific Ocean-Pico-Centinela-Southern City Boundary 



II-27 



Of the 343 condominiums sold in 2011, 147 were sold in zip code 90403, a low to medium 

density multi-family area between Wilshire and Montana, with higher densities allowed along 

the Wilshire corridor; 80 were sold in zip code 90404, a commercial and light manufacturing 

area; 76 were sold in 90405 a low to medium density residential area; and the remaining 40 

condominiums sold were located in 90401 and 90402. The median sales price for 

condominiums in these last two zip codes increased by 0.6 and 42 percent respectively, 

whereas the median condominium sales price decreased in all other zip codes. 

Table II-18: Single-Family Home and Condominium Sales Prices 2011 

Single-Family Homes 

Condominiums 

Zip Code 

% Change 

% Change 

# Sold Median Price 

# Sold Median Price 

from 2010 

from 2010 

90401 1 $600,000 N/A 10 $533,000 0.6% 

90402 110 $2,141,000 -8.5% 30 $1,015,000 42.0% 

90403 36 $1,423,000 -9.0% 147 $710,000 -7.8% 

90404 10 $548,000 -25.5% 80 $515,000 -7.2% 

90405 106 $ 983,000 5.2% 76 $299,000 -6.0% 

Total 263 343 

Source: DQ News- Los Angeles Times Annual Zip Code Chart. www.dqnews.com 

b. Home Foreclosures 

Home foreclosures are having a major impact on housing sales throughout the State. With 

depreciated values, many homeowners find themselves owing more on their homes than its 

market value. Combined with rapidly adjusting mortgage rates on subprime loans and high 

unemployment, the number of mortgage default notices filed against California homeowners 

reached a record high of over 135,000 in first quarter 2009, comprising 54 percent of all 

housing resale activity in the State. Since that time, foreclosure activity has been 

consistently declining each quarter, with the latest statistics for fourth quarter 2011 

identifying an 11.9 percent decline in new mortgage default notices from the prior year, and 

foreclosure resales accounting for just 38 percent of the resale market. Default notices in 

Los Angeles County also declined by 13 percent during 4th quarter 2011 over the prior year. 

Home foreclosures are not only impacting the more affordable inland communities, but have 

also expanded to older, more established communities as well. Within Santa Monica, 

www.Realtytrac.com identifies 196 residential properties in various states of foreclosure 

(July 2012): 31 percent in “pre-foreclosure” having received a notice of mortgage default; 35 

percent undergoing foreclosure with notice of a trustee sale; and 34 percent with ownership 

taken over by the bank. In May 2012, RealtyTrac recorded a total of 28 new foreclosure 

filings in Santa Monica, representing 1 filing for every 1,858 residential units in the City, well 

below the foreclosure ratios in other Westside jurisdictions: 

City of Los Angeles 1 : 511 

West Hollywood 1 : 672 

Culver City 1 : 882 

Beverly Hills 1 : 942 

Santa Monica 1 :1,858 



II-28 



c. Rental Housing Market 

Santa Monica voters adopted a Rent Control Law in 1979, affecting all rental units in 

existence at the time (including mobile homes and mobile home spaces) and requiring 

owners to establish rents at April 10, 1978 levels as well as register the rents and amenities 

as of that same date. The law also included provisions regarding just cause evictions, 

removal of controlled units and provided landlords a fair return. 

In 1995, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act was enacted, requiring changes to all rent 

control laws in California. Costa-Hawkins established a vacancy decontrol-recontrol rent 

stabilization for units that previously required strict rent control. As units are vacated, the Act 

allowed the owner to negotiate rental rates with new tenants after January 1, 1999. This 

new rental rate becomes the base for rent increases, rather than the 1978 rate. 

The City of Santa Monica Rent Control Board prepares an annual report on the Impact of 

Market-Rate Vacancy Increases. This report provides an analysis of rents in Santa Monica, 

comparing those under the original Rent Control Law and those decontrolled-recontrolled 

under Costa-Hawkins. The Board’s 2011 Report documents a total of 28,135 units subject to 

the Santa Monica Rent Control Law, not including the 8,522 units that have been removed 

from rent control or are subject to use exemptions (e.g., owner-occupancy, commercial use, 

removal permits or other use exemptions). Of these 28,135 units, 37.2 percent are 

occupied by long-term tenants and 61.4 percent have undergone tenant turnover and rerented 

at market rate rents, representing nearly 17,300 previously controlled unit that have 

received vacancy increases. 2 

As shown in Table II-19, 2011 rents on decontrolled-recontrolled (market rate) units are 

roughly double the median rents of the long-term controlled units. Median rents in long-term 

controlled units ranged from $670 for a studio to $1,285 for a unit with 3+ bedrooms; 

compared to median rents in decontrolled-recontrolled units of $1,172 for a zero-bedroom to 

$2,721 for a unit with three or more bedrooms. As the number of bedrooms increases, the 

median market rents are more than double the median long-term controlled unit rents. 

# Bedrooms 

Table II-19: Santa Monica Apartment Rents – December 31, 2011 

Long-Term Controlled 

Units 

# Units 

Median 

Rent 

# Units 

Decontrolled- 

Recontrolled 

Median 

Rent 

Not 

Registered 

# Units 

Total 

Units 

Studio 842 $670 2,116 $1,172 187 3,145 

1 4,510 $771 8,652 $1,556 33 13,195 

2 3,987 $998 5,627 $2,055 92 9,706 

3+ 1,126 $1,285 896 $2,721 67 2,089 

Totals 10,465 17,291 379 28,135 

Source: The Impact of Market-Rate Vacancy Increases, Thirteenth Year Report 1999-2011, 

Santa Monica Rent Control Board 

2 An additional 1.3 percent of units subject to Rent Control were not registered for various reasons. 



II-29 



d. Housing Affordability 

Housing affordability can be assessed by comparing market rents and sales prices with the 

amount that households of different income levels can afford to pay for housing. Standards 

for affordable owner and rental housing costs are as follows: 

Affordable Ownership Housing Cost - moderate income (110% AMI) 

‣ Housing costs consist of mortgage debt service, homeowner association 

dues, insurance, utility allowance and property taxes. 

‣ Affordability is based on housing costs


Renter Affordability: Table II-21 presents the maximum affordable rents for extremely low, 

low and moderate-income households by household size, and compares with median rents 

of both long-term rent controlled and decontrolled-recontrolled units in Santa Monica, as 

documented previously in Table II-19. As this Table indicates, median rents in decontrolled 

unit are well above the level of affordability for extremely low, low and moderate income 

households. Only the median long-term rent controlled units are below the level of 

affordability for all moderate income households and a two-person low income household. 

As the City’s long-term controlled units are vacated and rented under the Costa-Hawkins 

regulations, even moderate income households will be challenged to be able to afford to 

rent in Santa Monica. Prior to Costa Hawkins, 82% of Santa Monica’s rental units were 

affordable to low income households (


E. PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING 

1. Public Housing 

The Los Angeles County Housing Authority owns two developments in Santa Monica 

comprising 41 units of public housing. Monica Manor is a 19 unit development for families, 

and 175 Ocean Park Boulevard is a 22 unit development for seniors. 

2. SMHA Tenant-Based Housing Assistance 

The City of Santa Monica Housing Authority (SMHA) administers the Housing Choice 

Voucher (Section 8) program, which provides rental assistance to 1,092 households. SMHA 

also administers 238 Shelter Plus Care Vouchers; 34 HOME funded vouchers; 34 vouchers 

for the Serial Inebriate; and 82 redevelopment agency funded vouchers. In total, there were 

1,480 households receiving rental assistance administered by the SMHA in January 2012. 

Staff indicates that of the current vouchers, an average of 50 turn over on an annual basis 

and become available to new families on the SMHA waiting list. 

The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program enables income-eligible households to use an 

HCV to rent a suitable unit in any rental complex accepting the HCV. Once approved, the 

renter household pays a minimum of 30 percent of household income for rent and SMHA 

pays the difference up to the current rent payment standard. The current rent payment 

standards, presented in Table II-22, are based on HUD-established Fair Market Rents 

(FMR). As indicated by this table, the Section 8 payment standard is well below market rent 

levels. This disparity serves as a disincentive to landlords to participate in the program and 

has resulted in a shortage of Section 8 units for program participants. 

Table II-22: Santa Monica Housing Authority – 2012 Rent Payment Standards 

Bedroom Size 0-bdr 1-bdr 2-bdr 3-bdr 

SMHA Rent Payment Standard 

$1,009 $1,352 $1,843 $2,411 

(including utilities) 

Median Market Rent 

$1,172 $1,556 $2,055 $2,721 

(Decontrolled/Recontrolled Unit) 

Source: SMHA, January 2012. Santa Monica Rent Control Board,Thirteenth Year Report 1999-2011. 

In August 2011, the Housing Division opened its waiting list for all affordable housing 

programs, including Housing Choice Vouchers and Inclusionary Housing units. The previous 

waiting list had been established in 2006 with approximately 5,000 applicants. This time the 

waiting list was opened for 35 hours and received almost 34,000 applicants. Based on the 

self-reported data from applicants, approximately 3,900 applicants either work or live in 

Santa Monica, of which 173 reported being veterans. 

The SMHA’s Administrative Plan establishes local preferences and gives priority to serving 

families that meet those criteria. These preferences and priorities are consistent with the 

Consolidated Plan and must be based on local housing needs and priorities that are 

documented. The SMHA established two Tiers of preferences. Tier I establishes a 

displaced preference resulting from a disaster; government action; eviction pursuant to 

specific laws; and evictions related to owner/relative occupancy of rent controlled units. Tier 

II establishes preferences based on residing in the City; working in the City; applicants on 



II-32 



understood. The 2010 Census does not identify any predominant racial majority within the 

Asian population in Santa Monica. The largest Asian racial groups were Chinese (27%); 

Japanese (17%); Korean (16%); and Asian Indian (13%). Information from the 2006-2010 

American Community Survey showed that of 2,499 households with Asian or Pacific 

Islander languages, approximately 30 percent were households considered linguistically 

isolated (no one 14 or over speaks English only or ‘very well’). However, it is unclear which 

of the racial groups in the Asian community experiences this language barrier. In addition to 

the language barrier, lower income Asian populations may be unfamiliar with the City’s 

rental assistance programs, or may be reluctant to interface with government officials. 

SMHA staff has also found that lower income households in the Asian community tend to 

receive support from within the Asian community and are less inclined to seek support from 

the government for housing. 

The SMHA also keeps statistics on the household type of voucher holders, also presented in 

Table II-23. Of Santa Monica’s 1,715 low income renter households identified by the census 

as having a mobility or self-care limitation, just over half (53%) receive Housing Choice 

Vouchers. One-quarter of Santa Monica’s income eligible senior renter households also 

receive vouchers. 

The SMHA has established policies to monitor the characteristics of the population currently 

being served through rental vouchers compared to the population as a whole to identify 

underserved populations. Targeted outreach efforts will be undertaken if a comparison 

suggests that certain populations, including extremely low income families, are being 

underserved. If targeted outreach is necessary, the SMHA Administrative Plan suggests 

various activities such as: press releases to local and minority newspapers; providing 

informational materials to other public and private agencies; and developing partnerships 

with other organizations that serve similar populations. 

The SMHA undertook extensive community outreach in preparation for opening the assisted 

housing waiting list in August 2011, resulting in a significant number of applicants (almost 

34,000). In addition to outreach in the local newspapers, notice to partnering social service 

agencies, and information presented on the City’s website and cable television station, 

SMHA worked with local community partners to provide internet access and application 

assistance at various locations, particularly focusing on those populations in the community 

least likely to have internet access (e.g. homeless, seniors, disabled.) Analysis of the 

characteristics of the population on the waiting list is currently being conducted by SMHA 

staff. 

As part of the Housing Choice Voucher Program, the Santa Monica Housing Authority also 

administers the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program. As its name implies, the program is 

designed to help HCV participants become more self-sufficient. Participants in the program 

elect to sign a Contract of Participation, which specifies what actions they will take to 

become financially independent from welfare cash aid. The Housing Authority establishes a 

savings account for the participant in order to encourage successful completion of the 

program. As of October 2011, there were 44 participants in the Family Self-Sufficiency 

Program. 



II-34 


Figure 9. 

OCEAN 

7013.04 

SAN VICENTE 



SAN VICENTE 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

7012.01 

LINCOLN 

7012.02 

WILSHIRE 


OLYMPIC 

7016.01 

7016.02 

7017.01 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

BUNDY 

Low/Mod area defined as Census 

block groups with >38.5% of 

households earning


3. Assisted Housing 

Existing housing that receives governmental assistance is often a significant source of 

affordable housing in many communities. Santa Monica has used a variety of methods to 

facilitate affordable housing development throughout the City. In addition to subsidized 

housing, affordable housing has also been produced in private development in the City as a 

result of regulatory mechanisms such as inclusionary housing regulations, development 

agreements, settlement agreements, and rent control removal permit requirements. 

A detailed inventory of all publicly assisted affordable rental housing in Santa Monica is 

provided in Appendix A (does not include inclusionary units). This inventory encompasses 

3,633 units within 131 separate developments, including: 

• 1,005 units within 11 developments financed under specific HUD Programs 

• 41 public housing units in 2 developments owned by the Co. Housing Authority 

(HACoLA) 

• 40 privately owned units in three developments leased to and managed by HACoLA 

• 1,932 units within 108 developments developed by CCSM and other non-profits 

• 615 new units in 7 developments estimated to be developed between 2012 – 2014 

Public funding assistance has been provided through a wide variety of Federal, State and 

local sources, including: HUD (including HOME and CDBG funds), Federal Low Income 

Housing Tax Credits, State Multi-family Housing Program, City Housing Trust Funds, Multi- 

Family Earthquake Repair Loan (MERL) program assistance, and prior Redevelopment 

Housing funds, among others. The demand for assisted housing is high, with many 

developments having waitlists that are years long. 

Figure 10 displays the location of all 131 assisted affordable housing developments in 

Santa Monica. The distribution of these developments is relatively dispersed throughout the 

community in various multi-family residential neighborhoods and commercial corridors. 

Though most of these affordable rental complexes are in locations that correspond to the 

City’s low and moderate income areas, approximately one-third can be found in other 

census block groups. The City’s inclusionary housing policy which integrates affordable 

units within market rate developments serves to further de-concentrate low and moderate 

income households. And because the City is so well served by public transit, all affordable 

housing developments are located within short walking distance of a bus line (refer to Figure 

12 later in this chapter). 

The City’s 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan analyzed which of the publicly assisted rental 

housing developments were at-risk of converting to market rate either at the end of HUD’s 

subsidized contract period or other agreement that restricts the rents. Six City-assisted 

developments that were identified as at-risk have 10 year extensions on affordability 

restrictions; several of the HUD assisted developments have pre-payment options, but are 

controlled by non-profit agencies unlikely to pre-pay; several developments have Section 8 

subsidy contracts subject to renewal, however, it is likely that HUD will be able to extend 

those contracts each year. Based on these factors, it is unlikely that any of these 

developments will actually convert to market rate in the near future. 



II-36 


Figure 10. 

SAN VICENTE 

OCEAN 




SAN VICENTE 

#S #S 

4 

7TH 7TH 


WILSHIRE 

OCEAN 

1 

20TH 20TH 

LINCOLN 

2 

COLORADO 


PICO 

OLYMPIC 

OCEAN PARK 

2 

WILSHIRE 

1 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 

COLORADO 

OLYMPIC 

20tTH 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

BUNDY 


PUBLICLY ASSISTED 

AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING 

7012.01 

3 

7016.01 

1 

5 

3 

#S #S #S 

1 

1 

4 

#S 

1 

2 

7016.02 

#S 

7012.02 

#S 

2 #S 

#S 

1 3 

#S 2 

#S 

#S 7017.01 

4 

1 

7013.04 #S #S 1 #S 

2 

1#S 

#S 

#S 

#S 

3 

#S#S 

#S 

#S 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

2 

7013.02 

#S 18 #S 

7015.01 7015.02 

#S 

#S 

2 #S#S 

#S 

2 

1 

3 

3 #S 

', 10 

3 

#S 

#S 

#S 

#S 

#S 

#S#S #S #S 

1 

2 

2 

5 #S 

#S 

#S 

#S #S 

#S 

4 

7014.02 

4#S 

#S 

#S #S 

3 7017.02 

#S#S #S 

#S 

#S 4 

5 

#S 

#S 

3#S 

#S #S 

#S#S #S#S 

4 

3 

#S #S #S #S 

#S 

#S 

#S 1#S 

#S 

#S #S 

#S 

7018.02 #S 

#S 

7023.00 

1#S 

#S#S 

#S#S #S 

', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

#S 

#S 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

#S 

#S 

#S 

#S 

#S 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 #S #S 

7022.01 

#S #S 

4 

2 2 

#S #S 3 #S #S #S 

3 5 5 

4 #S #S 

7022.02 3 

#S 

#S 

#S#S 

#S 

4 

Crescent 7020.02 

#S 

Bay Park #S #S#S #S 

6 

#S 1 

2 

#S 

1 

5 3 #S #S 

Total assisted units Citywide: 3,633 

#S #S#S 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7#S 

#S#S 

2 

4 #S 

#S 

#S Publicly Assisted Housing 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

Low & Moderate Income Area 

#S #S 



OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

Source: City of Santa Monica, Housing Division, October 2011. 



F. RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES 

Residential care facilities (also known as licensed community care facilities) serve a variety 

of persons who may require a supportive care environment. Many of these facilities provide 

housing for persons with physical, developmental, or mental disabilities, including both 

children and the elderly. These facilities are licensed and monitored by the Community 

Care Licensing Division, which is part of the State of California’s Department of Social 

Services. A description of each type of facility is provided below: 

‣ Small Family Homes: provide 24-hour-a-day care to six or fewer children, who may 

have physical, mental or developmental disabilities, in a licensed home residence. 

‣ Group Homes: provide 24-hour non-medical care and supervision to troubled and/or 

developmentally disabled youth. 

‣ Adult Residential Facilities: provide 24-hour non-medical care for adults ages 18-59, 

including those with physical, developmental and/or mental disabilities, who need 

assistance with daily living skills. 

‣ Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly: provide care, supervision and assistance 

to persons 60 years of age and over (also known as assisted living facilities, 

retirement homes and board and care homes). 

‣ Residential Care Facilities for the Chronically Ill: serve up to 25 persons and provide 

care and supervision to adults with HIV/AIDS. 

Table II-24 provides a summary of the 25 licensed residential care facilities and two adult 

day care centers located in Santa Monica. These 27 facilities provide care for up to 914 

residents. The three adult residential facilities that serve disabled persons provide a total 

capacity of 202 beds. An additional 22 residential care facilities for the elderly serve up to 

592 elderly, including many who are also disabled. In addition, there are two licensed adult 

day care facilities serving 120 persons that provide care to adults over 18 years of age in 

need of personal services, supervision, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of 

daily living or for the protection of these individuals. 

Figure 11 shows the location of the 27 licensed facilities in relationship to the City’s low and 

moderate income areas. Overall, there is not a concern about over-concentration since 

facilities are distributed in various areas of the City. Two of the adult residential facilities are 

located near the northern and southern edges of the low and moderate income areas and 

the third is located near the northern boundary of the City in a lower density residential area. 

The 22 residential care facilities for the elderly are widely dispersed, with just three located 

within low and moderate areas. One adult day care facility is located on 4 th and the other on 

Pico, providing good access along significant transit corridors. 

Table II-24: Licensed Residential Care Facilities 

Type of Facility 

# of Facilities 

Capacity 

(beds) 

Adult Residential Facility 3 202 

Residential Care for the Elderly 22 592 

Adult Day Care 2 120 

Source: State Department of Social Services, Licensing Division (2011). 



II-38 


Figure 11. 

SAN VICENTE 




%U 

SAN VICENTE 

4 

7TH 7TH 

WILSHIRE 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

DIVERSA CONSULTING 102511 

1 

7012.01 

3 

LINCOLN 

2 

#S#S 


PICO 

OLYMPIC 

2 

7016.01 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

1 

#S #S 

LINCOLN 

1 

WILSHIRE 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

SANTA MONICA 

BUNDY 


LICENCED COMMUNITY 

CARE FACILITIES 

2010 Census 

5 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

2 

7012.02 

7016.02 #S 

2 #S#S 2 

1 3 

7017.01 

4 

1 

7013.04 

1 

2 

1 3 

2 

7018.01 

', 10 

2 

7013.02 

7015.01 7015.02 

#S 

#S 

2 #S 

18#S #S 

1 

3 

3 2 #S 

', 10 

3 

1 

2 

2 

5 4 

#S 7014.02 #S 

#S 

4 3 

#S 

7017.02 

4 

5 

%U 3 

4 

3 

1 

7018.02 %U 

$T 

7023.00 

1 

$T ', 10 2 

3 Cloverdale 

Park 2 


2 

3 

1 

3 

Airport 

7019.02 

7022.01 #S#S 

4 

2 2 

#S 3 

3 5 5 

4 

7022.02 3 

#S 

4 

Crescent #S 7020.02 

Bay Park 

6 1 

2 

1 

5 3 

Beach 

Park 7021.02 7 2 

4 

7013.02 

3 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

$T #S%U Adult Residential Facility 

Residential Care for the Elderly 

Adult Day Care 

Low & Moderate Income Area 

Census Tract 

Census Block Group


G. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 

Public transit is important for lower income households, which are often transit dependent. 

Fair housing choice is enhanced when public transit provides links for those households 

between housing, job opportunities and other services. 

The City of Santa Monica has one of the most 

extensive public bus systems of any city of its 

size in the nation. The City launched its own 

bus line in 1928, starting as Santa Monica 

Municipal Bus Lines and becoming Santa 

Monica’s Big Blue Bus in 1999. The Big Blue 

Bus has a fleet of approximately 210 

alternative fuel buses and carries over 80,000 

people a day or 21 million passengers a year 

around a 52 square mile service area. The 

Santa Monica Big Blue Bus won the American Transportation Associations’ Outstanding 

Achievement Award four times between 1983 and 2000. 

The Big Blue Bus offers fourteen regular bus routes, two limited stop (rapid) services, and 

three mini bus routes, providing extensive coverage within the City, to Santa Monica College 

and UCLA, and to downtown Los Angeles. Several routes provide service to the 

Pico/Rimpau Transit Center in Los Angeles where patrons can link to the Metro and LADOT 

DASH. The Big Blue Bus also provides service to the Metro Green Line, Los Angeles 

airport, VA Hospital, and regional shopping areas. The Mini Blue provides three routes 

within Santa Monica and is advertised as a smaller faster neighborhood ride, running every 

15-20 minutes. Fares for the Big Blue Bus are discounted for seniors, persons with 

disabilities, and Santa Monica College and UCLA students. Discounted fares are also 

available with monthly passes, day passes, or the purchase of 13 rides. 

Figure 12 depicts the location of fixed route transit systems in Santa Monica, and their 

proximity to employers with 100+ employees. Because Santa Monica is so well served by 

the Big Blue and Mini Blue bus lines, all the City’s major employers fall within a block or two 

of a bus line, demonstrating that public transportation enhances fair housing choice in Santa 

Monica and is not an impediment. Furthermore, the 2006-2010 American Community 

Survey indicates that almost 10 percent of Santa Monica’s residents use public transit as a 

means of commuting to work. 



II-40 


Figure 12. 

SAN VICENTE 

OCEAN 



%U 


SAN VICENTE 

7TH 7TH 


%U 

%U 

OCEAN 

WILSHIRE 

0 0.5 1 Miles 

20TH 20TH 

LINCOLN 

Crescent 

Bay Park 

PICO 

Beach 

Park 

OLYMPIC 

OCEAN PARK 

WILSHIRE 

SANTA MONICA 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 


%U 

OLYMPIC 

20TH 

SANTA MONICA 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U %U 

%U 

%U %U %U 

%U %U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U %U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

', 10 

%U %U %U 

%U 

%U %U 

%U %U 

%U 

', 

%U 

10 

%U %U 

%U %U 

%U 

%U %U %U %U 

%U 

%U 

%U %U 

', 10 Cloverdale 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U %U 

Park 


Airport 

%U %U 

%U 

%U %U %U 

%U 

%U 

%U 

%U %U %U 

%U 

%U%U %U 

%U 

SANTA MONICA 

Source: Santa Monica Housing & Economic Development Dept. (July 2011); 

www.bigbluebus.com 

PICO 

BUNDY 


EMPLOYMENT ACCESS 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

%U Major Employer (100+ employees) 

Big Blue Bus Route 

Mini Blue Routes 

Low & Moderate Income Area


H. EMPLOYMENT PROFILE 

Education and employment also have an important impact upon housing needs to the extent 

that housing affordability is tied to household income. According to the California 

Employment Development Department (EDD), a total of 56,800 Santa Monica residents 

were in the labor force as of December 2011, with approximately 5,400 unemployed 

residents. Santa Monica’s unemployment rate (9.6 percent) was two points below the 

overall unemployment rate for Los Angeles County (11.6%). 

The 2006-2010 American Community Survey documents that the overall educational level of 

Santa Monica residents is substantially higher than that of the population in Los Angeles 

County as a whole. The population over age 25 with a high school diploma or higher degree 

is 95 percent in Santa Monica, compared to 76 percent countywide. Of that same 

population, those with a Bachelor’s degree or higher is 63 percent for Santa Monica and 31 

percent countywide. Conversely, just three percent of Santa Monica residents (age 25+) do 

not hold a high school diploma, compared to 10 percent countywide. This higher level of 

educational attainment translates into the types of occupations and income levels necessary 

to afford Santa Monica’s high housing costs. 

Table II-25 shows the types of occupations held by Santa Monica residents in 2000 

(Census) and 2006-2010 (ACS). Two-thirds of residents are employed in management and 

professional occupations, professions characterized by higher paying jobs. Twenty percent 

of residents are employed in sales and office occupations, typified by moderate to upper 

income pay scales, with nine percent of residents employed in the service industry, 

characterized by lower paying jobs. Over the 2000-2010 period, the City evidenced a 

significant 14 percent increase in residents employed in management and professional 

occupations, indicating the prevalence of upper income professionals moving into the City. 

In contrast, production/transportation and construction/maintenance occupations evidenced 

significant declines (-33% and -34% respectively), as did sales and office occupations (-8%). 

Table II-25: Employment Profile 2000 and 2010 

Occupations 

2000 2010 Percent 

Persons Percent Persons Percent Change 

Management/Professional 28,378 60% 32,507 66% +14% 

Sales and Office 10,955 23% 10,089 20% -8% 

Service 4,430 9% 4,458 9% +1% 

Production/Transportation 1,721 4% 1,149 2% -33% 

Construction/Maintenance 1,575 3% 1,034 2% -34% 

Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 0 0% 0 0% 0% 

Total 47,059 100% 49,237 100% +5% 

Source: Bureau of the Census, 2000. American Community Survey 2006-2010. 

Santa Monica has a large array of industry types that provide jobs throughout the City, 

including professional occupations relating to Santa Monica College, the RAND Corporation, 

St. John’s Health Center and Santa Monica-UCLA Hospital. As a beachfront community, 

tourism is also a key component of Santa Monica’s economy, with numerous jobs in the 



II-42 



hospitality and service industries. The 2000 Census documented that only 17 percent of 

persons employed in Santa Monica also lived in the City, indicating that housing is not 

affordable to a large segment of the City’s workforce. 

Table II-26 identifies the twenty-five largest employers in the City, illustrating the dominant 

role education, health services, media/entertainment and hospitality industries play in the 

local economy. These large employers generated approximately 25 percent, or 18,123 of 

the 74,100 total estimated jobs in Santa Monica in 2011. Figure 12 depicts the location of 

the nearly 80 employers in Santa Monica with 100+ employees, and illustrates their 

excellent access to public transportation. 

Table II-26: Major Employers in Santa Monica, July 2011 

Rank Employer Industry Employees 

1 City of Santa Monica Government 2,528 

2 Santa Monica College Education 2,086 

3 Saint John’s Hospital Medical Center Health Services 1,796 

4 Santa Monica-UCLA Hospital Health Services 1,780 

5 Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Education 1,500 

6 RAND Corporation Research 894 

7 Universal Music Group Media + Entertainment 850 

8 Activision Blizzard Inc Media + Entertainment 692 

9 ET Whitehall Santa Monica Partners LP Hospitality 534 

10 MTV Networks Media + Entertainment 506 

11 Loews Hotels Hospitality 434 

12 Lion’s Gate Entertainment Corp Media + Entertainment 425 

13 Yahoo! Media & Music Media + Entertainment 390 

14 Edmunds.com Internet Service 361 

15 Rubin Postaer and Associates Advertising 350 

16 Goldline International Inc. Financial Services 337 

17 KOR Hotel Group Hospitality 323 

18 Whole Foods Market Retail 307 

19 Fairmont Miramar Hotel Hospitality 303 

20 Crossroads School for Arts & Sciences Education 295 

21 Wells Fargo Capital Finance Financial Services 295 

22 Sony Computer Entertainment America Media + Entertainment 292 

23 The Macerich Company Real Estate 284 

24 Google Internet Service 281 

25 Sonic Automotive Auto Dealer 280 

Total 18,123 

Source: City of Santa Monica Housing and Economic Development Department, Employer reported 

employment levels, July 31, 2011. 



II-43 



I. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 

The City of Santa Monica has a wide array of public facilities dispersed throughout the 

community to address the needs of residents. The following is an overview of these 

facilities. 

Civic and Governmental Facilities 

• The City Hall complex is located at 1685 Main between Olympic and Interstate 10 

(Santa Monica Freeway). Departments located in City Hall include: City Manager, 

City Clerk, Community & Cultural Services, Finance, Human Resources, Information 

Systems, Planning & Community Development, Public Works, and the Rent Control 

Board. 

• The Housing and Economic Development Department at 1901 Main near Pico 

houses the Santa Monica Housing Authority, administration of the City’s inclusionary 

housing program, the former Redevelopment Agency, Economic Development and 

the Farmer’s Market. It is located a few blocks from City Hall. 

• The Civic Auditorium is located at 1855 Main, near Pico and City Hall. 

• The Police Department is located at 333 Olympic between 4 th and Main, adjacent to 

City Hall. 

• The Main Library is located at 601 Santa Monica near 6 th . 

Community Facilities 

• The Ken Edwards Center is located at 1527 4 th , between Colorado and Broadway. 

This Center is used by City Departments for Commission meetings as well as by 

numerous community groups for meetings and other events. 

• The Senior Recreation Center is located at Palisades Park on Ocean between 

Montana and California. The Center offers on-going recreation classes for seniors. 

• The Teen Center is located at Virginia Avenue Park, south of Interstate 10 near 

Pico. The Center offers art classes, academic assistance, enrichment classes, a 

computer center and a variety of recreational opportunities. 

• Community meeting rooms are provided at six parks throughout the City, including 

the Thelma Terry Building with a multi-purpose room and classrooms for seniors at 

Virginia Avenue Park. 

Parks 

• Santa Monica maintains approximately 366 acres of public open space, including 

245 acres of Santa Monica State Beach; 27 regional, community and neighborhood 

parks; and 27 community facility sites. Four parks are located within the City’s low 

and moderate areas: Memorial Park, Stewart Street Park, Euclid Park and Virginia 

Avenue Park. The parks range from .16 acres (small neighborhood park) to 26.4 

acres (Palisades Park) and provide typical amenities including sports fields/facilities, 

playgrounds, picnic areas and open space. The City has just approved the design of 

its first universally accessible playground to be located at the beach, with 

construction beginning in 2012. 



II-44 



Schools 

• The Santa Monica/Malibu School District includes 11 elementary schools, four 

middle schools and three high schools. 

• Santa Monica College, located at Pico between 16 th and 18 th , is a two-year 

community college that has operated since 1929. It now serves approximately 

30,000 students and offers more than 80 fields of study. It is the leader among the 

State’s community colleges in transferring students to the University of California, 

University of Southern California and other four-year campuses. 

In summary, community facilities are well dispersed throughout Santa Monica and are well 

served by the Big Blue Bus and Mini Blue transit system. 



II-45 


FAIR HOUSING PROFILE 

III. FAIR HOUSING PROFILE: 

EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT 

This section provides an overview of the variety of fair housing and tenant/landlord 

mediation services available to Santa Monica residents. Recent fair housing complaints and 

cases are evaluated to assess potential patterns of impediments to fair housing choice. 

Finally, a summary is provided of comments received at the public fair housing consultation 

workshop, as well as comments received from various City commissions. 

A. FAIR HOUSING SERVICES 

Santa Monica’s Fair Housing Program is provided through the Consumer Protection Unit 

within the City Attorney’s Office, and is staffed by three attorneys and two investigators. The 

Consumer Protection Unit has two primary responsibilities: 1) to facilitate compliance with 

local, state and federal fair housing laws through complaint investigation and enforcement; 

and 2) to further fair housing goals through community education and awareness. Fair 

housing services provided to Santa Monica residents include: community outreach and 

education; investigation of allegations or complaints regarding unfair housing practices; fair 

housing audits and testing; and counseling or referrals to other agencies when individuals 

may have been victims of discrimination. 

1. Education and Outreach 

Every April for National Fair Housing Month, the Consumer Protection Unit conducts a multifaceted 

campaign to improve community awareness of fair housing laws and to help 

eliminate housing discrimination in the City. This includes outreach to Santa Monica 

residents, real estate professionals, developers, bankers/lenders, advocacy groups, 

government officials, and a variety of other entities. The City’s fair housing awareness 

campaign encompasses the following activities: 

Fair Housing Poster Contest. Hundreds of Santa Monica elementary and middle 

school students participate in the Consumer Protection Unit’s annual poster contest, 

creating colorful works of art reflecting the annual theme. Past themes have included 

“Fair Housing Brings Us Together”, “Fair Housing Rocks”, “Fair Housing Helps 

Families” and “Fair Housing Turns the Key.” Finalists’ posters are displayed in the 

lobby of City Hall, and published as calendars and provided free to the public. The 

posters are also used as part of the City’s fair housing ad campaign, described below. 

Fair Housing Ad Campaign. The City places full-page community awareness 

advertisements (featuring the students’ fair housing posters) in local newspapers, 

notifying residents where they can learn more about fair housing laws, such as 

www.fairhousing.com, fair housing videos on www.youtube.com, as well as the City 

Attorney’s consumer-oriented website at www.smconsumer.org. The fair housing 

posters are also placed in the display ad space on all of the City’s Big Blue Buses. 



III-1 



Fair Housing Workshops and Seminars. Every year, the City’s Consumer Protection Unit 

sponsors a public workshop to increase awareness of fair housing laws among local 

apartment owners, realtors and the general public, and to address current issues such as 

fair lending, reasonable accommodation, and protections for families with children. The City 

has utilized a variety of creative formats for its workshops, and has been successful in 

achieving a high level of community participation. The following highlights several of the 

workshops conducted in recent years: 

• Fair Housing Day at Santa Monica High School. The City’s fair housing 

attorneys and investigators spoke to over 500 students in six combined classes 

at Santa Monica High School about the fair housing laws and their history. After 

each presentation, students volunteered to take part in a fictional fair housing 

dispute, taking on the roles of attorneys and clients in a mediation. Gary 

Rhoades, Deputy City Attorney, coordinated the event with SAMOHI, commented 

on the day: “After getting a crash course in fair housing law, the students threw 

themselves into their roles during the mediation. We hope that not only will some 

of the students share what they learned with their parents, but they will be 

seeking housing for themselves in the not too distant future, and might need this 

information about their civil rights in housing.” 

• Fair Housing Seminar with Apartment Association: The Apartment 

Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA), the California Department of Fair 

Employment & Housing (DFEH), and the City Attorney’s Consumer Protection 

Unit have co-sponsored several half-day fair housing workshops at the Santa 

Monica Library. The workshop’s presenters focus on relevant fair housing topics, 

including anti-smoking laws as they relate to housing, families with children, 

reasonable accommodations for tenants with disabilities, insurance coverage 

issues, and alternatives to litigation such as mediation and the administrative 

complaint process. 

Lainy Parry, AAGLA Board Member and Santa Monica resident, said, “Fair 

housing for all is a practice vigorously pursued by AAGLA. Everyone deserves a 

fair shot at getting an apartment, and AAGLA takes pride in promoting equal 

opportunity.” Parry also noted that, “This cooperative venture between AAGLA 

and the City of Santa Monica has already proven to be the beginning of good 

things to come, as we have found common ground for other projects.” Gary 

Rhoades, Deputy City Attorney, agreed: “The continuing venture with AAGLA 

has helped both of us to reach many more folks with this valuable community 

education service. Over 230 persons have attended these workshops, and we’ve 

seen firsthand how the better informed owners and tenants resolve fair housing 

disputes without having to go to court.” 

• Fair Housing Seminar with Board of Realtors: The Beverly Hills/Greater Los 

Angeles Association of Realtors (BHGLAAR) and the Santa Monica City 

Attorney's Office co-sponsored a half-day fair housing workshop in Santa Monica 

on real estate and lending issues. The workshop's presenters reviewed federal 

and state fair housing laws pertaining to real estate, and discussed steering, 

redlining, predatory lending practices, and alternatives to litigation. Presenters 



III-2 



included representatives from the California Department of Fair Employment & 

Housing (DFEH), California Association of Realtors, BHGLAAR, Wells Fargo 

Mortgage, and the City Attorney’s Office. 

Commenting on the seminar, Deputy City Attorney Gary Rhoades said: “This 

unique cooperative venture between the City and the local realtors underscores 

the importance of fair housing. Not only does fair housing help Santa Monica 

families get and keep keys to housing, it’s also crucial for the healthy 

development of our community and businesses.” 

• Postwar Housing Segregation Film and Discussion: The City hosted a halfday 

workshop at the City library that included the showing of a PBS film on the 

history of post World War II housing segregation, and a discussion afterwards to 

explore the fair housing issues experienced by participants. Speakers included 

representatives of the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing 

(DFEH), the Housing Rights Center, Bet Tzedek, and Legal Aid. 

In addition to the annual fair housing workshops and seminars described above, the City 

Attorney’s Office sponsors workshops throughout the year in response to specific issues. 

Past workshops include: 

• Santa Monica Senior Law Day 

• Finding Common Ground in Changing Times – dispute resolution 

workshop with local apartment owners and tenants 

• Disability Issues in Rental Housing 

2. Fair Housing Enforcement and Case Statistics 

The Consumer Protection Unit investigates and prosecutes violations of fair housing laws 

and the tenant harassment ordinance, and helps to resolve tenant/landlord disputes on a 

regular basis. 

a. Complaint Resolution Process 

The City’s process for resolving discrimination complaints involves the following steps: 

• Complaint intake 

• Testing for discrimination 

• Meeting with alleged violator 

• Potential legal action 

Complaint intake: The first step is to obtain information on the nature of the complaint. 

Complainants are advised that the Consumer Protection Unit is part of a public agency and 

can not represent individuals in subsequent legal action. Any legal action filed by the Unit 

will be brought on behalf of the People of the State of California and the complainant will be 

witness. Complainants are thus advised to seek private counsel if they are interested in 

seeking legal remedies, and are provided with referrals to The Legal Aid Foundation of Los 

Angeles (with offices in Santa Monica) and the Santa Monica Bar Association. 



III-3 



Testing for discrimination: The next step is to investigate the complaint through testing. 

The process is done through telephoning the landlord or manager, giving an informational 

profile similar to the complainant, and recording the response. If a face-to-face 

confrontation was the setting for the discrimination, a tester fitting the profile of the 

complainant will be sent to the location. 

Meeting with the alleged violator: If a complaint sustains discrimination after testing, a 

letter is sent to the property owner requesting their presence at an informal office 

conference held at the City Attorney’s Office. Landlords are advised of their right to bring an 

attorney to represent them at the meeting as well as any witnesses and documents 

supporting their position. They are asked not to rent the unit or units in question until the 

office conference has been held. Many complaints can be resolved in this manner by the 

landlord agreeing to consider the tenant’s application for the unit. 

Potential legal action: When informal resolution fails and the complaint testing results 

strongly suggest that discrimination has taken place, the Consumer Protection Unit may file 

a lawsuit. The initial step in litigation is to file for a Temporary Restraining Order and 

Preliminary Injunction. The Consumer Protection Unit then files a civil action for violation of 

the Unfair Business Practice/Unfair Competition statute. A permanent injunction is sought 

as well as civil penalties and the costs of prosecution. Typically, the Unit seeks a negotiated 

settlement as a means to prevent litigation. 

b. Discrimination Cases 

Table III-1 displays the number and nature of fair housing cases in Santa Monica during the 

past three years, as well the outcome of the cases. 

Table III-1: Discrimination Cases in Santa Monica 

Discrimination Cases 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 Totals 

Protected Classification 

Disability 14 10 9 33 68% 

Race 2 1 1 4 8% 

Family Status 1 0 2 3 6% 

Religion 0 1 0 1 2% 

N/A* 2 2 4 8 16% 

Total 19 14 16 49 

Disposition 

No Violation or 

Inconclusive Evidence 

10 6 4 20 41% 

Referred to other Agency 4 5 6 15 31% 

Resolved with City’s Intervention 3 3 5 11 22% 

Case Open 2 0 1 3 6% 

City of Santa Monica, City Attorney’s Office, Consumer Protection Unit, October 2011. 

* Complaint filed as fair housing, but turned out not to involve any protected class. Often involves tenants in 

deed restricted housing and/or with Section 8 vouchers. 



III-4 



With a total of 49 discrimination cases during this period, more than two-thirds, or 33 cases, 

were related to disability issues and requests for reasonable accommodation. For example, 

a landlord’s refusal to permit a disabled person, at their own expense, to make reasonable 

modifications to their rental unit that are necessary to allow the disabled tenant “full 

enjoyment of the premises” is unlawful discrimination. Other discrimination cases involved 

race (4 cases), family status (3 cases), and religion (1 case). An additional eight fair 

housing cases didn’t involve any protected class, and typically involved tenants in deed 

restricted housing and/or with Section 8 vouchers. 

Upon investigation, 20 of the 49 fair housing cases (41%) were closed due to inconclusive 

evidence or a determination that no violation has occurred; 15 cases (31%) were referred to 

an outside agency; 11 cases (22%) were resolved with intervention by the City Attorney’s 

Office; and three cases (6%) were still open. 

Given the high incidence of disability issues in Santa Monica, the AI recommends the City 

conduct focused outreach and education to landlords and property owners on reasonable 

accommodation requirements. 

Fair Housing Case Examples: A variety of different fair housing complaints brought by 

Santa Monica residents have been investigated by the City Consumer Protection Unit. The 

discussion below provides an example of four fair housing cases - one pertaining to religious 

discrimination, one pertaining to disability discrimination, and two pertaining to discrimination 

based on familial status. 

Allegation: Religious Discrimination 

People v. Or Khaim Hashalom. Upon purchasing an apartment complex, a recently 

formed purported synagogue notified the complex’s tenants that it wanted only 

Jewish refugees from Iraq and Iran to live at the building. All the tenants were given 

eviction notices. Many of the tenants filed fair housing complaints with the City’s 

Consumer Protection Office. After an informal attempt to resolve the issue, the City 

filed an unlawful business practices lawsuit against the “synagogue,” including a 

state fair housing claim as one of the unlawful business practices. The tenants also 

filed their own case in federal court. Both cases were resolved in the same 

settlement agreement which required the owner to offer units back to any tenant who 

left, pay each tenant money for stress and costs, and engage in fair housing training. 

Allegation: Disability Discrimination 

Santa Monica Shores. The City Attorney’s Office received a complaint that 

management of a large apartment and condominium complex (500 units) prohibited 

the disabled owners of service and companion animals to walk their animals onsite. 

After visiting the property and talking to numerous witnesses, City staff determined 

that forcing the disabled owners (approximately 60 people) out the gates of the 

relatively large grounds violated the tenants’ rights to a reasonable accommodation. 

The City sent a letter to the management, owners and attorneys and persuaded 

them to change the policy in writing to allow all service animals to be walked on the 

Shore’s grounds. 



III-5 



Allegation: Familial Status 

Pablo & Rocio Cosio. A longtime tenant family was asked to leave because the 

owner planned a relative’s occupancy in their apartment. When the tenants asserted 

their rights to certain process under rent control, the owner’s son and manager made 

discriminatory remarks based on familial status and threatened to call Child Services, 

insinuating that the one-bedroom unit was too small for the family. After Consumer 

Protection Unit staff intervened and explained the law, the owners agreed they would 

not proceed with any type of eviction. 

Patricia Contis. The only elevator at a property became inoperable. At least two 

disabled tenants were unable to enter and exit their units. The Consumer Protection 

Unit involved several City and other agencies in the inspection and relocation of the 

disabled tenants. The City also worked with the owner to devise an action plan and 

future procedures for accommodating disabled tenants in such situations. 

Discrimination Suits: There have been no fair housing complaints in Santa Monica in 

which the Secretary of HUD has issued a charge of discrimination, nor any housing 

discrimination suit filed by the Department of Justice in the City. 

3. Random Fair Housing Audits 

In the fall of 2011, the City Attorney’s Office began its first affirmative long term project to 

test local rental properties for potential discrimination. The goal of the project was to 

determine if prospective renters experienced differential treatment based on race or familial 

status. The City partnered with the Housing Rights Center (HRC) to conduct the rental 

audits. 

As of the drafting of this report, HRC had finalized the race-based rental audit, with the 

following findings: 

• Four different apartment buildings were tested for differential treatment towards 

prospective African American and White tenants applying for occupancy. 

• Two of the four tests sustained findings of differential treatment towards African 

Americans. 

• One of the tests showing differential treatment involved a property manager who said 

different things to the African American and White testers, although the differences 

were very small in nature and on balance not weighted towards one race or another 

(i.e. one example of the treatment would be considered differential in favor of the 

African American tester). The City Attorney’s Office and HRC both agreed that the 

manager showed no apparent discrimination or discriminatory scheme. 

• For the other test showing differential treatment, the City Attorney’s Office is 

contacting the owner and management company and demanding that they address 

the problem. 



III-6 



Upon completion of the rental audit on potential differential treatment towards families with 

children, the results will be integrated into the AI prior to adoption by City Council. Based on 

the outcome of both audits, the City Attorney’s Office will develop a revised approach to its 

community education program, in addition to contacting affected property owners to demand 

they address any allegations of discrimination uncovered by the audit. 

4. Hate Crimes 

In response to Congress’ passage of the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990, the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation (FBI) collects and publishes data on crimes motivated by racial, 

religious, ethnicity/national-origin, sexual orientation, and disability bias. From the first year 

national hate crime data were published in 1992 to 2000, incidents motivated by racial 

violence comprised the largest portion of hate crime incidents, followed by incidents 

motivated by a religious bias. Following the events of September 11, 2001, crime incidents 

motivated by bias against ethnicity/national origin more than doubled and became the 

second most prevalent reported hate crime behind race. Hate crimes impact not only the 

individual victim, but can also affect the entire group associated with the particular bias. 

Such stereotyping can make victims of all who share the same race, religion, ethnicity or 

national origin, sexual orientation, or disability. 

Table III-2 presents FBI hate crime statistics for 2005-2010 in the cities of Culver City, Los 

Angeles, Santa Monica and West Hollywood. According to FBI records, seven hate crimes 

were recorded in Santa Monica during this six year period, fairly comparable to the eight 

crimes recorded in the City during the 2000-2005 period. Of these seven most recent hate 

crimes in Santa Monica, two were motivated by a bias against race, two by a bias against 

ethnicity, two by a bias against sexual orientation, and one by a bias against religion. In 

comparison with other communities, the rate of hate crimes per 1,000 population is 

generally lower in Santa Monica than in the City of Los Angeles and West Hollywood, and 

higher than that in Culver City. 

The Santa Monica Police Department conducts a thorough investigation of all hate crime 

incidents, including inquiries of nearby property owners to help identify the offender(s) and 

uncover potential patterns of hate crime activity. 

a. Services for Hate Crime Victims 

Both the State and County have programs providing assistance to hate crime victims. The 

Office of Attorney General has established an Office of Victims’ Services that provides 

advocacy, support, educational and referral services. The aims of this Office are to help 

victims and their families understand their rights, help them get the support they need, and 

to guide them through the criminal justice system. The Office of Attorney General also has a 

Hate Crime Prevention Program Manager. 

The Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations each year evaluates hate crime 

incidents and trends throughout the County, and publishes an annual hate crimes report. 

The Commission has developed an array of programs and projects aimed at reducing hate 

crime, prejudice and gang/community violence, and building networks that can promote 

healthy intergroup relations (refer to www.lahumanrelations.org) The Commission has also 



III-7 



Year/ 

Jurisdiction 

Source: www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm 

Table III-2: FBI Hate Crime Statistics 2005-2010 

Hate 

Motivation of Hate Crime 

Crimes 

per 1,000 

Race Religion Sexual Ethnicity 

Population 

Orientation 

Total 

Hate 

Crimes 

Reported 

Disability 

2010 

Santa Monica 1 .01 1 

Culver City 0 -- 

Los Angeles 138 .04 39 28 37 33 1 

West Hollywood 9 .30 1 7 1 

2009 

Santa Monica 3 .03 1 1 1 

Culver City 1 .03 1 

Los Angeles 190 .05 74 57 36 23 

West Hollywood 9 .30 3 6 

2008 

Santa Monica 0 -- 


Los Angeles 280 .07 112 83 43 42 


2007 

Santa Monica 1 .01 1 


Los Angeles 279 .07 132 50 43 54 


2006 

Santa Monica 2 .02 1 1 


Los Angeles 211 .05 94 33 42 41 1 

West Hollywood 4 .10 4 

2005 

Santa Monica 0 -- 


Los Angeles 219 .06 104 34 42 39 


created the Hate Crime Victim Assistance & Advocacy Initiative to offer assistance to hate 

crime victims at a time of crisis. The needs of victims, according to the Initiative, range from 

counseling, financial compensation for medical bills or other expenses, emergency 

relocation, explanation of law enforcement and legal matters, and other forms of support. 

The following agencies participate in the Hate Crime Victim Assistance & Advocacy 

Initiative: 

• American Legal Center 

• Anti Defamation League 



III-8 



• Asian Pacific American Legal Center 

• Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA) 

• Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center 

• Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) 

• South Asian Network (SAN) 

• Youth Empowerment Project of the Southern Christian Leadership 

Conference 

Victims of hate crimes in Santa Monica can be referred to the County Commission on 

Human Relations, Agencies participating in the Initiative, and the Office of Attorney General 

Office of Victim’s Services. 



III-9 



B. LANDLORD-TENANT SERVICES 

Santa Monica Consumer Protection Unit 

In addition to fair housing complaints, the Consumer Protection Unit of the City Attorney’s 

Office helps to resolve informal 

disputes between landlords and 

tenants on a regular basis. The Unit 

provides counseling to both tenants 

and landlords regarding their 

respective rights and responsibilities under the California Civil Code, Santa Monica’s Tenant 

Harassment Ordinance and other City codes. Complainants contact the City for a multitude 

of reasons, including lockouts, utility shut-offs, tenants with domestic partners and 

harassment, to name a few. The Unit’s webpage prominently displays the form for filing a 

housing complaint, and provides the option of completing the form on-line or in written form. 

In December 2011, the City Council expanded the tenant harassment ordinance to 

encompass both rent controlled and non-rent controlled units. All tenant harassment 

complaints are referred to the City Attorney’s Office for investigation and enforcement of the 

law. As a neutral enforcer of the law, the City can not represent tenants directly, and refers 

tenants requiring representation to Legal Aid (located near City Hall) or the Santa Monica Bar 

Association. 

Rent Control Board 

Santa Monica’s Rent Control Board monitors evictions and advises tenants of their rights. 

The Rent Control Ordinance provides specific procedures for filing complaints and resolving 

disputes between landlords and tenants in rent controlled housing. For example: 

• Excess rent complaints are reviewed by staff and the owner is given a chance to 

resolve the complaint. Complaints which are unable to be resolved administratively 

are referred to the Hearings Department for mediation and/or hearing. Decisions of 

the hearing officer may be appealed to the Rent Control Board. 

• The Hearings Department offers mediation services every time a petition is filed 

regarding rent decrease, excess rent, maintenance, loss of housing services, and 

unreasonable construction impacts. Mediation is also available when no petition has 

been filed, but is requested by an owner or tenant over a dispute involving rent or 

maintenance. 

Rent Control staff report that mediation is used extensively, and has been highly effective is 

resolving disputes. 



III-10 



The Rent Control Board does not usually mediate issues unrelated to the Rent Control Law. 

Examples may include disputes between tenants, neighborhood disputes, noise issues and 

family issues. If the Rent Control Board determines a dispute is unrelated to the Rent 

Control Law, the City provides referrals to the Center for Civic Mediation. 

Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles 

The Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA), located on 5 th Street in 

Santa Monica, is funded by the City and provides legal services to low 

income residents of Santa Monica. LAFLA attorneys work closely with 

local agencies and City services to provide the following services: 

• Housing & Eviction Defense 

• Tenant/Landlord Disputes (i.e. tenant harassment, housing 

conditions, security deposits, unlawful detainers) 

• Consumer Law (including foreclosures and predatory lending 

practices, home equity loan scams, elderly financial abuse) 

• Government Benefits 

• Naturalizations 

• Family Law/Domestic Violence 

• Self Help Legal Access Center 

LAFLA has 2½ attorneys who focus on assisting low income Santa Monica residents. A 

large segment of their work involves assisting residents with disabilities in obtaining 

reasonable accommodations, and in defending rent controlled tenants against unlawful 

evictions. 

Legal Clinics for Santa Monica Seniors: Beginning in December 2011, LAFLA began a 

new series of Monday morning legal clinics at WISE & Healthy Aging in the Santa Monica 

Ken Edwards Center. Each clinic focuses on a particular legal topic, such as Housing, 

Landlord-Tenant Issues, Family Law, or Government Benefits. LAFLA’s attorneys offer 

counsel and advice to seniors on a first come, first served basis. 

Santa Monica Self Help Legal Access Center: LAFLA operates a Self Help Legal Access 

Center in Santa Monica in collaboration with the County of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles 

Superior Court and Neighborhood Legal Services. The Center is a walk-in clinic where 

individuals who are representing themselves can obtain legal information, assistance in 

preparing legal forms and guidance on a variety of civil matters. Referrals to private 

attorneys or legal services programs are provided as needed. 



III-11 



The Center for Civic Mediation 

The Center for Civic Mediation, formerly Dispute Resolution Services, offers mediation 

services to the Santa Monica community from their Santa Monica 

office. They define mediation as “a highly successful dispute 

resolution process that provides people with an opportunity to find 

solutions to their conflicts without going to court.” The Center handles 

disputes involving landlord-tenant issues and consumers (such as 

homebuyers), among others, and cite the following benefits of their 

mediation services: 

• It's Effective – More than 90% of mediations result in long-term resolutions of mutual 

satisfaction. 

• It's Quick – Mediations are scheduled within 2 to 4 weeks of the initial request for 

service. 

• It's Inexpensive – There is no fee for the first three hours of mediation of community 

disputes. If subsequent mediations are needed and agreed upon by all participants, 

charge for additional sessions will be based on the mediator's hourly rate. 

• It's Convenient - Mediation sessions can be scheduled at a mutually convenient time 

and location including evenings and Saturdays to accommodate participants' 

schedules. 

• It's Empowering - Mediation allows people and organizations to develop mutual 

solutions, meeting their specific needs, interests and values as well as protecting 

their rights. 

• It's Confidential - Statements made during the mediation and documents prepared 

for the mediation are not admissible in any legal proceeding without the written 

consent of all parties and the Center for Civic Mediation 



III-12 



C. INPUT FROM FAIR HOUSING WORKSHOP AND CITY COMMISSIONS 

The City conducted outreach to a variety of public and private agencies either directly or 

indirectly involved with fair housing issues in Santa Monica to provide input during 

development of the AI. The following section summarizes the input received from those 

meetings. 

1. Fair Housing Consultation Workshop 

A consultation workshop was conducted on November 20, 2011, at the Ken Edwards 

Center with affordable housing providers, agencies representing special needs populations, 

the real estate community and key City Departments. The purpose of this workshop was to 

discuss potential impediments to fair housing, and to brainstorm potential strategies for the 

City to address. Approximately 20 agencies and City Departments were invited to attend 

the workshop held. The following agencies and City Departments were represented at the 

meeting: 

CLARE Foundation 

Community Corporation of Santa Monica 

Ocean Park Community Corporation (OPCC) 

Realtor, Rent Control Board 

St. Joseph Center 

Westside Center for Independent Living 

Westside Regional Center 

City Attorney’s Office, Consumer Protection Unit 

Housing Division 

Human Services Division 

Rent Control Department 

Santa Monica Housing Authority 

Comments from the workshop are summarized below, and have provided input into 

development of recommendations for the AI: 

Gary Rhoades, Deputy City Attorney, Consumer Protection Unit 

‣ The City’s Consumer Protection Unit investigates and prosecutes both housing and 

consumer cases – about 50/50 each type. 

‣ Enforcement involves investigation and sometimes working with other agencies such 

as the federal office of FHEO or the State DFEH that have been contacted by the 

complainant. The Unit’s goal is to resolve the disputes, which often involves working 

closely with local realtors. 

‣ The relatively low number of family dispute cases (compared to other cities) is likely 

due to a 2003 child discrimination and tenant harassment misdemeanor case that 

received significant attention. The property owner pleaded no contest to the 

charges, was required to pay a fine and attend fair housing training. 

‣ The Unit conducts extensive education and outreach during fair housing month every 

April. Activities include: 



III-13 



o 

o 

o 

o 

Fair Housing Poster Contest for elementary and middle school students. 

Hundreds of posters are received, with finalists displayed at City Hall, printed in 

the Daily Press, and published as calendars and provided free to the public. 

Fair Housing Ad Campaign. Community awareness advertisements, featuring 

the students’ fair housing posters, are run in the local newspapers. Posters are 

also placed in all the City’s Big Blue Buses. 

Fair Housing Seminar co-hosted with another major housing organization like 

the Apartment Owners Association, the Association of Realtors, and DFEH. 

The focus is to increase awareness of fair housing laws among local apartment 

owners, realtors and general public, and address current issues such as antismoking 

regulations, fair lending, reasonable accommodation, and protections 

for families with children. 

Santa Monica High School Fair Housing Program. The Unit conducted a 

program involving six presentations to over 500 high school students. After 

each presentation, students volunteered to take part in a fictional fair housing 

dispute, taking on the roles of attorneys and clients in mediation. 

Robert Kronover, Realtor, Santa Monica Rent Control Board 

‣ Concerned that the focus of the AI is so much on the ‘demand’ side without 

consideration of the ‘supply’ side issues. Specifically, he has seen intimidation of 

owners, particularly ‘mom and pop’ owners, by some renters. 

‣ ‘Mom and pop’ owners generally own 1-2 buildings and are often from other 

countries. He estimated that about 30-50% of apartment buildings in Santa Monica 

are ‘mom and pop’ owned. 

‣ Recommends that all owners run criminal background checks on prospective 

tenants. His understanding is the Community Corporation of Santa Monica (CCSM) 

does not run these checks. 

‣ A question from Jim Kemper was if more fair housing complaints involve ‘mom and 

pop’ owners or larger property owners. Response: The majority of fair housing 

cases involve smaller property owners. 

Tracy Condon, Administrator, Rent Control Department 

‣ The Rent Control Board oversees administration of the Rent Control law on 

approximately 30,000 rental units. Approximately 40% are under long-term control, 

and 60% have been decontrolled/recontrolled upon vacancy. 

‣ The Department has recently expanded its outreach to the Hispanic community, and 

maintains has a Spanish website and conducts specific outreach events in Spanish. 

‣ An annual rent control registration fee is paid by property owners; if the fee is paid on 

time, the fee may be passed on to tenants with proper notice. 

‣ Fee waivers are available for units occupied by very low income seniors or very low 

income disabled persons; units participating in a government funded rent subsidy 

program for very low or low income tenants; and units occupied by the landlord. 

‣ The Board provides mediation services regarding disputes over housing conditions 

and amenities as an option to holding a formal hearing. Tenant harassment cases 

are referred to the City Attorney’s Office. 

‣ Any tenant/landlord disputes not related to the rent control law are referred to the Los 

Angeles County Bar Association Dispute Resolution Services, now the Center for 

Civic Mediation. 



III-14 



Cheryl Shavers, Senior Administrative Analyst, Santa Monica Housing Authority 

(SMHA), Housing Division 

‣ The SMHA provides 1,400 households with rental assistance in the form of: Housing 

Choice Vouchers, Shelter Plus Care, Serial Inebriate Program, HOME Tenant Based 

Rental Assistance (TBRA) and Redevelopment TBRA. 

Sergio Ramirez, Senior Administrative Analyst, Human Services Division 

‣ This Division oversees Human Services funding of approximately $7.4 million, 

including federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. 

Kristen Blair, St. Joseph Center 

‣ St. Joseph Center provides emergency and long-term services to homeless and 

persons at-risk of homelessness. 

‣ Works with the federal Shelter Plus Care (S+C) and Family Self-Sufficiency housing 

subsidy programs. 

‣ The most significant issue for clients is the availability of affordable units. However, 

fair housing issues such as companion animals and accessible housing (wheelchair, 

etc.) are also concerns. 

‣ City staff indicated that there is some CDBG money available for housing 

modifications for accessibility through the Home Access Program. 

‣ Allowances for households to pay rent a few days later each month to coincide with 

State subsidy checks would be helpful. (If client is disabled, can receive reasonable 

accommodation to delay paying rent until receipt of disability check from State). 

Rocio Miranda, Cindy Norton, Community Corporation of Santa Monica (CCSM) 

‣ CCSM owns and manages 1,495 affordable rental units in Santa Monica. 

‣ CCSM receives 3-5 requests for reasonable accommodations per month, and 

maintains written procedures for granting a reasonable accommodation. 

Accommodations are provided through various means, including transfer of units, 

assistance from the Westside Center for Independent Living (WCIL). 

‣ CCSM has a waiting list of approximately 3,500 persons for their units, and maintains 

written policies and procedures for tenant selection. The waiting list is updated 

annually. 

Rebecca Ricketts, Westside Center for Independent Living (WCIL) 

‣ Due to fixed incomes, one of the most significant issues for their clients is finding 

units that are affordable to extremely low income households. 

‣ What is the best way to get accessible units to the people who need those units? 

Though there are accessible units in the city, many are occupied by persons who do 

not need the accessibility. WCIL would like to see an inventory of accessible units 

developed that they could use with their clients. 

‣ Concerned that the City’s new Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) mixed use 

areas require first floor commercial in new developments, thereby precluding the 

provision of accessible units on the first floor. 

‣ Would like to see the City adopt visitability standards for new development. 

Visitability is generally defined as first floor accessibility for potential guests visiting a 

residential property, i.e. a level entry, accessible bathroom, wide doorways, electrical 

switches at accessible height. 



III-15 



Leah Dyson, CLARE Foundation 

‣ CLARE provides recovery services for substance abusers and their families through 

14 programs including outpatient living. 

‣ Santa Monica does not have good outpatient settings for recovering abusers due to 

the high cost of land and difficulties with locating treatment centers in neighborhoods 

that oppose them. 

‣ Hard to find housing affordable to clients with general relief funds or SSI only. When 

a physical disability is added to affordability, finding units is especially difficult. 

Debby Maddis, Ocean Park Community Corporation (OPCC) 

‣ OPCC provides services and shelter to assist community members facing issues of 

domestic violence, poverty, homelessness, mental illness, abuse and discrimination. 

They assist approximately 9,000 persons on an annual basis. 

‣ There is a lack of affordable units for low income and disabled persons. 

‣ Would like the public to be able to access current information on affordable units 

available in the city, particularly inclusionary units. (affordable housing locater 

service) 

Lori Khajadourian, Administrative Analyst, Housing Division 

‣ City opened up the housing waiting list in August 2011. Almost 34,000 applications 

were received. The list is used for all City Affordable Housing Programs including 

the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. The Housing Division is 

encouraging owners of affordable housing, including inclusionary units, to check for 

potential tenants on the waiting list first. 

‣ An inventory of affordable housing built with City assistance is listed in the Housing 

Element, although developments with inclusionary units are not identified. 

Erica Reimer, Westside Regional Center 

‣ Works on Placement Plans for developmentally disabled clients; primarily provide 

referrals. 

‣ Clientele have not had fair housing complaints since she has been there. 

‣ Affordability and accessibility are both issues for clients. 

‣ Sometimes a child’s disability can create negative interactions with landlords. 

‣ Most residential facilities for WRC clients house less than 6 people. 

Jim Kemper, Manager, Housing Division 

‣ Housing Division functions as both a lender and as the Housing Authority, providing 

rental assistance. 

‣ The City also owns three residential properties: 1616 Ocean; 419 Ocean; and 

Mountain View Mobile Home Park. City has had requests for reasonable 

accommodations in these properties. 

Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (written comments) 

‣ Large segment of LAFLA’s work involves assisting disabled tenants in obtaining 

reasonable accommodations. 

‣ Accommodations received from private landlords include: acceptance of Section 8 

vouchers, changing the due date of rent, permitting a caregiver, allowance for a 



III-16 



support animal, not evicting due to breaches/nuisances related to mental disabilities, 

and moving a disabled or elderly tenant to a first floor unit. 

‣ Accommodations received from the Santa Monica Housing Authority include: 

rescinding terminations, extending time to re-certify income, and allowing changes in 

program rules. 

‣ LAFLA also protects rent controlled tenants from unlawful eviction. Occasionally see 

other types of fair housing issues such as familial status or race discrimination, 

although cases difficult to prove from an evidentiary standpoint. 

‣ Section 8 payment standard in Santa Monica has not been increased since 2006 and 

as a result is well below market rent levels. Many landlords not willing to accept 

current payment standard, thus limiting housing choice for Section 8 tenants, 

majority of which are members of protected classes under fair housing law. SMHA 

should apply to HUD for an increase in the payment standard even though unlikely it 

would be approved at this time. 

‣ AI should identify discrimination against Section 8 holders (resulting both from belowmarket 

payment standards and potential minority discrimination) as a potential 

impediment with a recommended action to include reviewing federal, state and local 

laws and recommend any new laws or modifications to the City’s current laws to 

protect Section 8 voucher holders from discrimination. 

‣ In 2011, market rents in Santa Monica were $1,240 for a studio unit and $1,595 for a 

one-bedroom unit, whereas affordable rents for moderate income households were 

$1,495 for a studio and $1,708 for a one bedroom. As moderate income rents are 

essentially the same as market rate, LAFLA is concerned that a City affordable 

housing policy that provides financial incentives to developers to build moderate 

income housing reduces funding available for needed housing for extremely low, 

very low and low income households, many of whom are members of protected 

classes. 

‣ Concern that CCSM admission policies may be too strict and may serve as an 

impediment to fair housing. For example, applicants with an unlawful detainer notice 

within the past five years are automatically denied admission. Also, applicants must 

show five years of rental history and no bankruptcies in the preceding five years. Not 

all unlawful detainer records result from the tenant’s wrongdoing, and even those 

that do are not always reasonably predictive of future performance. 

2. City Commissions 

Santa Monica has established various commissions and advisory boards comprised of 

interested citizens to monitor the needs of the community and advise the City Council on the 

best way to address those needs. As part of the community outreach for the AI, the 

Housing Division met with the Commission for the Senior Community, the Housing 

Commission and the Disabilities Commission during their regularly scheduled meetings to 

discuss fair housing issues. The following summarizes the comments received from 

commissioners at those meetings. 

COMMISSION FOR THE SENIOR COMMUNITY 

November 16, 2011; 1:30 p.m. 

Following a brief presentation regarding the AI by Lori Khajadourian, Housing Division and 

Karen Warner, Consultant, the Senior Commission provided the following comments: 



III-17 



‣ How much of Santa Monica’s housing is supported by HUD and thus subject to 

federal fair housing laws? Response: The federal Fair Housing Act applies to all 

housing, regardless of funding source. 

‣ The data on housing overpayment (>30% income on rent) is interesting as it shows 

fewer extremely low income seniors impacted by overpayment than low and 

moderate income seniors. This illustrates the gap in rental assistance for seniors 

whose incomes exceed the Section 8 assistance level and face housing 

overpayment due to high market rents. 

‣ It is important that seniors with disabilities are aware of options for a reasonable 

accommodation or modification. The City needs to better publicize procedures for 

requesting a reasonable accommodation. 

‣ Once a few senior tenants are granted an exception to have an “assistance animal”, 

leads to many senior tenants claiming a disability to allow them to have a pet. This 

has been the case at The Shores Apartments. However, the grounds remain well 

kempt so it hasn’t been a nuisance. 

HOUSING COMMISSION 

November 17, 2011; 4:30 p.m. 

Following a brief presentation regarding the AI by Lori Khajadourian, Housing Division and 

Beth Stochl, Consultant, the Housing Commission provided the following comments: 

‣ Suggest working with local hardware stores to provide information about reasonable 

accommodation requirements to owners and maintenance staff. 

‣ Concern that owners take more time making repairs in affordable versus market rate 

multi-family units. 

‣ Recommend simple training for owners regarding fair housing, holding fair housing 

workshops. 

‣ Service Pets – since the definition is broad, perhaps there is a way to distinguish 

between physical versus emotional impediment and require walking dogs off-site 

unless physically unable to do so. However, ADA does not distinguish between 

physical vs emotional disabilities. 

‣ Non-smokers rights – though not based on disability, there seems to be a movement 

for some protections in this area. Santa Monica has adopted an ordinance 

prohibiting smoking in common areas of multi-family residential properties. There is 

currently discussion about providing a smoke-free choice in multi unit housing. 

‣ In a non-smoking building, what happens to people who use medical marijuana? It 

does not always need to be smoked. 

‣ Look at all protected classes for the AI, not just race; for example, consider familial 

status and disabilities. 

DISABILITIES COMMISSION 

December 5, 2011; 6:30 p.m. 

Following a brief presentation regarding the AI by Lisa Luboff, Housing Division and Beth 

Stochl, Consultant, the Disabilities Commission provided the following comments: 

‣ Concern that not all affordable and accessible housing is being monitored by the 

City. Response: City staff monitors HOME funded developments as required by 

HUD which involves a file review, review of income certifications, and any other 

requirements of the City agreement. In order to monitor all affordable housing units 



III-18 



in the City, it would take over 7,000 hours. The Commissioners asked if more 

resources are needed for monitoring; the answer was yes. 

‣ How does an applicant know where they are on the City’s consolidated waiting list for 

housing? Is there a way to have a waiting list for accessible units in new 

developments? Response: Over 30,000 people are on the waiting list. A number is 

not assigned, but there are priorities assigned such as live or work in the City, 

homeless in the City. Approximately 4,000 people on the waiting list have a Santa 

Monica preference. Only approximately 50 Housing Authority Vouchers are freed up 

annually. When a unit is available, the waiting list is used to find the target 

population for that type of unit. Inclusionary housing units that are available must 

use names from the list before other advertising. Units developed with City loans do 

not currently use the consolidated waiting list – such as CCSM units– and draw from 

their own waiting lists. 

‣ In management of multi-family residential buildings, important to employ people who 

know about fair housing rights. If not, important to train all employees, not just 

managers. 

‣ The information from the City Attorney’s Office Consumer Protection Unit that 

approximately 67% of all fair housing complaints over the past three years have 

been related to disabilities was of interest. 

‣ Service animals are allowed with documentation. The recent case at Santa Monica 

Shores regarding service animals was discussed. 

‣ Important to get the word out regarding rent control and how seniors who live on an 

upper floor of a building can move to a vacant unit on the first floor. 

‣ Santa Monica should adopt a visitability ordinance. There was a recent federal study 

regarding the lack of housing stock meeting ADA. 

‣ Segregated housing (exclusively disabled housing) is not recommended. Persons 

with disabilities should be integrated within the overall population. 

‣ Does HUD have a program to provide information to private landlords regarding 

reasonable accommodation? 

‣ Daily Press now has a box in the ad section regarding non-discrimination, but 

nothing regarding service animals 

‣ Many of the complaints received by Westside Center for Independent Living (WCIL) 

are resolved through negotiations. WCIL is funded to help prevent situations where 

there is not reasonable accommodation. 

‣ There are tax incentives available for universal design and visitability. 



III-19 


POTENTIAL IMPEDIMENTS 

IV. REVIEW OF POTENTIAL IMPEDIMENTS 

This section evaluates potential public and private sector impediments to fair housing choice 

in Santa Monica. 

A. POTENTIAL PUBLIC SECTOR IMPEDIMENTS 

The following section evaluates public policies in Santa Monica and their impact – both 

positive and negative - on fair housing choice, including: 

‣ Local zoning, building and occupancy codes 

‣ Provision for a variety of housing types 

‣ Zoning regulations and procedures for persons with disabilities 

‣ Public policies affecting housing activities 

‣ Rent Control policies 

‣ Santa Monica Housing Authority policies 

‣ Moratoriums or growth management plans 

‣ Residential development fees 

‣ Community representation 

HUD has prepared a checklist to identify the public policies that an AI must evaluate; 

Appendix A includes the completed 18 question HUD checklist Review of Public Policies 

and Practices for Santa Monica. Many of Santa Monica’s public policies serve to further fair 

housing choice, such as the City’s anti-discrimination ordinances, Rent Control protections 

and Housing Authority practices, and are discussed in the following section to provide a 

complete picture of the impact of the City’s policies on fair housing. 

1. Local Zoning, Building and Occupancy Codes 

Santa Monica regulates the type, location, density, and scale of residential development 

primarily through the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. In general, the City’s zoning 

regulations are designed to balance the goal of providing affordable housing opportunities 

for all income groups with the goal of preserving the character and integrity of existing 

neighborhoods and protecting the health and safety of residents. 

Based on existing zoning designations, over 3,600 acres of land in Santa Monica are 

devoted to residential uses, accounting for two-thirds of the city’s land area. Commercial 

zoning districts provide an additional 825 acres (15 percent of the city’s land) and residential 

uses are an allowable use in all commercial districts. 

Te 4-2 Zoning Districts 

a. Residential Development Standards 

The City’s zoning regulations are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and 

general welfare of residents as well as implement the policies of the General Plan. The 

Zoning Code also serves to preserve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods. 

Table IV-1 summarizes the most pertinent development standards within Santa Monica’s 



IV-1 



primary residential zones. The City’s Housing Element documents over 1,000 affordable 

residential units completed, under construction or in the development review process 

during the 1998-2008 period, evidence that the City’s Zoning Code does not constitute a 

significant constraint to the production of housing. 

Table IV-1: Residential Development Standards 

Development 

Residential Zone District 

Standard 

R1 R2 R3 R4 

Min. Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 

Max. Density 8.7 du/acre 29 du/acre 35 du/acre 48 du/acre 

3 stories/ 

Max.Height 

2 stories/ 2 stories/ 

35 ft* 

4 stories/ 

28 ft Flat roof: 23 ft (Others: 2 Flat roof: 40 ft 

stories/23 ft) 

Max. Parcel Coverage 

First Story 

Second Story 

Third Story 

Fourth Story 

35-60% 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

45% -50% 

90% of 1 st story 

n/a 

n/a 

50% 

85%-90% of1 s story 

60% of1 s story 

n/a 

50% 




Front Yard (ft.) 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 

Side Yard (ft.) 

10% parcel width 

or min 3.5 ft 

8 ft 8 ft 8 ft 

Rear Yard (ft.) 25 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 

Open Space 

4-5 units 

6+ units 

n/a 

n/a 

100 sq. ft. per unit 

50 sq. ft. per unit 

Source: Santa Monica Municipal Code. 

* Preferred projects: congregate housing, homeless shelters, hospice facilities, large family day care, residential 

care facilities, senior group home housing, senior housing, single-family dwellings, transitional housing, multi-family 

housing where 25% of units are 3 bdrms or larger, projects registered to receive a LEED rating of silver or higher. 

Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, two parking spaces in a garage are required for a singlefamily 

residence. For multi-family residences, Santa Monica’s Zoning Ordinance provides for 

parking to be calculated on a per bedroom basis. The parking requirements are: 1.0 space 

for a studio unit; 1.5 space for a one-bedroom unit; and 2 spaces per unit for 2 or more 

bedrooms. The parking requirement for condominiums is slightly higher at 2.0 covered 

spaces per unit with one or more bedrooms. The city provides reduced parking standards 

for deed-restricted affordable housing at 1.0 space for a one-bedroom and 1.5 spaces for a 

two-bedroom unit. 

For more than a decade, Santa Monica has encouraged housing production in commercial 

zones through its Zoning Code and various incentives and has been successful in realizing 

numerous free-standing residential projects as well as residential/commercial mixed use. 

Single-family homes, multifamily homes, congregate housing, transitional housing, artists’ 

lofts, SROs, and senior housing may be developed in commercial districts including the 

BCD, BSC, CP, C2, C3, C3C, C4, C5, and C6 districts. By allowing residential uses in 

commercial zones, the City has provided extensive opportunities to address its share of 

future housing needs. Also, certain types of housing, for artists and transitional facilities, are 

allowed in industrial areas. The maximum building height varies from 30 feet in the C2 zone 



IV-2 



to 45 feet in the C3, C5, and C6 districts. There are no minimum rear and side yard setback 

requirements, except where the rear parcel line or interior side parcel line abuts a residential 

district. 

Moreover, in several districts, the City offers special incentives for housing: 

• In the BSC, C3C, and CM districts, any floor area devoted to residential use is 

counted at 50 percent for purposes of calculating FAR. In BCD, C2, C4, and C6 

districts, the City offers increased density if at least 30 percent of the project is 

residential. 

• In the BCD, C3-C, C6, and C3 districts, the City eliminates the restriction on the 

number of stories that can be built if the structure contains at least one floor of 

residential uses. The City also offers increased maximum height to projects with a 

designated number of floors of residential use. 

• The City offers bonuses for building heights, number of stories and FAR for 

preferred residential projects within many residential and commercial districts. 

a. Building Code 

Santa Monica has adopted the 2010 California Building Standards Code (based on the 2009 

International Building Code), the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code, and 2010 

California Residential Code. The State Building Standards Code establishes accessibility 

requirements in Chapters 11A (Housing Accessibility) and 11B (Accessibility to Public 

Buildings, Public Accommodations, Commercial Buildings and Publicly Funded Housing). 

Consistent with the federal Fair Housing Act, the Code requires all multi-family structures 

with four or more units built after March 13, 1991 to provide accessible routes throughout 

the property, and “adaptable” dwelling units to allow conversion to a fully accessible unit 

without significant costs and the need to do significant structural modifications. In multifamily 

structures with an elevator, 100% of the units must meet the accessibility 

requirements, whereas in buildings without an elevator, all of the ground floor units must be 

accessible. The Code requires compliance with the following seven basic design and 

construction requirements for accessible routes and unit adaptability: 

#1 Accessible building entrance on an accessible route 

#2 Accessible and usable public and common-use areas 

#3 Usable doors by a person in a wheelchair 

#4 Accessible route into and through the dwelling unit 

#5 Light switches, electrical outlets, thermostats, etc in accessible locations 

#6 Reinforced bathroom walls for later installation of grab bars 

#7 Usable kitchens and bathrooms for persons in a wheelchair 



IV-3 



These accessibility requirements pertain to new construction only, and not renovations or 

remodels. However, the Building Code applies a more stringent standard for publiclyfunded 

housing, requiring 20 percent of public funds utilized on renovation, structural repair, 

alterations or additions to existing multi-family buildings be allocated towards removal of 

architectural barriers. 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 adds an additional layer of accessibility 

requirements for developments receiving federal funds, such as HOME or CDBG. In 

federally assisted new construction or substantially rehabilitated housing with five or more 

units, five percent of the units, or at least one unit, must be accessible for persons with 

mobility disabilities. An additional two percent of the dwelling units, or at least one unit, must 

be accessible for persons with hearing or visual disabilities. These units must be 

constructed in accordance with the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS), or a 

standard that is equivalent or stricter. UFAS generally defines an accessible housing unit as 

a unit located on an accessible route that can be approached, entered and used by 

individuals with disabilities. 

Santa Monica’s Building Division ensures compliance with all State and Federal accessibility 

requirements as part of the Plan Check process. During the construction phase, building 

inspectors conduct site visits to ensure the project adheres to the required accessibility 

specifications prior to signing off on the final certificate of occupancy. 

Code enforcement can be a potential fair housing concern because code compliance 

actions may create disproportionate impacts on protected groups such as minority 

populations. In Santa Monica, however, code enforcement is triggered by complaints and 

the City seeks voluntary code compliance through administrative processes. In some cases, 

proactive campaigns are also undertaken when a widespread problem is identified. In 

conjunction with inspecting and noticing property owners regarding a violation, code 

enforcement personnel informs property owners of assistance provided through the City’s 

various housing rehabilitation programs. 

b. Occupancy Standards 

Local occupancy standards more stringent than those established by the State have been 

deemed unconstitutional by the courts; the Santa Monica Zoning Ordinance does not 

contain residential occupancy standards. All California jurisdictions are mandated to follow 

the occupancy standards established under the State Uniform Housing Code (UHC). The 

UHC requires that every dwelling, except studio apartments, have one room with at least 

120 square feet of floor area. Two persons are permitted to use a room for sleeping 

purposes if it has a total area of not less than 70 square feet. When more than two persons 

occupy a room, the required floor area must be increased by 50 square feet per occupant. 

The UHC is based on health and safety considerations, and is not intended to discriminate 

based on familial status. 



IV-4 



c. No Smoking Laws in Multi-Family Housing 

Effective September 9, 2010, Santa Monica expanded its current prohibition of smoking in 

multi-unit residential building common areas (yards, walkways, play areas, parking lots, etc) 

to include a 25 foot radius around any apartment building door, window or vent. Restrictions 

encompass private balconies, patios, porches and decks within the 25 foot radius. 

Under the law, a person who smokes in a restricted area is subject to a court-ordered 

payment of $100 for the first offense, with subsequent violations within the same year 

carrying fines of $200 and $500 respectively. The city’s ordinance prohibits landlords from 

using smoking as grounds for tenant eviction. 

Landlords and homeowner associations are required to post at least one conspicuous sign 

in an apartment or condo common area notifying residents of the new law and the remedy. 

They were also required to give notice by Dec. 1, 2010 to all tenants in affected units 

informing them of the new locations where smoking is banned and the remedies for 

enforcing the new law. 

A new state law went into effect on Jan. 1, 2012 that gives landlords the right to prohibit 

smoking within their properties. The law requires landlords to use their lease and rental 

agreements to clearly specify prohibitions on smoking. Santa Monica’s Rent Control Board 

has conducted outreach to tenants to clarify the new law has no effect on existing tenancies 

covered by the Rent control Law. This is because the new State law specifically says: 

“a landlord who exercises the authority …to prohibit smoking shall be subject to 

federal, state, and local requirements governing changes to the terms of a lease or 

rental agreement for tenants with leases or rental agreements that are in existence at 

the time that the policy limiting or prohibiting smoking is adopted.” 

Santa Monica prohibits unilateral changes in rent-controlled tenancies. Thus, if a tenant is 

currently not prohibited from smoking inside their apartment by the terms of their rental 

agreement, the new statute will not change that. However, once that tenant moves out, the 

landlord can prohibit the unit’s future occupant from smoking inside that unit as well as 

anywhere else on the property. 



IV-5 



2. Provision for a Variety of Housing Types 

Through its zoning powers, Santa Monica offers a range of options for siting residential uses 

including housing for special needs groups. Table IV-2 summarizes the variety of housing 

types permitted Santa Monica’s zoning districts. Affordable housing and SROs with 49 units 

or less are permitted by right, with discretionary review required for 50 or more units. 

The City provides for transitional housing in all multi-family residential and commercial 

zones. Homeless shelters are conditionally permitted in six residential districts, and are 

permitted by right in almost all nonresidential zones. The City also provides for domestic 

violence shelters in all residential districts and commercial districts except for one. 

The Zoning Ordinance contains numerous incentives specifically designed to facilitate the 

development of affordable and special needs housing, including the following: 

• Planning Fee Waiver: Planning and Zoning review fees are waived for projects that 

are 100 percent deed restricted for affordable housing. 

• Special Needs Housing by Right in Residential Zones: Senior and senior group 

housing, transitional housing, congregate housing, and domestic violence shelters 

are permitted by right in all multi-family residential districts. 

• Special Needs Housing by Right in Commercial Zones: Shelters of 55 beds or 

less, domestic violence shelters, congregate housing, transitional housing, single 

room occupancy housing, and senior housing are permitted by right in the BCD, 

BSC, C2, C3, C3C, C4, C6, CM, and CP zones. 

• Exemption from Story Limit: 100% affordable housing projects are exempt from 

the applicable limits on the number of stories. However, such projects are still subject 

to applicable height limits in each zone. 

• Height Bonus: 100% affordable housing developments in nonresidential zones are 

eligible for height bonus of ten feet if consistent with the Land Use Element. 

• State Density Bonus: Projects may be eligible for increases in density (up to 35%), 

along with 1-3 development incentives/concessions based upon the amount of 

affordable housing provided. 

• Reduced Parking Requirements: Parking reductions are provided for affordable 

housing, senior housing, shelters, congregate care housing, and transitional housing. 

Typically, the reduction allowed is 0.5 spaces per unit. 

While the City provides for senior housing in all its multi-family and most commercial zones, 

the age threshold for senior housing is identified as 60+ years in the Zoning Code. The City 

will amend this definition to be consistent with the Fair Housing Act and Unruh Civil Rights 

Act which establish a threshold of 62 years of age for senior housing exempt from familial 

status protections, or 55 years of age in a senior citizen housing development (35+ units). 



IV-6 



Table IV-2: Permitted Housing Types by Residential Zoning Category 

Housing Type OP OP-1 OP-2 OP-3 OP-4 R1 R2 

R3/ 

R4 

BCD 

RVC 

CP/ 

CM 

CC C2 C3 

Single-Family P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 

Duplex 

UP 

Multi-Family* P P P P P P P P P P P P 

Second Units UP UP 

Transitional 

Housing** 

P P P P P P P P P P P P 

SRO 

(up to 49 units) 

P P P P P P P P P P P 

SRO 

(50+ units) 

DR DR DR DR DR DR DR DR DR DR DR 

Domestic 

Violence 

P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 

Shelters 

Hospice 

Facilities 

P P P 

Large Group 

Homes 

PSP PSP PSP PSP PSP PSP PSP 

Community 

Care Facilities 

C C C C C 

Residential 

Care 

Facilities** 

C C P C C C 

(7+ persons) 

Congregate 

Housing 

P P P P P P P P P P P 

Senior Housing P P P P P P P P P P P 

Senior Group 

Housing 

PSP P P P P P P P P P P 

Homeless 

Shelters 

C C C C P C P P P P P 

55 beds 

Source: Santa Monica Municipal Code. 

P = Permitted by right. DR = Development Review. UP = Use Permit. C = Conditional Use Permit. PSP = Performance 

Standards Permit. 

* Multi-family apartments with 25% 3+ bedroom units, 60% of remaining units 2+ bedrooms, and project registered with 

USGBD to receive LEED rating of silver or higher. 

** Residential care facilities with 6 or fewer persons are considered a family dwelling and permitted in all zones where singlefamily 

units are permitted. 

Supportive housing is permitted and considered a residential use by right under the definitions of Transitional Housing, 

Domestic Violence Shelters, Congregate Housing, Residential Care Facilities and Homeless Shelters. 

C4/ 

C6 



IV-7 



3. Zoning Regulations and Practices for Persons with Disabilities 

The City of Santa Monica recognizes the importance of addressing the housing needs 

of persons with disabilities. This section reviews potential governmental constraints to 

the development and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities. 

a. Definition of Family 

Local governments may unintentionally restrict access to housing for households 

failing to qualify as a “family” by the definition specified in the Zoning Code. 

Specifically, a restrictive definition of “family” that limits the number of and differentiates 

between related and unrelated individuals living together may illegally limit the 

development and siting of group homes for persons with disabilities, but not housing 

for families that are similarly sized or situated. 

Santa Monica’s Zoning Regulations do not include a definition of “family”. Instead, the 

Zoning Regulations define the persons who occupy a housing unit as a “household”. A 

household is defined as follows: 

9.04.02.030.415 Household 

Persons living together in a single dwelling unit, with common access to, and 

common use of all living and eating areas and all areas and facilities for the 

preparation and storage of food within the dwelling unit. 

This definition of household does not refer to related or unrelated persons who may 

occupy a housing unit. Therefore, the zoning regulations do not discriminate against 

unrelated individuals with disabilities who reside together in a congregate or group 

living arrangement. 

b. Zoning and Land Use 

Pursuant to the Lanterman Act, licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer 

persons should be treated as a regular residential use and permitted where residential 

uses are permitted. Santa Monica zoning regulations specify that residential care 

facilities with 6 or fewer persons are considered a family dwelling and thus permitted in 

all zones where single-family units are permitted: 

9.04.02.030.715 Residential Facility 

A community care facility which consists of any family home, group care facility, 

or similar facility as determined by the Director of the State Department of Social 

Services, for twenty-four-hour non-medical care of persons in need of personal 

services, supervision or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily 

living or for the protection of the individual, as defined in Article 1 of Chapter 3 of 

the California Health and Safety Code, Section 1500 et seq. A residential facility 

serving six or fewer persons shall be considered a family dwelling for all zoning 

purposes. 



IV-8 



In terms of large residential care facilities with more than six residents, Santa Monica’s 

Zoning Code conditionally permits these uses in the R2, R3, R4, OP, OP-2, and OP-4 

zones, whereas the OP-3 zone permits them by right; no separation standards are 

imposed on these facilities (refer to Table IV-2). The City’s reasonable accommodation 

procedures currently under development will make explicit that facilities housing seven 

or more disabled persons may seek an exception or waiver from the Zoning Code 

standards and requirement for a Conditional Use Permit. 

Development standards for housing that serves persons with disabilities are the same 

as those for other residential developments. The Zoning Code does not specify a 

unique set of performance standards for group care facilities and other types of housing 

facilities for persons with a disability. The standard development requirements are not 

overly burdensome and do not represent a constraint to the provision of such housing. 

Santa Monica’s Zoning Code does not contain a definition of disability. However, 

specific disabilities are mentioned as part of a use definition, such as “terminally ill 

(hospice definition) and chronic illness/infirmity (nursing home definition). Under the Fair 

Housing Act, persons with disabilities (or handicaps) are defined as “individuals with 

physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities; 

has a record of such impairment; or is regarded as having such impairment.” In order to 

affirmatively further fair housing, the City will add to the zoning regulations a disability 

definition consistent with the Fair Housing Act. 

c. Building Code 

The City enforces Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which regulates the 

access and adaptability of buildings to accommodate persons with disabilities. ADA 

accessibility guidelines requires new residential buildings consisting of three or more 

units to incorporate design features, including (1) adaptive design features for the 

interior of the unit, (2) accessible public and common use portions, and (3) sufficiently 

wider doors to allow wheelchair access. The City ensures that all plans meet ADA 

accessibility standards and in recent years a number of accessible residential 

developments incorporating the new standards have been constructed. 

Santa Monica uses the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code. No unique 

restrictions are in place for accessible housing, such as minimum distances, special 

conditions for accessible housing, or other such regulations that could constrain the 

development, maintenance, improvement, or alteration of housing for persons with a 

disability. “Universal Design” housing which is fully accessible to persons with most 

disabilities, are allowed under the California Building Code (CBC) and UBC standards. 

Flexible development standards may also be considered by the City. Per State law, 

requests for modifications to ensure housing access, such as ramps up to 30 inches in 

height, do not require a building permit. 

d. Reasonable Accommodation 

Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act 

direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations (i.e. modifications or 



IV-9 



exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations when such 

accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to 

use and enjoy a dwelling. For example, it may be reasonable to accommodate requests 

from persons with disabilities to waive a setback requirement or other standard of the 

Zoning Code to ensure that homes are accessible for the mobility impaired. Whether a 

particular modification is reasonable depends on the circumstances. 

The City’s zoning regulations do not currently describe a formal “reasonable 

accommodation procedure”. The City initiated a comprehensive update of its Zoning 

Code in 2011 and is developing reasonable accommodation procedures in conjunction 

with the update. The Zoning Code and reasonable accommodation procedures are 

projected to be adopted in mid 2012. One of the main reasons for a reasonable 

accommodation procedure is to provide a way – other than through a variance – for 

disabled applicants to request a modification from zoning, building and land use rules, 

standards, and policies. 

Santa Monica Community Corporation (CCSM) maintains written procedures for 

granting a reasonable accommodation on its nearly 1,500 affordable rental units. CCSM 

reports receiving an average of 3 to 5 requests for reasonable accommodations per 

month, and provides accommodation through various means, including transfer of units 

and assistance from the Westside Center for Independent Living (WCIL). The Santa 

Monica Housing Authority (SMHA) also maintains written policies and procedures for 

granting a reasonable accommodation (refer to section A.6 later in this chapter). 

4. Public Policies Concerning Housing Activities 

a. General Plan Housing Element 

The General Plan Housing Element is a state-mandated document which sets forth a 

comprehensive strategy to address the community’s identified housing needs. The 

2008-2014 Santa Monica Housing Element was adopted by City Council in November 

2008 and was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community 

Development (HCD) as being in compliance with state housing element statutes. 

Important criteria for State HCD approval of any housing element include a 

determination that the local jurisdiction’s policies do not unduly constrain the 

maintenance, improvement, and development of a variety of housing choices for all 

income levels. 

Santa Monica’s Housing Element sets forth the following eight goals: 

GOAL 1: Promote the construction of new housing within the City’s regulatory 

framework. 

GOAL 2: Encourage the production of housing for all income categories 

including housing for the community’s workforce. 

GOAL 3: Protect the existing supply of affordable housing. 

GOAL 4: Promote the rehabilitation and continued maintenance of existing 

housing. 

GOAL 5: Provide housing assistance and supportive services to very low, low 

and moderate income households and households with special needs. 



IV-10 



GOAL 6: Eliminate discrimination in the rental or sale of housing on the basis 

of race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual preference, age, disability, family 

status, AIDS, or other such characteristics. 

GOAL 7: Promote quality housing and neighborhoods. 

GOAL 8: Promote the participation of citizens, community groups, and 

governmental agencies in housing and community development activities. 

State Housing Element law requires jurisdictions to adopt an action program to: 

“Promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, 

marital status, ancestry, national origin, or color.” 

While all of Santa Monica’s Housing Element programs expand housing choice, the 

following programs most directly promote equal housing opportunity: 

Program 2g: Facilitate Development and Maintenance of Special Needs 

Housing 

Program 2j: Facilitate a Reduction in Homeless Living on the Streets through 

Provision of Affordable, Permanent, Supportive Housing 

Program 3b: Protection of Mobile Home Park Tenants 

Program 3c: Maintain a Tenant Eviction Protection Program 

Program 5d: Provide Tenant Relocation Assistance 

Program 5e: Maintain a Temporary Relocation Program 

Program 5g: Maintain Senior Homeless Prevention Program 

Program 5h: Reasonable Accommodation (adopt written procedures) 

Program 6a: Maintain Fair Housing Programs 

Program 6b: Provide Tenant/Landlord Mediation and Legal Services 

Program 8a: Maintain a Citizen Notification Program 

b. Consolidated Plan 

As a recipient of federal housing and community development block grant funds, Santa 

Monica is required to adopt a Consolidated Plan that identifies priorities and resources 

for affordable housing and community development projects and services. More 

specifically, the Consolidated Plan directs the City’s expenditure of approximately $1.9 

million in annual CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) and HOME (Home 

Investment Partnership Act) funds. Santa Monica’s current Consolidated Plan covers 

the 2010-2015 period. 

The Strategic Plan portion of the Consolidated Plan identifies: 

• Priorities for allocating funds among priority needs throughout the City, as well 

as geographically in target neighborhoods 

• Obstacles to meeting underserved needs 

• How funds expected to be available will be used to address priority needs 

• 2010-2015 quantified objectives for the City’s housing and community 

development activities 

Santa Monica’s Consolidated Plan incorporates numerous policies and programs from 

the City’s Housing Element, including actions to promote equal housing opportunity. 



IV-11 



c. City Anti-Discrimination Policies 

Santa Monica maintains the following anti-discrimination protections within its Code: 

Sexual Orientation or Domestic Partnership: Chapter 4.40 of the Municipal Code 

prohibits housing discrimination against persons based upon sexual orientation or 

domestic partnership. Specifically, the Code prohibits unlawful real estate practices, 

generally defined as the refusal to treat persons fairly in the sale, lease or rental of 

housing; the provision of credit or insurance; the advertisement of housing; and the 

provision of tenant services. In addition, the Code prohibits evictions against any tenant 

on the grounds that he or she has breached a rental agreement if the alleged breach 

arises from an increase in the number of occupants due to the domestic partnership of 

the tenant, provided that the occupancy by the tenant’s domestic partner and children of 

the domestic partner is otherwise lawful. The only exception to these protections 

applies to the rental or leasing of any housing unit in which the owner or lessor or any 

member of his or her family occupies one of the living units and either a) it is necessary 

for the owner or lessor to use a bathroom or kitchen facility in common with the 

prospective tenants; or b) the structure contains less than three units. 

Persons Living with AIDS: Chapter 4.52 of the Municipal Code prohibits housing 

discrimination against a person with AIDS, a history of AIDS, or those regarded as 

having or transmitting AIDS. Specifically, the Code prohibits unlawful real estate 

practices, which are generally defined as the refusal to treat persons fairly in the sale, 

lease or rental of housing; the provision of credit or insurance; the advertisement of 

housing; and the provision of tenant services. The only exception applies to the rental 

or leasing of any housing unit in which the owner or lessor or any member of his or her 

family occupies one of the living units and it is necessary for the owner or lessor to use 

a bathroom or kitchen facility in common with the prospective tenants. 

Families with Children: Chapter 4.28 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code establishes 

the following actions as unlawful for any person offering for rent of lease, renting, 

leasing, or listing any housing accommodation, or any authorized agent or employee of 

such person: 

• Refuse to rent or lease a housing accommodation, allow access to or use of the 

common areas and facilities, serve a notice of termination of tenancy, 

commence an unlawful detainer action or otherwise deny or withhold a housing 

accommodation on the basis of age, parenthood, pregnancy, or the actual or 

potential occupancy of a minor or child. 

• Advertise, represent, or include in any contract with regard to a housing 

accommodation offered by that person a statement that indicates any 

preference, limitation, or discrimination with respect to age, parenthood, 

pregnancy, or the potential actual occupancy of a minor child. 

• Include in any rental agreement or lease for a housing accommodation a clause 

providing that as a condition of continued occupancy, the tenants shall remain 



IV-12 



childless or shall not bear children or otherwise not maintain a household with a 

person or persons of a certain age. 

• Threaten to commence or commence eviction proceedings against any tenant 

head of household on the grounds of breach of a rental agreement due to an 

increase in the number of occupants arising out of the marriage of the tenant, or 

the birth, adoption, or change of legal custody of a minor child of whom the 

tenant head of household or his or her spouse is the parent or legal guardian. 

Exceptions to this chapter include housing designed and operated exclusively for senior 

adults and their spouses, or any nursing, convalescent, or retirement home. 

d. Affirmative Marketing Policies 

HUD’s definition of affirmative marketing is marketing efforts intended to reach those 

prospective tenants and homebuyers who are least likely to apply for HOME-assisted 

housing to make them aware of available affordable housing opportunities. The City of 

Santa Monica’s Housing Division and project owners must adopt an Affirmative Fair 

Housing Marketing Plan (AFHMP) for any housing with five or more units assisted 

through the federal HOME program. 

The City has established affirmative marketing policies and procedures to serve as a 

guide to applicants in developing AFHMPs for their projects, including: 

Targeting: Identify the segments of the eligible population 

Outreach: Outline an outreach program that includes special measures designed to 

attract those groups identified as least likely to apply and other efforts designed to 

attract persons from the total population. 

Indicators: Identify the indicators to be used to measure the success of the 

marketing program. The effectiveness of the marketing program can be determined 

by noting if the program effectively attracted renters or buyers who are: 

from the majority and minority groups, regardless of gender, as represented 

in the population of the housing market area; 

person with disabilities and their families; and 

families with children, if applicable. 

All applicants are required to make a “good faith effort” to carry out the provisions of 

HUD’s Affirmative Marketing requirements. Examples of such efforts include: 

• Advertising in print and electronic media that is used and viewed or listened to 

by those identified as least likely to apply; 

• Marketing housing to specific community, religious or other organizations 

frequented by those least likely to apply; 

• Developing a brochure or handout that describes community facilities to be 

used by buyers or renters, how the proposed project will be accessible to 

physically handicapped persons and how any reasonable accommodations will 

be made to persons with disabilities; and 

• Insuring that the management staff has read and understood the Fair Housing 

Act, and the purpose and objectives of the AFHM Plan. 



IV-13 



e. Dissolution of Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency 

Affordable housing has been a longstanding priority in Santa Monica, and the primary 

local revenue source for affordable housing has traditionally been the Redevelopment 

Agency’s Low- and Moderate-income Housing Fund. Under the former Redevelopment 

law, twenty percent of all redevelopment tax increment funds that came to the City were 

required to be spent on affordable housing. Santa Monica exceeded that requirement in 

order to make the City an accessible place to live for households with diverse levels of 

incomes. Over the last 25 years, the former Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency 

spent more than $195 million on affordable housing development. 

On December 29, 2011 the California Supreme Court issued a ruling upholding AB 1X 

26, legislation that called for the elimination of hundreds of local redevelopment 

agencies in the state. On January 10, 2012, the City of Santa Monica elected to 

become the Successor Agency of the former Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency 

effective February 1, 2012. As the Successor Agency, the City elected to carry out 

activities necessary to wind down the affairs of the former Redevelopment Agency, 

including carrying out existing projects that are in various stages of development. 

In addition, on January 10, 2012 the City elected to retain the housing assets and 

functions previously performed by the Redevelopment Agency. The City entered into 

an agreement with the Housing Authority to carry out the affordable housing 

production, preservation and assistance activities, and managing all housing assets. 

With the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, redevelopment funds will no longer 

be available to support Santa Monica’s affordable housing activities. The City is 

pursuing alternative funding sources for its affordable housing program, including 

replacement funding for the 70 families assisted under the Redevelopment Agency 

Rental Assistance Program. 



IV-14 



5. Rent Control 

Santa Monica Rent Control was adopted by the voters in April 1979 in response to a 

shortage of housing units, low vacancy rates and rapidly rising rents. The law was 

intended to alleviate the hardship of the housing shortage and to ensure that owners 

received no more than a fair return. Regulations were adopted by the Rent Control 

Board to implement and enforce the Rent Control Law. Changes to the Charter can 

only be made by the voters, whereas changes to the implementing Regulations are 

made by the Board. 

The City’s Rent Control Law: 

• Controls the amount that may continue to be charged for a rental unit and 

provides remedies for the collection of excess rent. 

• Determines the amenities and services that are included as part of the rent 

and provides remedies for removal or reduction of those amenities. 

• Provides for only “just cause” evictions. 

• Limits removal of controlled units from rental market. 

The following units are covered under the Law: 

• Most residential rental buildings in the City constructed prior to April 10, 1979 

and certain units constructed after that date are covered by Rent Control. 

• In addition to apartment buildings, Rent Control also applies to single-family 

homes and condominiums used as rentals. 

• Duplexes and triplexes where one of the units is occupied by the owner are 

not subject to rent control. 

The Rent Control Board provides waivers of Rent Control registration fees to units 

occupied by their owners, subsidized by HUD (Section 8 or HOME program), or 

occupied by low-income tenants who are over 62 or disabled. There are also fee 

waivers for condominiums and single-family-dwellings on which rent restrictions have 

been lifted pursuant to the Costa-Hawkins' Act, for tenants participating in the City of 

Santa Monica TARP program, and in mobile home parks for units where tenants have 

signed long-term leases. 

a. Vacancy Decontrol 

The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, passed by the State Legislature in 1995, has 

had a significant impact on local rent control ordinances. Under this state law, a unit’s 

rent is decontrolled at the end of a tenancy. The owner can set a new rent for the next 

tenancy which is then controlled at that level, leading some to characterize Costa- 

Hawkins as a system of “vacancy decontrol-recontrol.” 

The following highlights some of the major effects Costa Hawkins’s has on the Santa 

Monica rental market during its 123years of implementation (1999-2011): 1 

1 The Impact of Market Rate Vacancy Increases - Thirteenth Year Report 1999-2011, Santa 

Monica Rent Control Board. 



IV-15 



• Since the decontrol-recontrol system began, nearly 17,300 controlled units have 

received vacancy increases, representing 61% of the City’s total rent controlled 

housing stock. Market rate rents are on average roughly double that of longterm 

controlled rents. 

• Median rents for decontrolled-recontrolled apartments have gone up by well 

over 150% between 1999-2011, compared to a cumulative rate of inflation in 

southern California of 50% over the same period. 

• Prior to Costa Hawkins, 82% of Santa Monica’s rental units were affordable to 

low income households (


• The landlord seeks to recover possession to demolish or otherwise remove the 

controlled rental unit from rental residential housing use after having obtained all 

proper permits from the City of Santa Monica. 

• The landlord seeks to recover possession of the unit to remove the rental unit 

permanently from rental housing use pursuant to the Ellis Act 

In November 2010, Santa Monica voters passed Measure RR, amending the Rent 

Control Law to further strengthen tenant protections against eviction in the following 

three ways: 

• Extending “just cause” eviction protections to all tenants in multi-unit apartment 

buildings that are permanently exempt from rent control, as well as 2 and 3 unit 

owner-occupied properties, and newly constructed rental units. 

• Requiring owners to give tenants a reasonable opportunity to correct an alleged 

lease violation, nuisance activity, or failure to provide lawful access before 

serving a three-day notice to perform or quit. 

• Forbidding owners to evict for owner occupancy any tenant who has occupied a 

rental unit for at least five years and is 62 or older, disabled, or terminally ill, 

unless the owner (or qualified relative intending to occupy the unit) meets at 

least one of these criteria. 

Rent Control staff conducted extensive outreach to inform tenants and owners about 

the expanded evictions protections under Measure RR, including mailing the “Rent 

Control News” newsletter to nearly every renter in the City within days after the election 

results were final. In addition, staff created a Fact Sheet it made available at City Hall, 

posted on the Rent Control website, and mailed to members of the City’s neighborhood 

associations. 

Tenant evictions are monitored by Rent Control staff to ensure compliance with Just 

Cause Eviction requirements. In 2010, the Board received 106 separate notices of 

eviction. Of these, roughly half or 54 were for alleged nuisances or breaches of lease 

terms (it is for such reasons that Measure RR now requires warning and reasonable 

time to correct). Thirty-seven notices of eviction were for non-payment of rent, and 

twelve were for owner-occupancy. 

c. Tenant Harassment Protections 

In 2002, the City Council adopted a Tenant Harassment Ordinance to protect tenants in 

rent controlled units from landlords’ conduct in derogation of tenants’ rights. The 

ordinance prohibits the following acts by landlords if they are done with the intent to 

harass: 

• Taking away services provided for in the lease (such as parking or laundry) 

• Failure to perform repairs and maintenance required by law 

• Entering the apartment without proper notice 

• Using lies or intimidation intended to make a tenant move out 

• Giving a “3 day notice” or other eviction notice that is based on false charges 

where the landlord does not intend to take the case to court 

• Threatening the tenant, by word or gesture, with physical harm 



IV-17 



• Intentionally disturbing a tenant’s peace and quiet 

• Interfering with a tenant’s right to privacy 

• Refusing to acknowledge receipt of a tenant’s rent payment without justification 

• Violating any law which prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, sexual 

preference, sexual orientation, ethnic background, nationality, religion, age, 

parenthood, marriage, pregnancy, disability, AIDS or occupancy by a minor child 

In December 2011, the City Council extended these tenant harassment protections to all 

tenants covered by just cause eviction rules. Tenant harassment complaints are referred 

to the City Attorney’s Office for investigation and enforcement of the law. As a neutral 

enforcer of the law, the City can not represent tenants directly, and refers tenants 

requiring representation to Legal Aid (located near City Hall) and the Santa Monica Bar 

Association. 

In a recent lawsuit, the City sued a former rental property owner for violation of the 

City’s Tenant Harassment Laws, and the former tenant filed a separate lawsuit for 

excess rent, wrongful eviction and other claims. The owner agreed to pay restitution of 

$120,000 prior to the case being brought to trial. “This case shows that breaking the 

rental laws does not pay,” said Deputy City Attorney Adam Radinsky. “When landlords 

go out of the rental business, they need to follow the law. And tenants should know that 

they have legal rights and can’t simply be thrown out on the street.” 

d. Relocation Assistance 

Under the City’s Rent Control Law, a property owner is required to pay relocation 

assistance to a tenant when terminating tenancy for any of the following reasons: 

• The owner seeks to withdraw all rental units from the rental market as provided 

for under the Ellis Act 

• The owner seeks to recover possession of a rental housing unit for use by the 

owner or family member 

• The landlord seeks to recover possession to demolish or otherwise withdraw a 

rental housing unit from residential rental housing use, including units that were 

illegally converted to residential use, after having obtained the proper permits 

from the City 

Santa Monica had not increased its permanent relocation benefit amounts (other than 

cost of living increases) since 2007, during which time rent levels in the City had 

increased and vacancies had decreased, so in December 2011, City Council adopted 

increased relocation fees. In addition, the city established augmented relocation 

amounts to households with seniors, disabled and children tenants because these 

households are particularly vulnerable. Table IV-3 presents the City’s adopted 2011 

relocation amounts. 



IV-18 



Table IV-3 Residential Relocation Fee Amounts 2011 

Unit Size 

Fee Amount 

Augmented Fee 

Amount* 

Single or Studio $7,800 $8,900 

One bedroom $12,050 $13,850 

Two or more bedrooms $16,300 18,750 

Source: Santa Monica Ordinance #2383 *Eligible households include those with a 

senior citizen or disabled occupant, or an occupant with whom a minor child resides. 

e. Rent Control Dispute Resolution 

The Rent Control Ordinance provides processes for filing of petitions, complaints and 

applications to resolve disputes between landlords and tenants. 

• Excess rent complaints are reviewed by staff and the owner is given a chance to 

resolve the complaint. Complaints which are unable to be resolved 

administratively are referred to the Hearings Department for mediation and/or 

hearing. 

• Owner-occupied exemption applications that are not resolved administratively 

are referred to the Hearings Department. 

• The Hearings Department provides mediation services as part of the decrease 

and excess rent processes, as well as for issues involving lack of maintenance, 

loss of housing services, and unreasonable construction impacts. The mediator 

has been very successful in settling a large percentage of these cases. 

The City has found that mediation may be particularly useful when a building is 

purchased. For example, new owners may want to fix-up the building and make 

improvements in the common areas, yet may be unaware of how the Rent Control law 

affects those changes. The owner may not realize that proper notice is required before 

entering the tenants’ units or that the tenants are entitled to certain amenities. The 

tenants may be concerned about changes to their home and disruptions to the 

longstanding practices or “culture” of a building and may not know how to communicate 

their concerns effectively. Both parties have different perspectives and needs, but no 

place to safely discuss them. Mediation may be appropriate and helpful in this type of 

situation. 

f. Rent Control Outreach Activities 

The Rent Control Board staff conducts extensive public outreach to keep existing and 

prospective tenants and landlords informed about Santa Monica’s Rent Control Law. 

The Board publishes two newsletters annually which it distributes to all rent controlled 

tenants and landlords, as well as postcards with the annual rent adjustment approved 

by the Board. Community meetings and free educational seminars are conducted at 

the City Library throughout the year, with the following seminars planned for 2012: 



IV-19 



• Owning Rental Property in Santa Monica: At this seminar, owners and 

managers learn the basics of the Santa Monica Rent Control Law and how to 

avoid common pitfalls. Topics include rents, amenities, maintenance, eviction 

limitations, restrictions on change of use, and services available through the 

Rent Control office. 

• Tenant Seminar on Santa Monica Rent Control Law: This seminar is 

designed for tenants to learn what services are available through the Rent 

Control office such as how rent and amenities are defined, the eviction 

protections under the law, and what remedies are available for issues related to 

rents, amenities, and maintenance. 

• Calculating the Annual Rent Increase: Designed for owners, this workshop 

offers a quick overview of how to calculate and notice this year’s general 

adjustment and surcharges. Attendees can sign up for one-on-one assistance 

with calculating and completing rent increase notices for a specific property. 

• Rental Property Maintenance: Presented with the City’s Code Compliance 

Division staff, this seminar will address what types of maintenance and repair 

are required, how and where to file a complaint, temporary relocation of tenants 

during repairs, and issues related to habitability, plumbing and painting. 

Tenants, owners, managers and all others are welcome. 

New Website Launched: In Spring 2010, Santa Monica Rent Control launched the 

redesigned Rent Control website to make it more user friendly, provide more detailed 

and more easily navigable data, and provide more continuously-current data to Rent 

Control users, including both current and prospective Santa Monica tenants and 

landlords. The Rent Control webpage is used extensively, with over 62,000 views in 

2010 alone. 

Greater Outreach to Spanish-Speaking Constituents: Rent Control Board staff 

recognize that Hispanic households are underrepresented in Santa Monica’s Rent 

Control program. The 2006 Santa Monica Tenant Survey conducted for the Board 

identifies 6.3 percent of rent-controlled households as Hispanic, whereas the 2010 

Census indicates Hispanic or Latino householders comprise 10.8 percent of all renter 

households in Santa Monica. During 2010, the Board greatly expanded outreach to 

Spanish-speaking constituents in two ways. First, Santa Monica Rent Control created 

the City’s first-ever Spanish-language website that exactly mirrors the English-language 

site in both layout and content. Second, Rent Control staff organized a Fall seminar 

conducted entirely in Spanish. The seminar was staffed by Spanish-speaking 

information coordinators as well as a Spanish-speaking code compliance officer. 

However, despite extensive advertisement of the seminar, including notification through 

the local Catholic church with a large number of Hispanic parishioners, attendance at 

the seminar was limited. 

Greater Outreach to Senior Citizen Constituents: As senior citizens (age 65+) 

occupy an estimated 15 percent of Santa Monica’s rent control households, Rent 

Control staff have begun conducting targeted outreach to seniors. Outreach to seniors 



IV-20 



was expanded when staff participated in the City’s first Senior Law Day in 2010, 

specifically designed provide seniors with greater access to legal services and to assist 

in their understanding of their rights to housing and other issues. As part of that 

participation, Rent Control staff provided written materials about the Rent Control Law 

and provided answers to seniors’ questions. 

New Social Media Presence: Beginning shortly after the Costa-Hawkins Rental 

Housing Act’s full enactment in 1999 and increasing over the subsequent decade, 

anecdotal evidence suggested that many new tenants mistakenly believed that their 

tenancies were not protected by the Rent Control Law. This seemed especially true for 

younger tenants. In order to reach out to new and younger tenants, Santa Monica Rent 

Control launched a Facebook page. The page, which is updated approximately twice a 

week, allows Rent Control staff to communicate regularly with those who have joined 

the page, and also allows constituents to communicate easily with staff. 

Apartment Listing Service Launched: The Rent Control Board started a new, free 

apartment listing service in the fall of 2010. Apartment owners are able to list vacancies 

for rent and tenants are able to access those listings free of charge, online or via 

handout from the Rent Control office, City library and other community locations. The 

list is published weekly and updated every Thursday. 



IV-21 



6. Santa Monica Housing Authority (SMHA) 

a. SMHA Programs 

The Santa Monica Housing Authority (SMHA) administers the Housing Choice Voucher 

(HCV) program; Shelter Plus Care vouchers; HOME funded vouchers; Serial Inebriate 

vouchers; and Redevelopment Agency funded vouchers. The Housing Choice Voucher 

program, often referred to as Section 8, provides rental assistance to extremely low and 

very low income households. The SMHA has budget authority for 1,092 tenant-based 

rental assistance (TBRA) vouchers. The SMHA allows up to 20 percent of HCV 

expenditures to be used as project-based vouchers (PBV), and currently, there are nine 

PBV administered by the SMHA. 

The SMHA administers up to 238 vouchers funded by Shelter Plus Care, a program that 

provides housing and supportive services to formerly homeless persons with chronic 

mental illness, substance abuse, and or HIV/AIDS and other disabilities. Other funds 

from the federal Supportive Housing Program are used to provide approximately 34 

vouchers to the Serial Inebriate population, referred by the Serial Inebriate Outreach 

Program (SIOP). The SIOP is a joint effort between the Santa Monica Police 

Department (SMPD) and the CLARE Foundation, a substance abuse treatment facility, 

to provide outreach services to in-custody arrestees including serial inebriates and 

others with chronic substance abuse issues. CLARE outreach counselors are available 

24/7 to go to the SMPD jail facility during peak release hours or as needed to offer 

arrestees services through their detoxification, outpatient, and residential treatment 

programs. 

A Senior Homeless Prevention and Rental Assistance program, funded through 

redevelopment housing funds, provides approximately 82 housing vouchers to 

homeless seniors. Seniors at risk of being evicted are eligible for a one-time grant of 

$2,000 to prevent them from becoming homeless. Case management is a requirement 

and is provided by community based non-profit agencies including St. Joseph’s Center, 

Ocean Park Community Center (OPCC) and WISE Senior Services. 

A Homeless Transitional Set-Aside program provides HCV and 34 HOME Tenant- 

Based Rental Assistance vouchers to formerly homeless persons who graduate from 

transitional housing programs funded by the City of Santa Monica. As units are vacated 

they are reserved for recently referred program graduates. Referrals are accepted from 

Sojourn, the OPCC, Family Place, St. Joseph’s Center, and two City funded homeless 

transitional housing programs. 

Both the HOME-funded Chronic Homeless Program and Redevelopment-funded Senior 

Homeless Program provides rental assistance to eligible Santa Monica residents. 

b. SMHA Policies and Plans to Promote Housing Choice 

The SMHA Administrative Plan (Plan) establishes policies for carrying out the Housing 

Choice Voucher (HCV) program in a manner consistent with HUD requirements and 

local goals and objectives contained in the Public Housing Agency (PHA) plan. The 



IV-22 



Administrative Plan explains the laws and HUD regulations requiring PHAs to 

affirmatively further civil rights and fair housing in all federally-assisted housing 

programs. The SMHA Plan specifically states: 

“The PHA shall not discriminate because of race, color, sex, religion, familial 

status, age, disability or national origin (called “protected classes”). Familial 

status includes children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal 

custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the 

age of 18.” 

In addition to Federal requirements to prohibit discrimination against certain classes, 

State and local requirements, as well as PHA policies, can prohibit discrimination 

against additional classes of people. The SMHA has adopted the following additional 

policy: 

“The PHA will not discriminate on the basis of marital status or sexual 

orientation.” 

These non-discrimination policies and regulations apply to all aspects of the SMHA’s 

actions, including but not limited to the opportunity to apply for housing, treatment in 

determining eligibility, and access to the same level of services. The Plan also states 

that the PHA will take steps to ensure that all families and owners are fully aware of all 

applicable civil rights laws. If there are discrimination complaints, the SMHA will 

attempt to remedy the discrimination and let the complainant know how to file the 

complaint with federal, state and/or local offices. 

Persons with Disabilities: The Administrative Plan provides policies related to persons 

with disabilities, including reasonable accommodation. As stated in the Plan, “the 

definition of a person with a disability for purposes of granting a reasonable 

accommodation request is much broader than the HUD definition of disability. Many 

people will not qualify as a disabled person under the HCV program, yet an 

accommodation is needed to provide equal opportunity.” Types of reasonable 

accommodation provided by the SMHA include: mailing applications and 

reexaminations; using higher payment standards if necessary to obtain a suitable 

housing unit; and/or providing time extensions for locating a unit. 

Accessibility to the SMHA programs and services for persons with hearing or vision 

impairments is also discussed in the Administrative Plan, along with requirements for 

physical accessibility. Standards for communication and key policies for the SMHA’s 

responsibilities for physical accessibility are provided in the Plan. 

Limited English Proficiency: The SMHA sets standards for improving access to 

services for persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) to remove barriers to 

accessing important benefits or services, understanding and exercising important rights, 

complying with applicable responsibilities, or understanding other information provided 

by the HCV program. The SMHA balances the following four factors in determining the 

level of access needed by LEP persons: (1) the number or proportion of LEP persons 



IV-23 



eligible to be served or likely to be encountered by the Housing Choice Voucher 

program: (2) the frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with the program; 

(3) the nature and importance of the programs, activity, or service provided by the 

program to people’s lives; and (4) the resources available to the PHA and costs. 

Balancing these four factors will ensure meaningful access by LEP persons to critical 

services while not imposing undue burdens on the SMHA. 

The SMHA has assessed LEP needs based on the American Community Survey from 

the Census and has prepared a draft Language Assistance Plan as part of the 2012 

Administrative Plan. The draft Plan states that the SMHA will continue to make the 

following resources available to LEP individuals and families: 

• Bilingual staff in designated positions to provide oral translation services 

• Program documents translated into Spanish (a participant population of 5% or 

more who speak a language other than English in the home if that language can 

be identified) 

• HUD website (www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/promotingfh/lep.cfm) containing LEP 

documents 

In addition, the SMHA will: 

• List the telephone extension on all notices addressing language assistance. 

• Utilize language identification flashcards to assist limited English proficient 

individuals to inform staff of the language they are most comfortable using to 

communicate. 

• Utilize signage in the lobby of the Housing Authority and on the website 

informing the public of translation and interpreter service. 

• Inquire as to the need for, and provide qualified interpreter assistance for all 

required group meetings (i.e. briefings) at no cost to the participant. 

The SMHA will also provide ongoing training for appropriate staff regarding the LAP 

policy and procedures including: 

• An overview of the SMHA’s Limited English Proficiency Policy and Procedures. 

• How and when to use the Santa Monica Housing Authority’s Language 

Identification Card to identify the language in which the LEP person needs 

assistance. 

• How and when to access language services through bilingual staff or Language 

Line Services. 

• How to work with an interpreter. 

• Prohibition against requiring or asking LEP person to bring his/her own 

interpreter. 

• Cultural sensitivity. 

SMHA staff will annually assess the language assistance needs and recommend 

modifications to the Plan, as necessary. 

Family and Household definitions: For purposes of eligibility, the Plan distinguishes 

the terms family and household. 

“To be eligible for assistance, an applicant must qualify as a family. A family 

may be a single person or a group of persons. Family as defined by HUD 



IV-24 



includes a family with a child or children, two or more elderly or disabled person 

living together, one or more elderly or disabled persons living with one or more 

live-in aides, or a single person. A single person family may be an elderly 

person, a displaced person, a disabled person, or any other single person. The 

PHA has the discretion to determine if any other group of persons qualifies as a 

family.” 

The SMHA has adopted the following additional policy: 

“A family also includes two or more individuals who are not related by blood, 

marriage, adoption, or other operation of law but who either can demonstrate 

that they have lived together previously or certify that each individual’s income 

and other resources will be available to meet the needs of the family. Each 

family must identify the individuals to be included in the family at the time of 

application, and must update this information if the family’s composition 

changes.” 

A household “is a broader term that includes additional people who, with the PHA’s 

permission, live in an assisted unit, such as live-in aides, foster children, and foster 

adults.” 

Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List: The Administrative Plan states that the PHA 

must have policies regarding various aspects of organizing and managing the waiting 

list of applicant families. Since the waiting list is essential in the application for HCV, 

these policies are critical to fair housing. SMHA has adopted a policy to maintain a 

single waiting list for the HCV program, including any public housing, project-based 

voucher or moderate rehabilitation program the PHA operates. In addition, the SMHA 

adopted a policy that “the PHA may merge the HCV waiting list with the waiting list for 

the HOME funded subsidies, dedicated affordable housing programs funded with the 

City of Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency funds, and inclusionary housing 

opportunities. The PHA may merge the HCV waiting list with the waiting list for any 

other program the PHA operates.” 

The SMHA waiting list was last opened August 15, 2011 as an on-line application 

system and in a 35 hour period, received almost 34,000 applicants. The previous 

waiting list, when opened in 2006 had 5,000 applicants. Of these applicants, 3,600 

remained on the HCV waiting list in 2011, but due to the passage of 5 years, the SMHA 

was not receiving responses when contacting wait list applicants regarding openings in 

the HCV program. Therefore, the SMHA ‘purged’ the list to prepare for opening up the 

list once again. The SMHA did extensive outreach through local papers, presentations 

to stakeholder City commissions, the City’s website, and contact with partner agencies, 

including those working with extremely low income populations. Several of these 

partner agencies provided application assistance and computer access during the open 

application process, especially for seniors and disabled persons. The City also opened 

up several sites for application assistance including the public library computer training 

room, the Police Activities League and Virginia Park Center. There was less use of this 

assistance than anticipated. The SMHA provided reasonable accommodation for 

disabled applicants by taking application information over the phone. 



IV-25 



The response was significantly more than anticipated with many out-of-state applicants. 

Approximately 4,000 applicants indicated that they are Santa Monica residents, 

including 173 veterans. There was some technical difficulty with the website due to the 

volume of applicants; however, the SMHA was pleased with the overall on-line process. 

The Administrative Plan states that “the PHA will announce the reopening of the waiting 

list at least 10 business days prior to the date applications will first be accepted. If the 

list is only being reopened for certain categories of families, this information will be 

contained in the notice.” In addition, “The PHA will give public notice by publishing the 

relevant information in suitable media outlets including, but not limited to: 

• Placing a notice in the local newspaper, 

• Posting a notice in plain view in the City Hall lobby, 

• Placing a notice in the Spanish language newspaper, 

• Posting a notice in community centers, 

• Arranging http://www.smgov.net/ and cable TV public service announcements, 

and 

• Sending a mailing to local Legal Aid Office, community organizations and civic 

groups.” 

The Administrative Plan also requires the PHA to conduct outreach as necessary to 

ensure that the PHA has a sufficient number of applicants on the waiting list to use the 

HCV resources it has been allotted. The SMHA has adopted a policy that “the PHA will 

monitor the characteristics of the population being served and the characteristics of the 

population as a whole in the PHA’s jurisdiction. Targeted outreach efforts will be 

undertaken if a comparison suggests that certain populations are being underserved.” 

Selection for HCV Assistance: As allowed by HUD, the SMHA’s Administrative Plan 

establishes local preferences and gives priority to serving families with HCV assistance 

that meet those criteria. These preferences and priorities are consistent with the HUD 

policies, Santa Monica’s Consolidated Plan and are based on documented local 

housing needs and priorities. The SMHA established two Tiers of preferences. Tier I 

establishes a displaced preference resulting from a disaster; government action; 

eviction pursuant to specific laws; and evictions related to owner/relative occupancy of 

rent controlled units. Tier II establishes preferences based on residing in the City; 

working in the City; applicants on the service registry (homeless); and other homeless 

applicants receiving services from a recognized homeless service agency. Within each 

Tier, preference is given to U.S. military; and single applicants who are elderly, 

displaced or disabled. 

The SMHA also administers targeted programs funded by Shelter Plus Care, 

Supportive Housing Programs and federal HOME funds. Applicants for these programs 

must meet additional, specific eligibility requirements. For most targeted programs, 

applicants are referred by agencies that provide services to the targeted population. 

These applicant referrals are placed on the affordable housing waiting list and the 

applicant is placed on the regular HCV list if it is open. 

Rental Property Owner Recruitment and SEMAP Indicators: One of the concerns 

for the SMHA is ensuring that very low income families have access to all types and 



IV-26 



ranges of affordable housing in the City, particularly housing outside areas of poverty or 

minority concentration. Therefore, it is essential for the SMHA to continue to identify 

and recruit new rental property owners to participate in the HCV program. 

The SMHA Plan establishes the following policy to encourage owner participation: 

“The PHA will conduct owner outreach to ensure that owners are familiar with 

the programs and its advantages. The PHA will actively recruit property owners 

with property located outside areas of poverty and minority concentration. 

Poverty concentration is a census tract with more than 20 percent of the 

population living in poverty. Minority concentration is a census tract with higher 

than the countywide average of minority population. These outreach strategies 

will include: 

• Distributing an owner packet of printed material about the program to 

property owners and managers 

• Contacting property owners and managers by phone or in-person 

• Holding owner recruitment/information meetings 

• Participating in community based organizations comprised of private 

property and apartment owners and managers 

• Developing working relationships with owners and real estate brokers 

associations.” 

HUD has established a management assessment tool, the Section 8 Management 

Assessment Program (SEMAP) to measure PHA performance in key areas to ensure 

program integrity and accountability. One of the SEMAP indicators reflects whether the 

PHA has adopted and implemented a written policy to encourage participation by 

owners of units located outside areas of poverty or minority concentration; informs 

voucher holders of the areas they may lease units; and supplies a list of landlords who 

are willing to lease units. The SMHA’s Plan provides such a written policy. 

The SMHA has established policies to encourage property owners to remain active in 

the program. They also work closely with other Santa Monica Housing and Economic 

Division staff to refer participating owners to available City rehabilitation assistance 

programs. 

Project Based Voucher Site Selection Standards: HUD allows PHAs that administer 

a tenant-based voucher program to take up to 20 percent of its voucher program budget 

authority and attach the funding to specific units rather than using it for tenant-based 

assistance. The SMHA has adopted a policy to operate a project-based voucher 

program. The SMHA’s goal regarding site selection standards for Project Based 

Vouchers (PBV’s) is to select sites that provide for de-concentrating poverty and 

expanding housing and economic opportunities. 

Conclusions: The SMHA has approved an Administrative Plan that addresses 

concerns about Fair Housing related to the various programs operated by the SMHA. 

This Administrative Plan is updated annually through an open process that includes 

presentations to City commissions and outreach to social service agencies. The SMHA 

demonstrated compliance with their policies when the waiting list for affordable housing 

was opened in August 2011 with a result of approximately 34,000 applicants. Outreach 



IV-27 



to property owners and allowing project based vouchers in areas that do not have 

poverty or minority concentration is also a part of the Administrative Plan. 

While the greatest numbers of rental assistance vouchers coincide with Santa Monica’s 

low and moderate income census block groups (refer to Figure 9 in the Community 

Profile), this is also a reflection of the location of rental housing and density in the City. 

The areas with the most vouchers are areas that contain higher density multiple-family 

housing and are located along transit and commercial corridors. In addition, there are 

significant numbers of voucher holders dispersed throughout Santa Monica and living in 

areas outside low and moderate income neighborhoods. 

7. Moratoriums/Growth Management 

The City of Santa Monica does not have building moratoriums or growth management 

plans that limit housing construction. 

8. Development Fees/Assessments 

Like cities throughout California, Santa Monica collects various fees, charges, and taxes 

on new residential development. These charges are set at rates designed to recover the 

cost of permit processing, and the costs of providing public services to the 

developments, and to mitigate certain development impacts (e.g., parks and open 

space and affordable housing). Construction of housing in the City typically requires 

payment of plan check and building permit fees, water meter fees, sewer connection 

fees, recreation taxes and school facilities fees. Multi-family developments, which 

constitute most of the net new housing in the City, may also be subject to charges for 

various administrative or discretionary reviews, environmental review, and impact 

mitigation. 

Most planning and construction fees and taxes are due at building permit, but some 

fees and charges (e.g., affordable housing fees, when applicable; infrastructure 

improvements for which security instruments may be posted)may be paid at a later 

point in the construction process (e.g., Certificate of Occupancy). In limited cases, offsite 

improvements may be required to mitigate project impacts (e.g., street capacity 

improvements), or to repair public facilities damaged during project construction (e.g., 

sidewalk and curb reconstruction or alley repaving), and in order to protect the public 

health, safety and general welfare of City residents, businesses and visitors. 

When a residential development project requires multiple planning permit applications, 

the City places a cap on the combined fees. Planning and zoning fees are waived for 

affordable housing developments. 

The City conducts a periodic assessment of its fees to ensure they reflect the actual 

cost of providing services. Most user fees are adjusted annually based on the change in 

the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The City attempts to keep its fees in line with similar 

jurisdictions; a comparison of typical multi-family development fees in Santa Monica 

with those imposed in other Westside cities and Los Angeles shows that the City’s fees 



IV-28 



and charges are generally comparable to those charged in these other jurisdictions 

located in the same housing market area. 

9. Community Representation and Participation 

An important way to further fair housing is to provide a variety of opportunities for 

residents to express their concerns about housing issues. The City of Santa Monica has 

over twenty commissions and advisory boards comprised of interested citizens which 

monitor the needs of the community and advise the City Council and City staff on the 

best way to address those needs. Appointments to these Commissions are made by 

the City Council after reviewing applications, interviewing applicants individually, and 

hearing the recommendations of the Council liaisons. The length of the term on most 

Commissions is four years. 

The City solicits applications from persons interested in actively participating in local 

government on an ongoing basis. Applications are available on the City’s website and 

at the City Clerk’s Office. Completed applications remain on file for a period of one 

year, after which time letters are mailed out asking the applicant to reapply if they are 

still interested in serving. 

The purview of the following Santa Monica commissions and boards involve issues 

pertaining to fair housing: 

• Commission for the Senior Community 

• Commission on the Status of Women 

• Disabilities Commission 

• Housing Commission 

• Social Services Commission 

As part of the community outreach for the AI, the Housing Division and AI consultants 

met with these commissions during their regularly scheduled meetings to solicit their 

input on fair housing issues. A summary of the input received from those commissions 

providing comments is included in the community outreach section of this report. 



IV-29 



B. POTENTIAL PRIVATE SECTOR IMPEDIMENTS 

The following section evaluates potential private sector impediments to fair housing, 

including real estate, apartment association and mortgage lending practices. 

1. Real Estate Associations and Practices 

Real estate associations at the national, state and local level promote fair housing 

practices. Organizations relevant to Santa Monica include the National Association of 

Realtors, the California Association of Realtors, the California Department of Real 

Estate, and the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of Realtors. 

a. National Association of Realtors 

Since 1996, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) has maintained a Fair Housing 

Partnership with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and 

have developed a Model Affirmative Fair Housing Action Plan for use by members. 

Through this Plan, NAR offers a full spectrum of fair housing resources and training to 

member realtors. 

As part of the NAR Code of Ethics, each member Realtor is required to sign the 

following fair housing declaration per the HUD-NAR agreement: 

‣ Provide equal professional service without regard to race, color, religion, sex, 

handicap, familial status, or national origin of any prospective client, customer, 

or of the residents of any community. Refuse to tolerate non-compliance. 

‣ Keep informed about fair housing law and practices, improving my clients’ and 

customers’ opportunities and my business. 

‣ Develop advertising that indicates that everyone is welcome and no one is 

excluded, expanding my client’s and customer’s opportunities to see, buy, or 

lease property. 

‣ Inform my clients and customers about their rights and responsibilities under the 

fair housing laws by providing brochures and other information. 

‣ Document my efforts to provide professional service, which will assist me in 

becoming a more responsive and successful Realtor. 

‣ Learn about those who are different from me, and celebrate those differences. 

‣ Take a positive approach to fair housing practices and aspire to follow the spirit 

as well as the letter of the law. 

‣ Develop and implement fair housing practices for my firm to carry out the spirit 

of this declaration. 



IV-30 



In addition to the Code of Ethics, NAR certifies real estate professionals who receive 

specialized training to work with a diverse population. The “At Home with Diversity: One 

America” certification program provides planning tools for reaching out and marketing to 

a diverse housing market in the areas of diversity awareness, building cross-cultural 

skills, and developing a diversity business plan. Other NAR training tools include 

brochures for existing and prospective homebuyers on “How to Avoid Predatory 

Lending” and “Learn How to Avoid Foreclosure and Keep Your Home.” 

b. California Association of Realtors (CAR) 

The California Association of Realtors (CAR) is an arm of 

NAR, and represents nearly 200,000 realtors statewide. 

Members are required to adhere to the NAR Code of Ethics 

and sign the Fair Housing Pledge. Santa Monica realtors 

are served by CAR’s Los Angeles office, and have access 

to numerous services and programs including legislative advocacy, legal programs 

(including CARs Legal Hotline), and educational training. CAR offers a variety of 

professional development courses both on-line and in Face2Face interactive sessions, 

including a current focus on training realtors in working with foreclosed properties. 

CAR and the Los Angeles Times have host an annual Southern California Homebuyer’s 

Fair at the Los Angeles Convention Center. The Fair features more than 50 educational 

seminars, including sessions on fixing credit, qualifying for a home loan, and how to 

purchase foreclosures, short sales and REOs. Several of the sessions are offered in 

Spanish. 

CAR has developed diversity-related initiatives that now serve as models for 

associations across the country. In 2000, the Association inaugurated a Leadership 

Summit for the state’s ethnic real estate associations to discuss current issues such as 

subprime loans, predatory lending, and pending legislation. The Leadership Summit 

occurs bi-annually and has been instrumental in developing the HOPE (Home 

Ownership Participation for Everyone) Awards program, which awards a $10,000 

honorarium to individuals and organizations for success in promoting minority 

homeownership. C.A.R.’s Leadership Summit also resulted in establishment of the 

“Diversity Toolkit” designed to assist associations with a wide variety of diversity 

programs. 

c. California Department of Real Estate (DRE) 

The California Department of Real Estate (DRE) serves as the licensing authority for 

real estate brokers and salespersons in the State. DRE has adopted education 

requirements that include courses in ethics and in fair housing. State real estate 

licenses are issued for a four year period, with renewals requiring continuing education 

courses in each of the four mandated areas: agency, ethics, trust fund, and fair housing. 

The fair housing course contains information to enable real estate agents to identify and 

avoid discriminatory practices when providing real estate services to clients. 



IV-31 



DRE is responsible for investigation of written complaints received from the public and 

other real estate agents/brokerages regarding alleged violations of real estate law 

among licensed real estate brokers and salespersons. Complaints may involve fair 

housing issues. If DRE determines a violation has occurred, they have the authority to 

revoke the real estate license. Violations may result in civil injunctions, criminal 

prosecutions or fines. 

d. Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of Realtors 

The Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of 

Realtors (BHGLAAR) represents over 5,600 Realtors and 

Affiliate members in the cities of Beverly Hills, Culver City, 

Los Angeles, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, and 

unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. Members 

automatically become members of the California Association of Realtors (CAR) and the 

National Association of Realtors (NAR), providing access to the resources and trainings 

offered through these organizations. In addition, BHGLAAR is involved with the 

following activities in support of fair housing: 

• Ongoing educational seminars on a variety of timely topics, including the Annual 

Real Estate Mediation Institute that addresses issues of fraud, landlord/tenant 

and real estate “crisis” issues such as foreclosure, short sales, loan 

modifications and bankruptcy. The Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office has 

worked closely with BHGLAAR in co-sponsoring the City’s annual Fair Housing 

workshop. 

• An Equal Opportunities/Cultural Diversity Committee dedicated to developing 

policy to promote equal opportunity in housing and diversity within the real 

estate industry. 

• Weekly updates from California Association of Realtors (CAR) on property 

scams/frauds for realtors to be aware of. BHGLAAR reports any scams directly 

to the Department of Real Estate. 

• BHGLAAR’s C.A.R.E Project sponsors a different social service agency each 

month, providing donations of food, clothing and other necessities; monetary 

contributions; and volunteering at the agency. C.A.R.E. has assisted several 

agencies that serve Santa Monica’s homeless and at-risk populations, including 

OPCC, PATH, Westside Homeless Outreach, and A Place Called Home. 

The Grievance Committee serves as the local body for the public, other real estate 

agents, and brokerages to register complaints about member realtors. If the 

Committee determines the grievance is in potential violation of real estate law, the 

decision is scheduled for a hearing before the Professional Standards Committee, who 

in turn makes a determination whether the issue should be referred to the State 

Department of Real Estate (DRE). 



IV-32 



2. Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles 

The California Apartment Association (CAA) is a trade association for 

rental property owners and managers. Under this umbrella agency, 

the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA) serves 

Santa Monica. Members of the CAA agree to abide by provisions of 

the Code for Equal Housing Opportunity: 

‣ We agree that in the rental, lease, sale, purchase, or exchange of real property, 

owners and their employees have the responsibility to offer housing 

accommodations to all persons on an equal basis; 

‣ We agree to set and implement fair and reasonable rental housing rules and 

guidelines and will provide equal and consistent services throughout our 

resident’s tenancy; 

‣ We agree that we have no right or responsibility to volunteer information 

regarding the racial, creed, or ethnic composition of any neighborhood, and we 

do not engage in any behavior or action that would result in steering; and 

‣ We agree not to print, display, or circulate any statement or advertisement that 

indicates any preference, limitations, or discrimination in the rental or sale of 

housing. 

AAGLA holds meetings on a regular basis in Santa Monica. Through a variety of 

workshops and educational courses, AAGLA provides members with information and 

training on such topics as fair housing laws/regulations, landlord/tenant law, ethics, 

credit checks, addressing code enforcement violations, and lead based paint and mold 

hazards. The Association offers a Registered Residential Manager certification that 

provides training in landlord/tenant issues, ethics, marketing, property management, fair 

housing, and other issues. AAGLA publishes a monthly magazine, Apartment Age, 

which periodically features articles that aim at educating its members regarding fair 

housing laws; the Santa Monica Report edition is specifically targeted to issues in the 

local community, such as rent control, relocation and tenant harassment. 

While AAGLA’s membership base of approximately 30,000 apartment owners have 

excellent access to fair housing training, many of the smaller “mom and pop” property 

managers are not members of this organization. The Housing Rights Center (HRC) - 

the largest fair housing provider in Los Angeles - confirms that the majority of tenant 

complaints they receive are in smaller buildings where property managers have not 

likely undergone specialized training. The Consumer Protection Unit of the Santa 

Monica City Attorney’s Office reports similar findings, albeit on a much smaller scale. 

The HRC offers free property manager certificate training in its offices, and periodically 

conducts workshops for rental property owners, leasing agents, and managers. 

Through its annual fair housing seminar alternately co-sponsored with AAGLA and 

BHGLAAR, Santa Monica’s Consumer Protection Unit provides information to local 

landlords on fair housing laws and current issues, such as reasonable accommodation 

and the rights of families with children. 



IV-33 



3. Mortgage Lending Practices 

Equal access to credit for home purchase, home refinance and home improvements is 

one of the central tenets of fair housing. The following review of mortgage lending 

practices in Santa Monica analyzes the following issues: 1) existing lending laws; 2) 

availability of financing; 3) practices of active lenders; 4) subprime and predatory 

lending activity; 5) foreclosures and loan modifications; and 6) regulations aimed at 

curbing discriminatory/predatory practices. 

a. Lending Laws and Regulations 

Though equal access to lending is critical to homeownership, lending discrimination 

against minorities or persons of color has been a serious problem in the United States. 

As a result of past discriminatory lending practices by financial institutions, the federal 

government enacted a series of laws aimed at protecting persons from discriminatory 

lending. Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 

1976, commonly called the “Fair Lending Laws,” prohibit discrimination against 

mortgage applicants on the basis of race or national origin. 

In 1975 the federal government passed the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 

which requires mortgage lenders to report information annually about applications for 

home purchase, refinancing and home improvement loans, including information on 

race, income, geographic area, and loan pricing. This information allows both the public 

and federal regulators to determine responsiveness to the home financing needs of 

communities in which business is conducted. 

HMDA data cannot conclusively identify redlining or discrimination because many 

factors, such as income, income-to-debt ratio, credit rating, and employment history, 

affect approval and denial rates. However, analysis of the data may reveal trends that 

could indicate a pattern of discriminatory lending practices. 

Following the passage of HMDA, Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act 

(CRA) of 1977. CRA is a federal law that requires banks to make loans and 

investments, and open branches in the communities where they are taking deposits, 

and is aimed at ensuring banks are meeting the credit needs of low- and moderateincome 

neighborhoods. CRA performance is measured and rated against the amount of 

bank lending activity in low and moderate income markets, relative to bank lending in 

non-low and moderate income markets and to the opportunities that exist in such 

markets. 

The mortgage meltdown has spurred a national debate over the effectiveness of CRA. 

Legislation stemming from the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act has been proposed to significantly strengthen the law, broadening its 

scope to apply to non-bank lending institutions and increasing the rigor of CRA 

performance exams. 



IV-34 



b. Availability of Financing 

Table IV-4 summarizes Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for both Santa 

Monica and Los Angeles County, providing information on the approval status of all 

conventional home purchase, refinance and home improvement loan applications 

during 2010. 

• Of the total 560 completed applications for home purchase loans in Santa 

Monica, 83 percent were approved and 17 percent were denied, consistent with 

County-wide averages. 

• The volume of applications for refinance loans in Santa Monica was over four 

times that of home purchase loans, with 75 percent of the total 2,517 

applications receiving approval and 25 percent denied, again similar to the 

regional average. 

• The number of applications for home improvement loans in Santa Monica was 

very limited at just 61, with 67 percent of applications receiving approval and 33 

percent being denied, slightly better than the 36 percent denial rate Countywide. 

Home improvement loans typically have higher denial rates because 

homeowners may already have high debt-to-income ratios on their home 

mortgage or refinance loans. 

Table IV-4: Status of Home Purchase, Refinance and Home Improvement Loans 2010 

Completed 

Loan Type 

Loan 

Applications 

Conventional Home Purchase Loans 

Loans Approved 

Santa 

Monica 

L.A. 

County 

Loans Denied 


Monica 

# Applications 560 465 95 

L.A. 

County 

% Approval/Denial 83% 83% 17% 17% 

Refinancings 

# Applications 2,517 1,884 633 


Home Improvement Loans 

# Applications 61 41 20 


Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, 2010. Compiled by Karen Warner Associates, Inc. 

Note: Approved loans include: loans originated and applications approved but not accepted. Denial rate 

based on applications that went through complete underwriting process, and exclude applications 

withdrawn or files closed for incompleteness. 



IV-35 



The continued economic recession, combined with stagnant home prices and tighter 

lending standards has resulted in a significant slowdown in mortgage lending activity 

over the past five years. In Los Angeles County, the volume of completed home 

mortgage loan applications declined 67 percent between 2006-2010; Santa Monica 

evidenced a 59 percent decrease during this same period. In conjunction with the 

decline in mortgage lending has been an increase in the number of lower cost, 

government-backed loans made available through FHA, VA, and FSA/RHS (Farm 

Service Agency/Rural Housing Service) as stimulated by the 2008 federal Housing and 

Economic Recovery Act (HERA). Such loans comprised 40 percent of all home 

purchase loan applications in Los Angeles County in 2010, up from 18 percent in 2008, 

and less than one percent in 2007 and 2006. 

In contrast to the County, government-backed loans comprise a very small proportion of 

mortgage loan applications in Santa Monica (just 6% in 2009 and 5% in 2010). In 2010, 

the maximum conforming loan limit under the FHA program was $729,750, whereas 

HMDA documents an average home purchase loan size in Santa Monica of $709,000 

(refer to Table IV-9 later in this section). FHA loans are often preferable to consumers 

as they offer low downpayment options (currently 3.5%); provide more flexible income, 

debt and credit requirements; and allow co-applicants to help with loan qualification. 

However, FHA loans do typically require and up-front as well as a monthly FHA 

mortgage insurance premium. 



IV-36 



Table IV-5 compares the number of loan applications for home purchase, refinance and 

home improvement loans in Santa Monica for the years 2006 to 2010 and the 

associated loan denial rates. 

• For conventional home purchase loans, while the volume of applications declined 

from approximately 1,400 in 2006 to 550 in 2010, the percent of loan denials also 

decreased slightly from 18 percent to 17 percent. 

• For refinance loans, historic low interest rates have spawned a flurry of refinance 

activity, with the number of applications increasing from approximately 1,700 in 

2006 to 2,500 in 2010. The denial rate on refinance applications, however, is 

noticeably higher than that of home purchase loans, and has increased from 23 

percent to 25 percent during this period. Many homeowners are unable to take 

advantage of low refinance rates due to a lack of equity in their properties. 

• Applications for home improvement loans have declined from 230 in 2006 to just 61 

in 2010, a drop of over 70 percent. The sluggish economy and soft housing market 

have served to dampen home improvement activity, and with loan denial rates 

increasing from 26 to 33 percent over the past five years, the number of private 

home improvement loans initiated is that much more limited. 

Table IV-5: Home Purchase, Refinance and Home Improvement Loans 2006-2010 

Completed Loan Applications 

% Loans Denied 

Loan Type 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Conventional 

Home 

Purchase 

1,436 1,104 660 559 560 18% 15% 22% 17% 17% 

Refinancing 1,736 1,624 1,244 2,616 2,517 23% 24% 25% 23% 25% 

Home 

Improvement 230 166 92 88 61 26% 22% 31% 18% 33% 

Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, 2006-2010. Compiled by Karen Warner Associates, Inc. 

To mitigate potential financing constraints and expand home improvement opportunities, 

the City of Santa Monica offers an Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Grant Program for low 

and moderate income seniors, persons with disabilities, and mobilehome owner 

occupants. The City also offers a Multi-Family Rental Rehabilitation Program which 

provides matching rehabilitation grants for property owners with a majority of low and 

moderate income tenants. The Mobile Home Improvement Program provides financial 

assistance to low and moderate income owners who wish to substantially repair or 

replace their mobile home with new models that meet current standards. 

The City of Santa Monica helps to extend home ownership opportunities to low and 

moderate income tenants in buildings being converted to condominium ownership 

through its TORCA Shared Appreciation Loan Program. Revenues from the TORCA 

Trust Fund have also been used to support the new construction of affordable 

homeownership units in the community. 



IV-37 



Table IV-6 presents information on 2010 home purchase and refinance loan 

applications in Santa Monica by applicant race/ethnicity and income, and compares 

loan denial rates with Los Angeles County as a whole. 

• Loan denial rates were fairly consistent among applicants of different race and 

ethnic groups, with the exception of Hispanic applicants which evidenced a 

denial rate of 31%, 10% above other racial groups in Santa Monica, and 6% 

above Hispanics Countywide. This data does not however control for applicant 

income, and given the limited number of loan applications completed by 

Hispanics in Santa Monica, may not be entirely representative with such a small 

sample size. 

• As sufficient debt-to-income ratio is one of the primary mortgage lending criteria, 

Table IV-6 illustrates how loan denial rates increase significantly as applicant 

income decreases. Among low, moderate and middle income applicants, loan 

denial rates in Santa Monica are well above County averages, indicative of the 

City’s high housing costs which preclude most of these households from 

homeownership without some form of assistance. 

Table IV-6: Status of Home Purchase and Refinance Loans 

by Applicant Characteristics 2010 

Applicant Characteristics 

# Completed Loan 

Applications 


Applicant Race/Ethnicity Santa Monica L.A. County 

White (non-Hispanic) 1,791 21% 21% 

Asian 215 21% 18% 

Hispanic 70 31% 25% 

African American 15 20% 29% 

Applicant Income Santa Monica L.A. County 

Low (120% AMI) 2,390 21% 19% 

Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, 2010. 

Compiled by California Reinvestment Coalition and Karen Warner Associates, Inc. 

Notes: Includes conventional & govn-assisted (FHA, FSA/RHS and VA) home purchase applications. 

Denial rate based on applications that went through complete underwriting process, and excludes 

applications withdrawn or files closed for incompleteness. 



IV-38 



Loan denial rates can also be evaluated by the racial and income characteristics of the 

census tract in which the prospective home is located. Table IV-7 presents the status of 

2010 home purchase and refinance loan applications in Santa Monica and Los Angeles 

County by census tract minority population and tract income. 

• No correlation exists in Santa Monica between loan denial rates and census 

tracts with higher minority populations. In fact, the highest aggregate loan denial 

rate of 24% was in tracts with the lowest percentage of minorities (10-19%). 

• Similarly, no relationship exists between loan denials and census tract income 

when evaluated in the aggregate. 

Table IV-7: Status of Home Purchase and Refinance Loans 

by Census Tract Characteristics 2010 

# Completed Loan 

Census Tract Characteristics Applications 


Tract Race/Ethnicity Santa Monica L.A. County 


Geographic Analysis of Mortgage Loan Denials 

An analysis of loan denial rates by individual census tract can be used to assess 

whether there is any correlation between areas with high minority and/or lower income 

concentrations and access to mortgage financing. Table IV-8 presents 2006-2010 

mortgage loan denial rates for each of Santa Monica’s 19 census tracts listed in order of 

% minority population. Census tract loan denial rates five percent or above the 

Citywide average for that particular year are highlighted. 

Table IV-8: Conventional Home Loan Denial Rates by Census Tract 2006-2010 

Census % Minority % Low/Mod Denial Rate - Conventional Home Purchase Loans 

Tract (2010 Census) (2000 Census) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

7018.01 64% 52% 25% 14% 40% 20% 10% 

7018.02 58% 54% 31% 10% 27% n/a n/a 

7017.02 41% 37% 18% 19% 9% 8% 14% 

7017.01 36% 30% 7% 19% 35% 26% 25% 

7023 33% 26% 18% 11% 16% 12% 12% 

7019.02* 32% 55% 8% 18% 47% n/a n/a 

7016.02 32% 29% 23% 11% 22% 16% 0% 

7022.01 31% 25% 23% 14% 17% 23% 11% 

7022.02 28% 23% 16% 11% 17% 11% 10% 

7015.02 27% 34% 13% 11% 13% 12% 13% 

7020.02* 26% 27% 20% 13% 28% 34% 20% 

7016.01 23% 17% 19% 8% 12% 3% 22% 

7012.02 23% 16% 14% 11% 19% 14% 19% 

7021.02* 22% 30% 25% 13% 16% 8% 26% 

7014.02* 22% 40% 23% 23% 36% 26% 19% 

7015.01 22% 25% 12% 13% 21% 29% 19% 

7013.02 19% 25% 9% 29% 34% 15% 7% 

7013.04* 18% 13% 14% 18% 19% 24% 19% 

7012.01 15% 8% 13% 13% 13% 15% 17% 

City 

30% 30% 18% 15% 22% 17% 17% 

Average 

Total Conventional Home Loan 

1,436 1,104 660 559 560 

Applications 

Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, 2006-2010. Compiled by Karen Warner Associates, Inc. 

Note: Denial rate based on applications that went through complete underwriting process, and excludes 


n/a - not applicable. Denial rates not presented as census tract had less than 10 loan applications. 

*The following 5 census tracts were renumbered in the 2010 census: 7013.04 (was 7013.01), 7014.02 (was 

7014), 7019.02 (was 7019), 7020.02 (was 7020), and 7021.02 (was 7021). Census tract boundaries, however, 

remained unchanged between 2000 and 2010. 



IV-40 



The following conclusions can be drawn from Table IV-8 regarding census tracts with 

high minority and/or low and moderate income populations, and higher than average 

mortgage loan denial rates in two or more of the past five years: 

• The census tract with the highest minority population percentage (tract 7018.01) 

evidenced two years of higher than average loan denials, although this pattern has 

not continued in the two most recent years HMDA data is available (2009 and 

2010). 

• The census tract with the second highest percentage of minorities (tract 7018.02) 

evidenced high loan denials in 2006 and again in 2008. Mortgage loan activity in 

this tract has been minimal for the past two years, with less than ten applications 

annually. 

• Census tract 7017.01 experienced higher than average loan denial rates in 2008, 

2009 and 2010. However, the percent minority population in this tract is not 

significantly above the City average (36% vs 30% Citywide), and the percentage of 

low and moderate income households mirrors that of the City (30%). 

• Census tract 7014.02 evidenced higher than average loan denials in 2006, 2007, 

2008 and 2009. While this tract has a relatively low percentage of minorities, 40 

percent of its households are low and moderate income, compared to the Citywide 

average of 30 percent. 

Figure 13 presents a composite map of census block groups with Hispanic, African 

American and Asian concentrations (compiled from Figures, 2, 3 and 4) and overlays the 

four census tracts identified above with higher than average loan denials and high minority 

and/or low and moderate income populations. Census tracts 7018.01 and 7018.02 

(located adjacent one another between Pico Blvd and Colorado Ave, extending inland from 

Lincoln Blvd to the City’s northeastern boundary) both contain several census block groups 

identified as having concentrations of one or more minority groups; comparison with Figure 

7 also shows overlap with several HUD designated low and moderate income block groups. 

Census tract 7017.01 (located between Colorado Ave and Santa Monica Blvd, and 

extending inland from 20 th Street to the City’s northeastern boundary) does not correspond 

to any areas of identified minority concentration, although approximately one-third of the 

tract falls within a HUD designated low and moderate income area. Census tract 7014.02 

(located between Wilshire Blvd and Montana Ave, and extending from Lincoln Blvd 

southwest to the beach), contains no minority concentrations and two low/mod census 

block groups; this area has a large number of seniors and affordable housing developments 

(refer to Figures 6 and 7), thus contributing to its high percentage of low and moderate 


In summary, census tracts 7018.01, 7018.02, 7017.01 and 7014.02 exhibit recent trends of 

higher than average loan denials and are characterized by high minority and/or low/mod 

populations. The City should continue to monitor loan denial rates in these census tracts 

and discuss concerns with the community’s major mortgage lenders. 



IV-41 


Figure 13. 

SAN VICENTE 

7012.01 

7016.01 

WILSHIRE 

SANTA MONICA 

BUNDY 


CENSUS TRACTS WITH HIGHER THAN 

AVERAGE LOAN DENIALS AND MINORITY 

OR LOW/MOD CONCENTRATIONS 

SAN VICENTE 


7013.04 


7TH 7TH 

7014.02 

7013.02 

WILSHIRE 

LINCOLN 

WILSHIRE 


7019.02 

7012.02 

7016.02 

7017.01 

7015.01 

OLYMPIC 

OLYMPIC 

', 10 Cloverdale 

Santa Monica 

7015.02 

7018.01 

', 10 

', 10 

7017.02 

7018.02 

7023.00 

7022.01 

PICO 

OCEAN PARK 

OLYMPIC 

PICO 

GATEWAY 

PICO 


0 0.5 1 Miles 

Crescent 

Bay Park 

7020.02 

Beach 

Park 

OCEAN PARK 

7021.02 

LINCOLN 

7022.02 

Loan Denials 5%+ Above Citywide Average 

in 2 or More Years (2006-2010) 

Hispanic, African-American or Asian 

Concentration (Refer to Figs. 2-4) 

Source: 2006-2010 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data; U.S. Census 2000 & 2010 



c. Availability of Private Mortgage Insurance 

Private mortgage insurance, or PMI, is the additional insurance that lenders typically require 

from homebuyers seeking a mortgage with less than a 20 percent down payment. PMI 

enables borrowers with less cash to have greater access to homeownership, while 

protecting the lender against loss if a borrower defaults. With this type of insurance, it is 

possible for a qualified purchaser to buy a home with as little as a three to five percent 

down payment. Government-backed mortgages, such as FHA, VA and USDA, provide for 

low downpayment levels without requiring PMI. 

Similar to Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, the Federal Financial Institutions 

Examination Council (FFIEC) tracks the status of Private Mortgage Insurance applications 

made to lending institutions. The following summarizes the status of PMI applications both 

countywide and within the City of Santa Monica during 2010: 

• Of the 56,868 applications for conventional home purchase loans in Los Angeles 

County in 2010, the FFIEC recorded only six percent that also applied for PMI 

(3,129 PMI applications). 

• 79 percent of these PMI applications were approved, fifteen percent were denied, 

and six percent were withdrawn or closed. 

• Within Santa Monica, the FFEIC identified only 17 PMI applications during 2010, 

representing just three percent of the total 666 conventional home loan applications 

in the City. 

• Of Santa Monica’s 17 PMI applications, eleven were approved and six denied, 

representing a 65 percent rate of approval. 

In summary, PMI is involved in an extremely limited segment of the homebuyer market in 

Santa Monica and has thus not served to limit access to homeownership. 



IV-43 



d. Major Lenders in Santa Monica 

Santa Monica’s top ten residential lenders, as measured by the aggregate number of 

home purchase and refinance loans originated in 2010, are identified in Table IV-9. 

These lenders accounted for 63 percent of all mortgage and refinance loans originated 

in the City, with the top four - Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of America, CitiMortgage and JP 

Morgan Chase - accounting just under half of all loans. Bank of America had the 

largest market share of home purchase loans (25%), whereas Wells Fargo was the 

predominant refinance lender (20%). The average loan size in Santa Monica among 

all 71 mortgage lenders for home purchase loans was $709,000, whereas the average 

refinance loan among the 145 lenders who originated refinance loans in Santa Monica 

was $567,000. 

Table IV-9: Ten Most Active Mortgage Lenders in Santa Monica 2010 

Rank 

Loan Type 

(based on 

Total Loans 

activity in 

Name 

Originated 

Conventional 


Home 

Monica) 

Purchase Refinance 

1 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 370 69 301 

2 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 355 97 258 

3 CITIMORTGAGE, INC 107 9 98 

4 JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. 101 0 101 

5 UNION BANK, N.A. 71 27 44 

6 MORTGAGE CAPITAL ASSOC, INC 47 14 33 

7 METLIFE BANK, N.A. 45 13 32 

8 PROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOC. 38 6 32 

9 US BANK, N.A. 37 7 30 

10 QUICKEN LOANS 29 0 29 

Subtotal – Top 10 Lending Institutions 1,200 242 958 

Market Share of Top 10 Lenders 63% 62% 63% 

TOTAL – All Lenders 1,914 389 1,525 

Average Loan Size – All Lenders $709,000 $561,000 

Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, 2010. Compiled by California Reinvestment Coalition. 



IV-44 



Table IV-10 examines the disposition of home purchase and refinance loan applications 

among those top ten lending institutions in Santa Monica most active in each area. For 

home purchase loans, the three most active banks – Bank of America, Wells Fargo and 

Union Bank – all evidenced lower mortgage loan denial rates than the Citywide average 

of 17 percent, with Wells Fargo exhibiting the lowest rate at 12 percent. For refinance 

loans, Wells Fargo’s loan denial rate of 18 percent was well below the Citywide average 

of 25 percent, whereas CitiMortgage was slightly below the average at 23 percent and 

Bank of America was slightly above at 27 percent. JP Morgan Chase evidenced a 

refinance loan denial rate of 43 percent, nearly 20 percent above the Citywide average. 

Table IV-10: Residential Loan Applications 

From Select Banking Institutions – Santa Monica 2010 

Total 

% 

% 

Lending Institution 

Completed Loans 

Loans Denied 

Applications Approved 

Home Purchase Loans 

BANK OF AMERICA, NA 124 85% 15% 

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 106 88% 12% 

UNION BANK, NA 35 86% 14% 

All Lending Institutions 560 83% 17% 

Refinance Loans 

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 456 82% 18% 

BANK OF AMERICA, NA 397 73% 27% 

JP MORGAN CHASE, NA 197 57% 43% 

CITIMORTGAGE, INC 142 77% 23% 

All Lending Institutions 2,517 75% 25% 

Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, 2010. Compiled by Karen Warner Associates, Inc. 

Note: Approved loans include loans originated and applications approved but not accepted. Denial 

rate based on applications that went through complete underwriting process, and exclude 




IV-45 



CRA Ratings 

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requires that each lending institution's record 

be evaluated periodically in order to help determine if it is meeting its obligations under 

the Act to address the credit needs of the community in which it is located, including low 

and moderate income neighborhoods. Ratings range from Outstanding, Satisfactory, 

Needs to Improve, and Substantial Non-Compliance. As illustrated in Table IV-11, 

seven of the ten most active mortgage lenders in Santa Monica fall under the purview of 

CRA, and six of these received an outstanding rating for lending and community 

development activities. Metlife Bank received a rating of satisfactory. 

Table IV-11: CRA Ratings for Major Lending Institutions Active in Santa Monica 

Rank 

(based on 2010 

activity in Santa 

Name CRA Rating Exam Year 

Monica) 

1 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Outstanding 2009 

2 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. Outstanding 2009 

3 CTITIMORTGAGE Outstanding 2009 

4 JP MORGAN CHASE Outstanding 2007 

5 UNION BANK Outstanding 2009 

7 METLIFE BANK, N.A. Satisfactory 2009 

9 US BANK, N.A. Outstanding 2008 

Source: http://www.ffiec.gov/craratings 

The California Reinvestment Coalition has negotiated Community Reinvestment Act 

(CRA) commitments with California’s major financial institutions for 20 years, including: 

• Bank of America 

• Bank of the West 

• Citibank 

• City National Bank 

• Comerica Bank 

• Union Bank of California 

• U.S. Bank 

• Wells Fargo Bank 

A goal of these CRA commitments is to focus the attention of these financial institutions 

on the opportunities and needs of California’s low and moderate income communities 

and communities of color. In conjunction with these CRA commitments, the CRC 

conducts monitoring meetings at these banks to discuss the bank’s CRA commitment, 

review home mortgage lending activities, consumer lending, affordable housing, 

subprime lending, advertising, and the bank’s overall plans to reach underserved and 

minority communities. 



IV-46 



CRA and Loan Modification Activities of Santa Monica’s Major Lenders 

In order to gain a better understanding of the specific CRA-related activities and 

foreclosure prevention efforts of lenders, interviews were conducted with the five most 

active mortgage lenders in Santa Monica, as identified in Table IV-9. 

Each lender was asked to provide information on the following: 

• Mortgage lending policies or activities the bank is undertaking to reach out to 

people of color and/or lower income populations 

• Any focused marketing in lower income and/or minority neighborhoods 

• Training of mortgage lenders on fair housing 

• Foreclosure prevention policies/activities for existing borrowers 

The following staff were interviewed at each of the banks, and served as the liaisons in 

compiling the requested information: 

• J.P. Morgan Chase Bank - Peter Villegas, Vice President/Senior Manager 

Office of Corporate Responsibility 

• Union Bank – Jan Woolsey, CRCM, Senior Vice President/Manager 

Corporate Social Responsibility Data Center 

• CitiMortgage - Camille Hendrix, Senior Vice President, Regulatory Manager 

CRA/Fair Lending Unit 

• Bank of America - Michael Manigault, Community Relations Manager 

Community Development Division 

• Wells Fargo Bank - Katy Fitzsimmons, Client Services Consultant 

Home Mortgage Division 

The results of the lender interviews and supplemental information provided by the 

banks are summarized in the following section. 



IV-47 



J.P. Morgan Chase Bank 

Mortgage Lending to Low/Mod and Minority Households and Neighborhoods 

• 10 year pledge (2004-2013) to invest $800 billion in low and moderate income communities. Seven 

years into pledge (through Dec 2010), invested over $650 billion, including $517 billion in mortgages for 

both minority and lower income borrowers and communities. 

• National community mortgage lending unit that works with community groups to help minority and lower 

income households purchase their first home. 

• Expansion of credit and mortgage counseling programs in low/moderate income communities, 

frequently in partnership with community-based organizations. Goal is to provide financial education 

and credit repair to help borrowers lower their risk profile to qualify for a mortgage. 

• Extensive homebuyer seminars to outreach to first time homebuyers and lower income households. 

Conducted at local branches or in partnership with community based organizations (including 

Neighborhood Housing Services, West Angeles CDC) and realtor associations, including those 

representing minority groups (National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals, Asian Real 

Estate Association of America). 

• No specialized first time homebuyer mortgages, though majority of mortgages are currently FHA which 

provide a variety of low downpayment options. 

Fair Lending Training 

• All Chase loan officers and employees receive regular training on fair lending. Fair lending extends to 

every aspect of credit transactions, from advertising and pre-application inquiries to loan disbursement 

and ongoing servicing. The CHASE website includes information concerning fair lending regulations 

and enforcement, including examples of overt discrimination, disparate treatment, and disparate impact. 

Foreclosure Prevention 

• Opening of Chase Homeownership Centers in communities hardest hit by foreclosures, including 18 in 

California. Customers meet face-to-face with trained home loan advisors about their financial situation 

and mortgage modification options, and maintain a single point of contact throughout the process. 

• Chase is one of the leading participants in the federal HAMP program. Active participation in CalHFA 

Keep Your Home Affordable Programs. 

• Enhancements to Chase.com “my home” website to allow borrowers to securely view up-to-date 

information any time during the loan modification process. 

• Partner in HOPE NOW, an alliance between counselors, mortgage lenders and non-profits to 

coordinate and maximize outreach efforts to homeowners in distress. 

• Homeownership Preservation Office that serves as a single point of contact for non-profit counselors, 

housing advocates, legal services and others who help Chase mortgage customers to keep their homes. 

• Through its Community Revitalization Program, Chase sells at a discount or donates Chase-owned 

residential properties (REOs) to non-profit agencies or local municipalities for restoration and resale to 

new homeowners. In California, 1,300 homes were transferred to non-profit agencies in 2011. Chase 

has established ongoing relationships with numerous major non-profits throughout the state, including 

LISC and Habitat for Humanity. 



IV-48 



Union Bank 


• In 2005, the bank renewed its 10 Year Commitment, pledging a minimum of 6.5% of average annual 

assets towards CRA related loans and activities. Between 2005-2010, the bank surpassed this goal, 

contributing an average of 7.25% in annual assets and totaling over $21.8 billion. 

• The bank’s “Economic Opportunity Mortgage” (EOM) is specifically structured to provide mortgage 

financing to low and moderate income households (up to 80% AMI) with limited credit history, and to 

extend financing within low and moderate income census tracts. (In defined high cost areas, including 

Los Angeles County, EOM financing is extended to middle income – up to 119% AMI – census tracts). 

Features of the EOM include up to 95% financing with no Private Mortgage Insurance (PMI) required, 

consideration of alternative forms of credit, and optional credit counseling. 

• In 2011, Union revamped the EOM to make it more competitive with FHA mortgage financing. The 

bank’s analysis on a “typical” mortgage loan shows the average monthly payment is $250 less under an 

EOM vs an FHA loan. 

• Union has conducted extensive marketing of EOM loans in low and moderate income areas throughout 

the State, and in 2009 funded 802 EOM loans, plus an additional 150 non-EOM loans that qualified for 

CRA credits; in 2010, 761 EOM loans were funded with an additional 313 CRA eligible mortgage loans. 

• As a smaller lender, Union Bank doesn’t offer FHA, VA or other government insured loan products. 

• In 2011, Union Bank was awarded $300,000 in WISH (Workforce Initiative Subsidy for Homeownership) 

Downpayment Assistance Funds through the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB). Through this program, 

Union partners with local non-profits to provide up to $15,000 in downpayment assistance to low and 

moderate income households, matching up to $3 for every dollar contributed by the household. 

• Union also participates in the FHLB’s IDEA (Individual Development and Retirement Account) 

Downpayment Assistance Program. This program is similar to the WISH program, but targeted towards 

households participating in either the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) program, Individual Development 

Account (IDA) program, or lease-to-own program. 


• All loan officers and contractors undergo annual training on fair lending practices, and are required to 

pass an annual certification. 

• Community lenders dedicated to the low and moderate income mortgage segment undergo specialized 

training to better serve this population with tailored products such as the FHLB’s WISH and IDEA 

downpayment assistance programs. 


• Union Bank did not receive TARP money from the federal government, and therefore does not have 

access to foreclosure prevention solutions under the federal Making Your Home Affordable program, 

such as HARP and HAMP. 

• Union reports that less than 2% of borrowers are currently identified as “in trouble” on their mortgage 

payments, compared to an industry average of greater than 10%. Because Union owns its own loan 

portfolio, it requires greater creditworthiness at the front end, thus resulting in fewer loan defaults. 



IV-49 



CitiBank 


• 10 year pledge (2003-2012) of $120 billion lending and investment commitment to minority and low and 

moderate income individuals, small businesses and communities in California and Nevada, representing 

approximately four times the combined deposits of Citi and Cal Fed (acquired by Citi) in these two 

states. The 10 year commitment includes a target of $80 billion in HMDA lending and $3.5 billion in 

community development lending in California and Nevada. 

• Array of tailored products for first time homebuyers with flexible credit criteria, such as: 

No minimum loan amount 

Low downpayment requirements 

Citibank Closing Cost Assistance 

Expanded housing and debt-to-income ratios 

Recognition of alternative sources of income 

Non-traditional sources of furnishing credit history 

• Offers both FHA and VA government-insured loans, allowing borrowers who may not qualify for a 

conventional mortgage to obtain financing. 

• Citi’s Homerun Program is designed to meet the needs of low and moderate income borrowers by 

providing greater underwriting flexibility and lower downpayment options. 

• In 2011, every Citi bank branch held a series of first time homebuyer and refinance seminars. 


• Citimortgage requires Fair Lending Training for all mortgage employees, encompassing both the Fair 

Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act, with recertification required every 2 years. 

• Wholesale lenders receive in-field training for marketing to LMI and minority communities. 


• Assists borrowers having difficulty meeting mortgage payments by: 

Providing workout arrangements where possible so borrowers can remain in their homes 

Offering free credit counseling to borrowers who miss payments 

Making loss mitigation staff available to borrowers and the nonprofit counseling agencies 

acting on behalf of borrowers 

Assigning borrowers a single point of contact with Citi 

• Participates in the federal HAMP program, and the Second Lien Modification program under the 

federal Making Home Affordable program, and will be implementing the recently announced Attorney 

General programs. Citi also offers other modification products to help keep borrowers in their homes. 

• In 2007, initiated Office of Homeownership Preservation (OHP) to work with national and local partners 

to conduct outreach in communities hardest hit by foreclosures. OHP’s loss mitigation specialists 

participate in outreach events and work closely with nonprofit foreclosure prevention counselors. 

• HomeownerSupport.com website launched Dec 2011 to help struggling homeowners understand 

options, including refinancing, payment plans, loan modifications, and other alternatives to foreclosure. 



IV-50 



Bank of America 


• In 2009, established 10-year, $1.5 trillion community development goal to lend and invest in 

underserved communities. Invested $168,5 billion in community development activities in 2010, 

achieving 11% of goal. 

2010 Accomplishments 

• $70 billion in mortgages to 452,000 low/mod income households (1 in 3 loans to low/mod household) 

• Assisted 90,000 first-time homebuyers through federal government homebuyer tax credit 

• Within Santa Monica (zip codes 90401-90405), $39.7 million in “community development” home 

purchase and refinance loans. BofA criteria for community development loans include: 

Loans in LMI census tracts and to LMI borrowers as defined under CRA 

Borrowers


Wells Fargo Bank 


• $70 billion, 10-year goal for affordable mortgage lending, encompassing lending in low and moderate 

income (LMI) neighborhoods and to LMI borrowers. Includes mortgage lending as well as home 

improvement and multi-family loans. 

• Achieved 50% of goal during first four years (2007-2010), investing a total of $35 billion in affordable 

mortgages, including $22.3 billion in LMI neighborhoods and $12.6 billion to LMI households. 

• #1 originator of home loans to African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans and low and 

moderate income borrowers in 2010. 

• In February, 2012, launched Neighborhood LIFT as a pilot in City of Los Angeles to help stabilize 

neighborhoods hard hit by foreclosures, providing approximately $15 million in downpayment 

assistance and programmatic support for first-time homebuyers and “ready-again” homebuyers. 

• Partners with City of Los Angeles’ home ownership program for low- and moderate-income buyers 

seeking to purchase a home from Restore Neighborhoods Los Angeles (RNLA) a non-profit 

organization formed by the City to manage the disposition of REO properties. Wells offers mortgage 

financing to buyers in the program who complete home buyer education classes. 


• Wells Fargo Home Mortgage Team members required to take Fair and Responsible Lending course 

annually. Course reviews fair and responsible lending principles and key concepts including Fair 

Lending Laws and Wells Fair & Responsible Lending Policies. 


• Between 2009-2011, Wells Fargo participated in 148 home preservation events throughout California, 

including nine Wells-organized home preservation workshops to work one-on-one with mortgage 

customers facing financial hardships. 

• Continued sponsorship of large scale homeownership preservation events, such as those at the Los 

Angeles and Pasadena Convention Centers where thousands of Wells customer’s loans are reviewed 

and loan modifications and other workout options are provided on-the-spot. Events also involve 

participation of local nonprofit organizations to offer additional support to customers in such areas as 

credit counseling and budgeting. 

• Establishment of Wells Fargo Home Preservation Centers in the country’s most distressed markets, 

including 16 Centers in California. Customers meet face-to-face with home loan advisors about their 

financial situation and mortgage modification options. 

• Adoption of an enhanced Single Point of Contact model for distressed homeowners. Designed to 

provide greater continuity to customers throughout the process and help avoid confusion for those who 

may be pursuing a modification or other option while at risk of foreclosure. 

• Active participant in HOPE NOW, an alliance between mortgage servicers, investors, HUD approved 

counselors, and other mortgage market participants established to coordinate and maximize outreach 

efforts to help as many distressed homeowners as possible to stay in their homes. 



IV-52 



e. Subprime and Prime Lending 

Financial institutions that provide loans to customers are divided into two major 

categories: prime lenders, which provide loans to applicants with good credit, and 

subprime lenders. Subprime lenders serve a legitimate role in the market by providing 

credit to persons who are considered a higher credit risk due to such factors as 

employment history, debt-to-income ratio, or a troubled credit history. Legitimate and 

fairly priced subprime lending can enable some families who would not qualify for a 

bank loan to purchase a house or access home equity. 

While the definition of subprime lending varies somewhat among agencies, subprime 

loans are generally associated with higher interest rates, higher points, larger fees, and 

often pre-payment penalties compared to loans in the so-called prime market. Given 

the greater risk associated with lending to higher-risk applicants, interest rates on 

subprime loans may be anywhere from a couple of points to as much as 10 percentage 

points above the prime rate for persons with “less-than-perfect” credit. Abuses occur 

when subprime lending goes beyond reasonably compensating the lender for taking on 

the added risk of lending to a person with a poor credit history. Fannie Mae and Freddie 

Mac have estimated that 30 to 50 percent of all borrowers with higher cost subprime 

loans could have qualified for a lower-cost prime loan. 

Between 2001-2005, HUD published a Subprime and Manufactured Home Lender List 

which identified lenders with a predominance of subprime loans. However, once HMDA 

began requiring lenders to report on loan pricing data, it became possible to identify 

how many actual “subprime” or “high cost” loans were made, no longer having to rely on 

how many loans were made by lenders that seemed to specialize in subprime loans. In 

fact, most of the lenders on the early HUD subprime lender lists are now out of business 

for making too many bad loans. 

The California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC) has access to the raw HMDA data, and 

has evaluated all mortgage and refinance loan applications in Santa Monica in 2010 to 

identify high cost/subprime loans (defined as 1.5% above prevailing prime interest rates 

as defined by Freddie Mac). CRC’s review of all conventional home purchase and 

refinance lending on single-family homes that were owner-occupied, first lien originated 

loans revealed the following: 

• None of the home purchase loans made in Santa Monica during 2010 were 

high cost loans 

• Of the 1,525 refinance loans made, only two met the “high cost” threshold. 

In summary, the issue of subprime/high cost loans in Santa Monica is fairly nonexistent. 



IV-53 



Predatory Lending: Predatory mortgage lending is defined as the practice of making 

high-cost home loans to borrowers without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay the 

loan. Predatory lending is primarily targeted to low-income people, the elderly, and 

people of color, and has emerged from the subprime market due to several factors: 2 

‣ The characteristics of many subprime borrowers make them more easily 

manipulated and misled by unscrupulous actors. Many are unfamiliar with the 

lending process, have less education, limited English skills, or may be recent 

immigrants; 

‣ Many subprime borrowers live in low-income and minority communities that 

have been and in some cases continue to be underserved by traditional prime 

lenders; and 

‣ The finance and mortgage companies that dominate lending in many lowincome 

and minority communities are not subject to the same level of oversight 

as their counterparts in federally supervised banks, thrifts, and credit unions. 

Predatory lending encompasses a wide variety of practices, such as: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excessive Charges: Charging excessive rates and fees to a borrower who 

qualifies for lower rates and/or fees offered by the lender. 

Exploding Interest Rates: Adjustable rate mortgages that rise quickly. 

Prepayment Penalties: Locking borrowers into bad loans or requiring payment 

of thousands of dollars in penalties. 

Flipping: Repeatedly refinancing a loan within a short period of time and 

charging higher points and fees with each refinance. 

Packing: A loan with single premium credit insurance products, such as credit 

life insurance, and not adequately disclosing the inclusion, cost or any 

additional fees associated with the insurance. 

Mandatory Arbitration: Denying borrowers access to the court system. 

As predatory lending has increased, many states as well as local governments have 

enacted regulations in an effort to curtail predatory practices. Efforts in California have 

included the passage of AB 489, which includes restrictions on a variety of practices 

considered predatory. For high cost loans, this legislation bans flipping, making loans 

people can't repay, balloon payments, and a host of other practices. The law 

establishes remedies available to victims (borrowers) for a violation of its provisions and 

enables regulatory agencies to take disciplinary action. 

The Federal “Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007” (H.R. 3915) 

establishes reforms to protect consumers from predatory lending practices. The Act 

creates a licensing system for residential mortgage loan originators, establishes a 

minimum standard requiring that borrowers have a reasonable ability to repay a loan, 

and attaches a limited liability to secondary market securitizers. The Act also expands 

consumer protections for “high-cost loans,” includes protections for renters of foreclosed 

homes, and establishes an Office of Housing Counseling through HUD. 

2 HUD-Treasury Task Force on Predatory Lending, the report, "Curbing Predatory Home 

Mortgage Lending,” June 2000. 



IV-54 



Based on information gathered at five field forums conducted by the joint HUD-Treasury 

Task Force on Predatory Lending, the resulting Curbing Predatory Home Mortgage 

Lending report proposes the following four point plan: 

• Improve Consumer Literacy and Disclosures. Creditors should be required to 

recommend that high-cost loan applicants avail themselves to home mortgage 

counseling, disclose credit scores to all borrowers upon request, and give 

borrowers more timely and more accurate information as to loan costs and 

terms. 

• Prohibit Harmful Sales Practices in the Mortgage Market. Practices such as 

loan flipping and lending to borrowers without regard to their ability to repay the 

loan should be banned. New requirements should be imposed on mortgage 

brokers to document the appropriateness of a loan for high-cost loan applicants, 

and lenders who report to credit bureaus should be required to provide “full-file” 

payment history for their mortgage customers. 

• Restrict Abusive Terms and Conditions on High-Cost Loans. Congress should 

increase the number of borrowers in the subprime market covered by legislative 

protections; further restrict balloon payments on high-cost loans; restrict 

prepayment penalties and the financing of points and fees; prohibit mandatory 

arbitration agreements on high-cost loans; and ban lump-sum credit life 

insurance and similar products. 

• Improve Market Structure. Award CRA credit to banks and thrifts that promote 

borrowers from the subprime to prime mortgage market, and deny CRA credit to 

banks and thrifts for the origination or purchase of loans that violate the 

applicable lending laws. 

The California Department of Real Estate has prepared information to help borrowers 

avoid predatory lending. The information bulletin titled Avoiding Predatory Lending – 

Protect Yourself in the Loan Process defines predatory lending, gives examples of 

predatory lending practices, and provides other information helpful to borrowers such as 

explaining the loan application process. 

The City of Santa Monica supports these actions to help low income and minority 

borrowers to avoid the pitfalls of predatory lending. Although the incidence of predatory 

lending in Santa Monica is likely not as extensive as in many parts of Los Angeles 

County, the City will take actions to protect low income and minority borrowers from its 

adverse impacts. These actions will include, but not be limited to including information 

on the dangers of subprime/predatory lending at workshops conducted by the City and 

the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Board of Realtors. 

f. Foreclosures and Loan Modifications 

Approximately 1.2 million Californians lost their homes to foreclosure between 2008 and 

mid-2011, with the number expected to increase to over 2 million by the end of 2012. 

While the number of mortgage default notices in the State has been consistently 

declining since its peak in 2010, the level of foreclosure activity remains significant. 

According to RealtyTrac, the slowdown in foreclosure activity during 2011 was in large 

part due to lenders re-evaluating foreclosure processes in light of ongoing legal issues 



IV-55 



stemming from the “robo-signing” controversy and mortgage servicing abuses. 3 By the 

later half of 2011, however, RealtyTrac reports that lenders were beginning to push 

through delayed foreclosures, with foreclosure activity projected to increase again in 

2012. 

Within Santa Monica, www.Realtytrac.com identifies 196 residential properties in 

various states of foreclosure (July 2012): 31 percent in “pre-foreclosure” having 

received a notice of mortgage default; 35 percent undergoing foreclosure with notice of 

a trustee sale; and 34 percent with ownership taken over by the bank. In May 2012, 

RealtyTrac recorded a total of 28 new foreclosure filings in Santa Monica, representing 

1 filing for every 1,858 residential units in the City. In comparison, the ratio of 

foreclosure filings to total housing units in other Westside jurisdictions was much higher 

than in Santa Monica: 

City of Los Angeles 1 : 511 

West Hollywood 1 : 672 

Culver City 1 : 882 

Beverly Hills 1 : 942 

Santa Monica 1 :1,858 

Of Santa Monica’s 28 May foreclosure filings, 11 were in zip code 90405 (south of 

Pico); 7 were in 90404 (between Pico and Wilshire, east of Lincoln); 6 were in 90403 

(between Wilshire and Montana); 3 were in 90402 (north of Montana); and 1 was in 

90401 (downtown west of Lincoln). 

The California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC) has tracked the cost impacts of 

foreclosures in select zip codes throughout the State. By way of example, information 

for zip code 90402 in Santa Monica (generally located south of 26 th St and north of 

Montana Ave and extending west to Chatautqua Blvd into Pacific Palisades) is 

presented in Table IV-12 below. A total of 171 ownership units are projected to be 

foreclosed upon in this zip code during the 2008-2012 period. CRC estimates that 

homes in foreclosure experience an average 22% decline in property value, translating 

to a total loss in home value of $22 million on the 171 foreclosed units. In addition, 

each foreclosed property is estimated to cause the value of neighboring homes within 

an eighth of a mile to drop 0.9%, triggering an additional loss of $45 million in home 

value and further eroding the local property tax base. Local governments have to 

spend money and staff time on blighted foreclosed properties, providing maintenance, 

inspections, trash removal and other code enforcement services, estimated at $19,229 

per foreclosure and totaling $980,000 for the 171 foreclosed units. 

Zip Code 

# Foreclosures 

2008-2012 

Table IV-12: The Cost of Foreclosures 

Foreclosed Home 

Value Loss 

Impacted Homes 

Value Lost 

Local Government 

Cost 

90402 171 $22,000,000 $45,000,000 $980,000 

Source: www.calreinvest.org/publications/crc-reports, The Wall Street Wrecking Ball: What Foreclosures are 

Costing Los Angeles Neighborhoods, Sept 15, 2011. 

3 www.realtytrac.com, 2011 Year End Foreclosure Report:Foreclosures on the Retreat, Jan 2012. 



IV-56 



Federal Programs: In order to stem the number of foreclosures and help stabilize the 

housing market, in 2010 the Obama Administration launched the $75 billion Making 

Your Home Affordable as a partnership between HUD and the U.S. Treasury. The 

program includes several components, including: 

• Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) – reduces monthly mortgage 

payments to 31% gross income 

• Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) – offers a way to lower payments 

on a second mortgage 

• Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP) – assists homeowners whose 

mortgages are held by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to refinance into a more 

affordable mortgage 

• Unemployment Program – Requires mortgage servicers participating in the 

Making Home Affordable Program to provide minimum three month forbearance 

period during which mortgage payments are reduced or suspended while the 

homeowner is seeking re-employment 

• Principal Reduction Alternatives for Homeowners Underwater - Beginning 

September 2010, mortgage servicers are required to evaluate every 

homeowner with high negative equity (owe more than 115% value of their 

home) for a HAMP reduction of at least 10% on the primary mortgage. 

• Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA) – Provides 

options for homeowners who can no longer afford their home and are interested 

in a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. 

Many of the Making Your Home Affordable programs have had a slow start. Roughly 

$29.9 billion in TARP funds have been allocated for HAMP (Home Affordable 

Modification Program) and other foreclosure prevention programs, but as of December 

2011, only $2.3 billion has been spent. Just over 900,000 permanent HAMP 

modifications have been granted and will likely fall well short of the 3 million to 4 million 

originally estimated. In 2011 a U.S. Treasury compliance team evaluated how 

participating HAMP lenders were performing when contacting homeowners, and as a 

result have withheld HAMP repayments from several major banks until procedural 

improvements are implemented. In an effort to broaden eligibility under HARP (Home 

Affordable Refinance Program) for pre-June 2009 mortgages backed by Freddie Mac or 

Fannie Mae, the federal government revamped the program, including elimination of the 

maximum 125% loan-to-value ratio, and extended the program end date to December 

2013. 

In February 2012, President Obama asked congress for $5 to $10 billion in financial aid 

to assist approximately 3.5 million distressed homeowners refinance debt-ridden 

mortgages. The proposed program is targeted to “underwater” homeowners that have 

stayed current on their mortgage payments, but are unable to refinance under 

historically low interest rates as they owe more on their mortgage than their home is 

worth. Unlike the current federal Making Your Home Affordable programs that require 

loans to be backed or owned by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or FHA, the new program 

would be expanded to underwater homeowners whose loans are owned by banks or 

investors. Eligibility under the program includes: 



IV-57 



• Six months of current on mortgage payments, with no more than one missed 

payment in the previous six months 

• Minimum credit score of 580 

• No more than 40% underwater on the loan 

• Limited to mortgages below FHA’s conforming loan limits ($729,750 in Southern 

California) 

State Programs: In February 2011, CalHFA launched the Keep Your Home California 

program using $2 billion in federal funds from the 2008 rescue of the financial system. 

State officials hope to fend off foreclosure for about 95,000 borrowers and provide 

moving assistance to about 6,500 people who do lose their homes. As of January 2012, 

10,000 households had received financial assistance, with 55 mortgage servicers 

participating in the program, representing 90 percent of the mortgages in California. The 

program is limited to low and moderate income households (up to 120% AMI), and the 

maximum benefit is $50,000 for any household. The Keep Your Home California 

program includes the following four parts: 

• Unemployment Mortgage Assistance - Mortgage assistance of up to $3,000 

per month for homeowners collecting unemployment benefits and in imminent 

danger of defaulting on their home loans. Homeowners can receive help for a 

maximum of nine months, and a total of $27,000. 

• Mortgage Reinstatement Assistance Program - As much as $20,000 per 

household to reinstate mortgages to prevent foreclosure. The funds are available 

to homeowners who have fallen behind on their mortgage payments due to a 

temporary change in household income, such as reduced pay or work furloughs. 

• Principal Reduction Program - Lowers the principal owed on a mortgage by as 

much as $50,000 when the homeowner is facing a serious financial hardship and 

owes significantly more than the home is worth. Lenders must match any 

assistance provided through Keep Your Home California. 

• Transition Assistance Program - Provides up to $5,000 in relocation assistance 

for homeowners who can no longer afford their home when their lender agrees to 

a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. Homeowners must occupy and 

maintain the property until the home is sold or returned to the servicer. 

National Mortgage Settlement: After many months of negotiation, in February 2012, 

49 state attorneys general and the federal government reached agreement on a joint 

state-federal settlement with the country’s five largest mortgage lenders over “robosigning” 

and other deceptive foreclosure practices. The settlement will provide up to 

$25 billion in relief to distressed borrowers and direct payments to states and the 

federal government, and involves the following banks: 

• Wells Fargo 

• Bank of America 

• JP Morgan Chase 

• Citibank 

• Ally/GMAC 



IV-58 



Benefits to eligible homeowners whose mortgages are owned or serviced by one of the 

five lenders include: payments to borrowers who were wrongly foreclosed upon; 

reduction of unpaid principal balances; refinancing for borrowers whose homes are 

worth less than the money they owe; and the opportunity for short sales and other 

relocation assistance. As the state hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis, up to $18 billion 

of the settlement will be directed to California homeowners, allocated among the 

following activities: 

• $12 billion is guaranteed to reduce the principal on loans or offer short sales to 

approximately 250,000 California homeowners who are underwater on their 

loans and behind or almost behind in their payments. 

• $849 million is estimated to be dedicated to refinancing the loans of 28,000 

homeowners who are current on their payments but underwater on their loans. 

• $279 million will provided as restitution to approximately 140,000 California 

homeowners who were foreclosed upon between 2008 and December 31, 2011. 

• $1.1 billion is estimated to be distributed to homeowners for unemployed 

payment forbearance and transition assistance as well as to communities to 

repair the blight and devastation left by waves of foreclosures, targeted at 

16,000 recent foreclosures. 

• $3.5 billion will be dedicated to relieving 32,000 homeowners of unpaid balances 

remaining when their homes are foreclosed. 

• $430 million in costs, fees and penalty payments. 

Loan Modification Scams: Foreclosure rescue and loan modification scams are a 

growing problem. Scammers might promise “guaranteed” or “immediate” relief from 

foreclosure, and they might charge very high fees for little or no services. HUD provides 

free resources through the Homeowner’s HOPE Hotline at 1-888-995-HOPE and 

maintains a list of HUD-approved housing counselors. The following tips to avoid loan 

modification scams are listed on HUDs website: 

• Beware of anyone who asks you to pay a fee in exchange for a counseling 

service or modification of a delinquent loan. 

• Scam artists often target homeowners who are struggling to meet their mortgage 

commitment or anxious to sell their homes. 

• Recognize and avoid common scams. Beware of people who pressure you to 

sign papers immediately, or who try to convince you that they can “save” your 

home if you sign or transfer over the deed to your house. 

• Do not sign over the deed to your property to any organization or individual 

unless you are working directly with your mortgage company to forgive your 

debt. 

• Never make a mortgage payment to anyone other than your mortgage company 

without their approval. 

Independent Review of 2009-2010 Home Foreclosures: As part of the consent 

orders entered into with the Federal Reserve System and the Office of the Comptroller 



IV-59 



of the Currency in April 2011, fourteen U.S. mortgage servicers 4 are making available 

free, impartial Independent Foreclosure Reviews to borrowers who faced a foreclosure 

action on their primary residence during January 2009 through December 2010. If 

eligible borrowers believe that they were financially injured as a result of deficiencies in 

the foreclosure process, they can request a review of their foreclosure file to verify that 

their foreclosure process was handled properly. If financial injury is found, borrowers will 

receive compensation or other remedy. 

Foreclosure actions that may be eligible for a review include: 

• Property sold due to a foreclosure judgment 

• Mortgage loans referred into the foreclosure process but removed from the 

process because payments were brought up-to-date or the borrower entered a 

payment plan or modification program. 

• Mortgage loans referred into the foreclosure process, but the home was sold or 

the borrower participated in a short sale, or chose a deed-in-lieu or other 

program to avoid foreclosure. 

• Mortgage loans referred into the foreclosure process and remains delinquent but 

the foreclosure sale has not yet taken place 

Beginning in November 2011, an estimated 4.5 million borrowers potentially eligible for 

the Independent Foreclosure Reviews will be notified by a letter explaining the review 

process and a Request for Review Form. In addition, a national advertising campaign 

will direct borrowers to www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for information. 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB): The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 

and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank) established the federal Consumer 

Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and in January 2012, President Obama appointed 

its first Director. The goal of the CFPB is to give consumers the information they need 

to understand the terms of their agreements with financial companies, including 

mortgages, credit cards and other financial services. The Bureau’s functions include: 

• Rule-making and enforcement of Federal consumer financial protection laws 

• Restricting unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices 

• Taking consumer complaints 

• Promoting financial education 

• Researching consumer behavior 

• Monitoring financial markets for new risks to consumers 

• Enforcing laws to outlaw discrimination and unfair treatment in consumer finance 

The hope is that the CFPB will play an important role in stopping abusive lending and 

foreclosure practices in the future. 

4 The 14 servicers participating in the program include: America's Servicing Company, Aurora 

Loan Services, BofA, Beneficial, Chase, Citibank, CitiFinancial, CitiMortgage, Countrywide, 

EMC, EverBank/Everhome Mortgage Company, First Horizon, GMAC Mortgage, HFC, HSBC, 

IndyMac Mortgage Services, MetLife Bank, National City, PNC, Sovereign Bank, SunTrust 

Mortgage, U.S. Bank, Wachovia, Washington Mutual and Wells Fargo. 



IV-60 



4. Discriminatory Newspaper Advertising 

Federal and State fair housing laws prohibit advertising in the sale or rental of housing 

that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on any arbitrary basis. 

More specifically, the federal Fair Housing Act prohibits the making, printing and 

publishing of advertisements which state a preference, limitation or discrimination on 

the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. The 

prohibition applies to publishers, such as newspapers and directories, as well as 

persons and entities who place real estate advertisements. It also applies to 

advertisements where the underlying property may be exempt from the Act, but where 

the advertisement itself violates the Act. 

The California Newspaper Publishing Association (CNPA) provides guidance on the 

advertising terms that violate fair housing laws. Appendix C provides examples of 

advertising words and terms that violate the Fair Housing Act. 

The Los Angeles Times publishes the 

following “Live Free From Discrimination” 

fair housing notice in the classified section 

pertaining to for-sale and for-rent ads. 

Neither the Santa Monica Daily Press or 

the weekly Santa Monica Mirror currently 

publishes a fair housing disclaimer in its 

classified section. The City’s Consumer 

Protection Unit has contacted these two 

local newpapers on multiple occasions to 

request publication of the disclaimer, and 

while the Daily Press published it for a 

short time, it is no longer doing so. 

LA Times 

Live Free From Discrimination 

Federal and State Fair Housing Laws 

make it illegal to indicate any preference, 

limitation, or discrimination because of 

race, color, religion, sex, sexual 

orientation, marital status, national origin, 

ancestry, familial status, source of 

income, or physical or mental disability. 

California Dept. of Fair Employment & 

Housing 800-884-1684 

a. No “Pets” Limitations 

Under Fair Housing law, landlords are required to make reasonable accommodations 

for people with disabilities. This includes making an exception to a no pet rule for 

persons with disabilities that require a companion animal. Many rental advertisements 

indicate a no pet policy. Neither the LA Times, Santa Monica Daily Press, or Santa 

Monica Mirror include any type of disclaimer regarding exceptions to no pets policies for 

persons requiring a companion animal. 

b. Recommendations 

• The City should continue to encourage the Mirror and Daily Press to publish a 

fair housing disclaimer such as that published by the LA Times. Reference to 

City fair housing services could be included in the disclaimer. 

• Encourage all three newspapers to publish a no pets disclaimer for rental 

housing stating that “no pets allowed” may still be required to rent to disabled 

persons requiring a service or companion animal. 



IV-61 



5. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions 

In the past, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) sometimes included 

provisions to exclude certain groups such as minorities from equal access to housing in 

a residential development or neighborhood. Today, the California Department of Real 

Estate (DRE) reviews CC&Rs for all subdivisions of five or more lots, or condominiums 

of five or more units. The review includes a wide range of issues, including compliance 

with fair housing law. 

The review must be completed and approved before the DRE will issue a final 

subdivision public report. This report is required before a real estate broker can sell the 

unit and each prospective buyer must be issued a copy of the report. If the CC&Rs are 

not approved, the DRE will issue a “deficiency notice”, requiring the real estate broker to 

revise the CC&Rs. 

Communities with old subdivisions or condominium developments may still contain 

CC&Rs that do not comply with fair housing law. However, provisions in the CC&Rs 

that violate the fair housing law are not enforceable. 



IV-62 


FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATIONS 

V. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Santa Monica AI evaluates a wide range of housing issues and potential barriers to fair 

housing. The following section builds upon this analysis, outlines conclusions, and provides 

recommended actions for the City and its community partners to address identified 

impediments to fair housing choice. The final section summarizes impediments identified in 

Santa Monica’s prior 2007/08 AI, and identifies the actions taken by the City to address. 

A. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS/FINDINGS 

The following summarizes the key findings from the AI: 

1. Community Profile 

‣ While Santa Monica’s population remains predominately White (70% in 2010), 

different racial and ethnic groups evidence areas of concentration, defined as 

census block groups which exceed the countywide average of a particular group. 

A small area of Hispanic concentration is located between Pico and the 10 

freeway 

African American concentrations are present along the Olympic corridor 

from 23 rd street to Pacific Coast Highway. 

Concentrations of Asian households exist in several census block groups 

located north and west of the Santa Monica Airport. 

‣ An estimated 760 Spanish speaking households and 750 Asian speaking 

households in Santa Monica are linguistically isolated. Such households are 

defined as ones in which all members over the age of 14 have some difficulty in 

speaking or understanding the English language. Language barriers may 

prevent these residents from accessing services, information and housing, as 

well as impacting educational attainment and employment. 

‣ An estimated 16 percent of Santa Monica’s population has some type of 

disability, encompassing physical, mental and developmental disabilities. The 

living arrangements for persons with disabilities depends on the severity of the 

condition, and ranges from independent living to specialized care environments 

(group housing). Without an inventory of accessible units, it is often difficult for 

disabled individuals and organizations to locate suitable housing in the 

community. 

‣ Senior citizens comprise 20 percent of Santa Monica’s households. 60 percent 

of the City’s senior households live alone, 58 percent are renters, and 40 percent 

of seniors have a disability. Seniors face housing needs related to housing 

maintenance, accessibility, and cost. Many elderly are on limited, fixed incomes 

and are particularly vulnerable to rent increases and other changes in living 

expenses. 


TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE V-1 



‣ While Hispanics, African-Americans, persons with disabilities and seniors are all 

well represented in SMHA rental assistance programs, Asians are 

underrepresented relative to their presence in the community. With 1,400 

households receiving rental assistance vouchers, approximately 18 percent of 

Santa Monica’s eligible renter population is served by rental assistance 

vouchers, compared with just two percent of the eligible Asian renter population.. 

‣ Since 1999 when Costa-Hawkins allowed vacancy decontrol of rent controlled 

units, 61 percent of Santa Monica’s 28,000 units subject to Rent Control have 

undergone tenant turnover and re-rented at market rate. Rents on decontrolledrecontrolled 

units are roughly double that of long-term controlled units, and are 

well above the level affordable to even moderate income (80% AMI) households. 

‣ Nearly 200 units in Santa Monica are in various states of foreclosure (July 

2012), and with adjusting mortgage interest rates and a slow economic recovery, 

the level of foreclosure activity is projected to remain significant. However, new 

foreclosure filings in Santa Monica are well below the ratio evidenced in other 

Westside communities relative to each jurisdiction’s total housing stock, 

‣ An over-concentration of residential care facilities can be a fair housing 

concern if that over-concentration is limited to a certain area of the City. 

Residential care facilities are generally dispersed throughout Santa Monica, 

providing these types of supportive housing services in most areas of the 

community. 

‣ Santa Monica is very well served by public transit provided by the Big Blue and 

Mini Blue bus lines. Major employers, community facilities, and assisted housing 

are located within close proximity to transit routes. 

2. Fair Housing Profile 

‣ The Consumer Protection Unit within the City Attorney’s Office, the Rent Control 

Board, the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of Realtors, and the 

Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles conduct extensive fair housing 

education and outreach. As the Consumer Protection Units reports that small 

property managers/owners are generally the major violators of fair housing laws, 

targeted outreach to this group remains critical. 

‣ Due to their specific housing needs, persons with disabilities are vulnerable to 

discrimination by landlords who many not understand the reasonable 

accommodation protections contained in the Federal Fair Housing Act. Given 

the continued prevalence of discrimination complaints from disabled households, 

there is a continued need to educate landlords on reasonable accommodation. 

‣ The race-based rental housing audit confirmed differential treatment to African 

Americans in one of four tests. An additional audit is being conducted to test 

differential treatment to families with children. The City will tailor its fair housing 





education program to address the results of the audits and any identified patterns 

of discrimination. 

3. Review of Potential Impediments 


‣ While the City provides for senior housing in all its multi-family and most 

commercial zones, the age threshold for senior housing is identified as 60 years 

or older in the Zoning Code. In contrast, the Fair Housing Act and Unruh Civil 

Rights Act establish a threshold of 62 years of age for senior housing to be 

exempt from familial status protections, or 55 years of age in a senior citizen 

housing development (35+ dwelling units). 

‣ The City does not currently have written procedures in place to allow for 

deviations from development standards, building codes, or permit procedures to 

provide a reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities. 

‣ The Zoning Code does not contain a definition of disability, although specific 

disabilities are mentioned as part of a use definition, such as “terminally ill 

(hospice definition) and chronic illness/infirmity (nursing home definition). Under 

the Fair Housing Act, persons with disabilities (or handicaps) are defined as 

“individuals with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or 

more major life activities; has a record of such impairment; or is regarded as 

having such impairment.” 

‣ With the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, redevelopment funds will 

no longer be available to support Santa Monica’s affordable housing activities, 

impeding the City’s efforts to expand housing choice among lower and moderate 


‣ Rent Control Board staff recognize that Hispanic households are 

underrepresented in the Rent Control program: the 2006 Santa Monica Tenant 

Survey identifies 6.3% of rent-controlled households as Hispanic, whereas the 

2010 Census indicates Hispanic householders comprise 10.8% of the City’s 

renter households. In an effort to increase participation, the Rent Control Board 

has established a Spanish website and conducted targeted outreach to the 

Hispanic community. 

‣ The Section 8 payment standard in Santa Monica is well below market rent 

levels, and as a consequence some landlords are not willing to accept the lower 

rents associated with Section 8 tenants. This has led to heightened competition 

for available Section 8 rentals and a longer time period for voucher holders to 

secure Section 8 units. 






‣ While Santa Monica residents have good access to financing for home 

mortgage, refinance and home improvement loans, lower cost governmentbacked 

FHA loans continue to comprise a very small proportion of mortgage loan 

applications (5% FHA loans in Santa Monica in 2010, compared to 40% 

countywide). 

‣ Hispanic applicants for mortgage and refinance loans evidenced a loan denial 

rate of 31% in Santa Monica, 10% above other racial groups in the City and 6% 

above Hispanics countywide. 

‣ Review of loan status by census tract over the past five years identifies several 

areas with loan denial rates of five percent or above Citywide averages. Census 

tracts 7018.01, 7018.02, 7017.01 and 7014.02 all exhibit recent trends of higher 

than average loan denials and are characterized by high minority and/or low/mod 

populations. 

‣ The issue of subprime/high cost loans in Santa Monica is fairly non-existent. 

None of the home purchase loans made in 200 were high cost loans, and just 

two of the 1,525 refinance loans met the “high cost” threshold. 

‣ Similar to most communities, home improvement loans in Santa Monica had a 

relatively high loan denial rate (33%). Coordination with local lenders to direct 

loan applicants to the City’s rehabilitation programs could assist eligible 

households in making needed home improvements. 

‣ Predatory mortgage lending refers to the practice of making high-cost home 

loans to borrowers without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay the loan. As 

predatory lending has increased, both the federal government and State of 

California, among others, have enacted regulations in an effort to curtail 

predatory practices. The City of Santa Monica supports these actions to help low 

income and minority borrowers to avoid the pitfalls of predatory lending. 

‣ An area of lending currently subject to abuse is loan modifications for 

homeowners at-risk of foreclosure. The Housing Rights Center (HRC) – the 

largest fair housing provider in the county - reports a high volume of its calls are 

from homeowners reporting “mortgage rescue fraud,” having paid hundreds and 

even thousands of dollars to consultants who are often ineffective for a service 

provided free of charge through HUD-certified mortgage counseling agencies. 

‣ Another area of concern is the plight of existing tenants in properties 

undergoing foreclosure. While Federal legislation now provides tenants the 

right to remain in their homes for 90 days after foreclosure, HRC reports that 

some realtors representing the lenders in bank-owned properties are not 

sufficiently well versed on tenant’s rights. 





‣ Despite the City’s continued urging, the Santa Monica Daily Press and the Santa 

Monica Mirror do not currently publish a fair housing disclaimer in their 

classified sections. Neither the LA Times or these two local newspapers include 

any type of disclaimer regarding exceptions to no pet policies in units advertised 

for rent for disabled persons requiring a service or companion animal. 

B. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TO ADDRESS IMPEDIMENTS 

Recommendations are organized by activity type as outlined in HUD’s 1998 Fair Housing 

Planning Guide. The actions listed below are primarily implemented through Santa 

Monica’s Consumer Protection Unit within the City Attorney’s Office. 

1. Education and Outreach Activities 

Action 1.1: Continue the proactive fair housing outreach to Santa Monica 

residents, apartment owners/managers and realtors conducted through the 

Consumer Protection Unit. Continue co-sponsorship of fair housing workshops with 

the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, the Beverly Hills/Greater Los 

Angeles Association of Realtors, the Housing Rights Center and other community 

partners to maximize the effectiveness of fair housing education and outreach. 

Action 1.2: Conduct focused outreach and education to small property 

owners/landlords on fair housing, and familial status and reasonable accommodation 

issues in particular. Conduct property manager workshops within Santa Monica on 

an annual basis, targeting managers of smaller properties and Section 8 landlords, 

and promote fair housing certification training offered through HRC. 

Action 1.3: Coordinate with the Rent Control Board’s outreach to tenants and 

landlords to incorporate information on fair housing. 

Action 1.4: Conduct targeted outreach to Hispanic households to solicit 

participation in the Rent Control Program. Re-evaluate and expand previous 

outreach techniques with the goal of gaining greater involvement. 

Action 1.5: Further evaluate the under-representation of Asian households in 

SMHA Rental Assistance Voucher Programs. As warranted, conduct targeted 

outreach as defined in the Administrative Plan. 

Action 1.6: Designate a staff disability coordinator at City Hall to assist disabled 

residents in reasonable accommodation, locating accessible units, accessibility 

grants, etc. 

2. Enforcement Activities 

Action 2.1: Continue to provide investigation and response to allegations of illegal 

housing discrimination through the Consumer Protection Unit. For cases which 

cannot be conciliated, refer to the Department of Fair Housing and Employment 





(DFEH), U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), small claims 

court, or to a private attorney, as warranted. 

Action 2.2: On an annual basis, review discrimination complaints to assess 

Santa Monica trends and patterns over time, and tailor fair housing education and 

outreach accordingly. 

Action 2.3: Continue to enforce (and make the public aware) of the City’s antihousing 

discrimination policies in the Municipal Code (Chapter 4.28, Families with 

Children; Chapter 4.40, Sexual Orientation or Domestic Partnership; and Chapter 

4,52, Persons Living with AIDS). 

Action 2.4: Continue to enforce and promote Santa Monica’s just cause eviction 

and tenant harassment laws which offer protections to tenants in buildings 

regardless of rent control status. 

Action 2.5: Continue to offer counsel to tenants and landlords regarding rights 

and responsibilities under State and City codes through the Consumer Protection 

Unit, and mediate disputes arising from rent control law through the Rent Control 

Board. Provide referrals to The Center for Civic Mediation, Legal Aid and other 

agencies for issues outside the City’s purview. 

Action 2.6: Coordinate review of hate crime data on an annual basis between the 

Santa Monica Police Department and City Attorney’s Office, and evaluate as a 

potential fair housing issue. When appropriate, refer victims to the County Hate 

Crime Victim Assistance & Advocacy Initiative. 

3. Monitoring Lending, Housing Providers, and Local Real Estate Practices 

Action 3.1: Coordinate with the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of 

Realtors in conducting outreach on predatory mortgage lending practices, loan 

modification scams, and the rights of tenants in foreclosed properties. Disseminate a 

Fact Sheet via the City’s website and in public locations throughout the community. 

Action 3.2: Monitor mortgage loan denial rates among Hispanic households and 

in census tracts with higher than average loan denials and high minority and/or 

low/mod populations (tracts 7018.01, 7018.02, 7017.01 and 7014.02) through annual 

review of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data. Contact the City’s major 

mortgage lenders to discuss the City’s concerns. 

Action 3.3: Follow-up with Santa Monica’s major mortgage lenders to discuss 

opportunities for expanded marketing of: 

Lower cost, government-backed mortgage products 

Available first-time homebuyer education and loan products 

Foreclosure prevention programs 

Transfer of REOs to non-profits for affordable housing 





Action 3.4: Contact local lenders to request they direct applicants ineligible for 

privately financed home improvement loans to the City’s rehabilitation loan program. 

Action 3.5: Continue to encourage the Santa Monica Mirror and Santa Monica 

Daily Press to publish a fair housing disclaimer with reference to City fair housing 

services, and encourage these newspapers, as well as the LA Times, to publish a 


Action 3.6: Continue to include non-discriminatory and fair housing language in 

all City affordable housing contracts and agreements. Enforce the Affirmative 

Marketing Policies that are required as part of HOME-assisted rental developments. 

4. Investigative Testing and Auditing Local Real Estate Markets 

Action 4.1: Conduct rental audits and/or testing to evaluate apparent patterns of 

discrimination related to race, familial status and disability. To the extent such audits 

reveal significant discrimination, widely publicize the results and require remediation 

to serve as a deterrent to other property owners and landlords. 

5. Land Use Policies to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing 

Action 5.1: Amend the current 60 year age threshold for senior housing in the 

Zoning Code to be consistent with those in the Fair Housing Act and Unruh Civil 

Rights Act. These Acts reference a 62 year age threshold, or 55 year threshold in a 

senior citizen housing development (35+ dwelling units) for allowing a senior housing 

exemption to the law’s familial status requirements. 

Action 5.2: Incorporate the following definition of “disability” within the Zoning Code 

consistent with the Fair Housing Act: “individuals with physical or mental impairments 

that substantially limit one or more major life activities; has a record of such 

impairment; or is regarded as having such impairment.” 

Action 5.3: Develop and adopt reasonable accommodation procedures to facilitate 

accessibility improvement requests through modifications in zoning (including use 

permissions and development standards), building codes, and permit processing 

procedures. 

Action 5.4: Develop an inventory of publicly-assisted accessible units in Santa 

Monica and make available on the City’s website for use by interested parties. 

Encourage apartment owners utilizing the Rent Control Board’s Apartment Listing 

Service to identify accessible units. 

6. Increasing Geographic Choice in Housing 

Action 6.1: Continue to provide financial and regulatory incentives to facilitate the 

provision of affordable housing throughout the community, particularly in locations 

near transit and services that promote walkability Provide affordable and accessible 





housing to special needs populations, including the disabled, seniors and persons atrisk 

of homelessness. 

Action 6.2: Support the integration of affordable units within market rate projects 

through implementation of the Affordable Housing Production (inclusionary) 

Program. 

Action 6.3: Pursue alternative funding sources for affordable housing activities 

previously funded through the Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency, including 

replacement funding for the 70 families assisted under the former Redevelopment 

Agency’s Rental Assistance Program. 

Action 6.4: If eligible, apply to HUD for an increase in the Section 8 payment 

standard to provide greater parity with market rents. Evaluate adoption of an 

ordinance prohibiting discrimination against Section 8 voucher holders. 





C. STATUS OF ADDRESSING IMPEDIMENTS IDENTIFIED IN 2007/08 AI 

Santa Monica’s 2007/08 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice identified a 

number of private and public sector impediments and established recommended actions to 

address each of these impediments. The following Table V-1 summarizes the City’s 

progress in implementing these actions. 

Table V-1: Status of 2007/08 AI Impediments and Actions 

Impediment Recommended Actions to Address Status 


A. Housing Discrimination 

An average of 18 

discrimination complaints are 

filed each year with the City, 

HUD and DFEH. 

B. Redlining 

Potential trend of redlining in 

census tracts 7018.01 and 

7018.02 which have largest 

minority populations and rank 

1 st and 3 rd for mortgage loan 

denials. However, no 

consistent correlation found 

when all census tracts 

evaluated. 

C. Predatory Lending 

No available data. 

D. Discriminatory Advertising 

Santa Monica Mirror and Daily 

Press do not include a fair 

housing disclaimer with 

housing listings. 

“No pets” may discourage 

disabled persons who require 

a reasonable accommodation 

for a pet from applying for 

available rental housing. 

E. Hate Crimes 

The FBI reports 7 hate crimes 

in Santa Monica between 

2005-2010: 4 based on a bias 

against race or ethnicity, 2 

based on sexual orientation, 

and1 based on religion. 

Continue the efforts of the Consumer 

Protection Unit to process housing 

discrimination complaints. 

Update the HMDA loan denial rates 

for conventional and home 

improvement loans. Future updates 

should monitor loan denial rates in 

areas with a concentration of minority 

and low income populations. 

Prepare and make available flyers 

that provide information on predatory 

lending and other fair housing issues. 

Encourage the Santa Monica Mirror 

and Daily Press to publish a fair 

housing disclaimer, which references 

City fair housing services. 

Encourage all three newspapers 

(Santa Monica Mirror, Santa Monica 

Daily Press, LA Times) to publish a 


As appropriate, City may refer victims 

to the County Human Relations 

Commission, Hate Crime Victim 

Assistance and Advocacy Initiative, 

and State Office of Victims’ Services. 

Completed 

Ongoing program 

administered by city Attorney’s 

Office. 

Completed 

City evaluates HMDA on an 

annual basis and has found 

no correlation between large 

minority population 

percentages and high loan 

denial rates. 

Pending 

City Attorney’s Office provides 

variety of Fact Sheets online 

regarding fair housing and 

disability rights, but does not 

provide info on predatory 

lending. 

Pending 

No disclaimer was found in 

the current editions. 

Pending 

No disclaimer was found in 

the current editions. 

Completed 

Police Dept conducts 

thorough review of all hate 

crimes and refers victims to 

available services and 

resources. 





Impediment Recommended Actions to Address Status 


A. Housing Element 

Implement the equal housing 

opportunity program adopted as part 

of the Housing Element. 

B. Housing Discrimination Policies – Zoning Code Policies and Standards 

City zoning regulations do not Amend zoning regulations to include 

contain a definition of 

a disability definition consistent with 

disability, though specific the definition found in the Fair 

disabilities are mentioned as Housing Act. 

part of a use definition. 

Residential care facilities for 6 

or fewer residents are 

currently only permitted in R1 

districts and require 

conditional use permits in R2, 

R3 and R4 districts. 

Housing Element has not been 

amended to include the new 

SB 2 requirements. 

The City has not adopted a 

formal procedure for disabled 

applicants to request 

reasonable accommodations. 

Senior age thresholds in 

Municipal Code are not 

consistent with those in the 

Fair Housing Act and Unruh 

Civil Rights. 

Amend the zoning regulation with 

respect to permitting residential care 

facilities for six or fewer persons in all 

zones that permit single-family 

homes (R1, R2, R3 and R4) 

Implement actions recommended in 

the Housing Element regarding SB 2 

requirements to remove 

governmental constraints that hinder 

the City “from meeting the need for 

supportive housing and transitional 

housing.” 

Adopt reasonable accommodation 

procedures for disabled applicants to 

request a modification from zoning, 

building and land use rules, 

standards and policies. 

Amend the senior age thresholds 

cited in the Municipal Code to be 

consistent with those of the Fair 

Housing Act and Unruh civil Rights. 

(62 years of age, or 55 in a senior 

citizen housing development). 

C. Housing and Fair Housing Services 

Upon adoption, implement actions to 

affirmatively further fair housing 

included in the SMHA’s Public 

Housing Agency Plan. 

Completed 

Ongoing Fair Housing 

Program administered by the 

City Attorney’s Office (Goal 

6.a of Housing Element) 

Pending 

City initiated comprehensive 

Zoning Code update in 2011 

and will include a disability 

definition as part of update. 

Completed 

Upon further analysis of the 

City’s zoning it was 

discovered that residential 

care facilities with 6 or fewer 

persons are considered a 

family dwelling, and thus 

already permitted in all zones 

where single-family units are 

permitted. 

Completed 

The City fully complies with 

SB 2, as confirmed by State 

HCD approval of the City’s 

2008-2014 Housing Element. 

Pending 

City initiated comprehensive 

update of Zoning Code in 

2011 and is developing 

reasonable accommodation 

procedures in conjunction with 

the update. 

Pending 

Will be incorporated with 

current update to Municipal 

Code. 

Completed 

SMHA is furthering fair 

housing with the adoption of 

programs such as VAWA and 

LEP, among other programs. 




APPENDIX A 

INVENTORY OF ASSISTED AFFORDABLE 

RENTAL HOUSING

PROJECT/LOCATION 

TOTAL 

UNITS 

Inventory of Assisted Rental Housing 

FUNDING 

PROGRAM/SOURCE 

YEAR 

BUILT/ 

REHABBED 

TYPE OF 

HOUSING 

Santa Monica Towers 1233 

Sixth St. 163 Section 202 1964 Senior 

Westminster Towers 1112 

Seventh St. 285 Section 202 1969 Senior 

SPONSOR/OWNER 

EARLIEST 

CONVERSION 

DATE(S) 

Santa Monica Christian 

Towers, Inc. 10/1/2028 

Westminster Towers; First 

Presbyterian Church of SM 2/1/2031 

Neilson Villas 3100 

Section 

Neilson Villas Limited 10/07/2017 / 

Neilson Way 100 236(j)(1)/Section 8 1977 Senior 

Partnership 

2009 

Geneva Plaza 1441 

21st St. 100 Section 202/Section 8 1979 Senior Westminster Towers 7/14/2020 

Barnard Park Villas 3356 

Barnard Way 60 HUD insured/Section 8 1981 Senior Barnard Villas Ltd. 

Ocean Park Villas 2019 & 

Section 221 

2219 5th St. 24 (d)(4)/Section 8 1982 Senior 

Wilshire House 1125 3rd 

St. 72 Section 202/RHF CHTF 1992 Senior 

Ocean Park Villas Limited 

Partnership 

12/11/2026 - 

2023 

Not Applicable/ 

2009 

Retirement Housing 

Foundation 1/4/2046 

Lincoln Court 2807 Lincoln 

Blvd. 40 Section 202 CHARP 1999 Senior Volunteers of America 2052 

Project New Hope 1637 Appian 

Way 25 Section 811 CHTF 1999 

Special 

Needs S.M. New Hope 2052 

Upward Bound Senior Villa 

Section 202 

1011 11th St. 70 RHTF/CHTF 2000 Senior Upward Bound Senior 2038 

1116 4th St. 66 CHARP/CHTF 2002 Senior Fourth Street Senior 1/9/2056 

Privately owned, 99-year lease 

Colorado Place 1444 14th St. 

18 to LA Co. Housing Authority 

Housing mitigation for 

which manages the facility; 


construction of One 

11 

1982 Family nominal lease rate of $1/year. 2081 

Colorado Place office 

RJG/LP Corp. owns land and 

project. 


improvements purchased as 

11 

part of mitigation agreement. 

175 Ocean Park Blvd. 22 Public Hsg./LA Co. 1985 Senior Public Housing/LA Co. Indefinite 

A-1

Monica Manor 1901-07 11th St. 

2017-23 20th St. 

2625 Kansas Ave. 

724 Pacific Ave. 

2525 Kansas Ave. 

1959 Cloverfield 

19 Public Hsg./LA Co. 1988 Family Public Housing/LA Co. Indefinite 

12 PNHTF 1983 Family/Senior CCSM 

16 PNHTF 1984 Family CCSM 

8 Rental Rehab/CHARP 1984 Family CCSM 


62 CHARP 1985 Family CCSM 

12/13/2008 +10 

years 

7/5/2009 +10 

years 

3/21/2009 +10 

years 

6/14/2009 +10 

years 

11/30/2021 +15 

years 

1843 17th St. 

12/20/2009 +10 


years 

2302 5th st. 6 CHARP/Rental Rehab 1986 Family/Senior CCSM 12/30/2020 

1629 Michigan 

1937 18th St. 

1827 19th St. 

1808 17th St. 

1943 17th St. 

2402 5th St. (OP 12) 

2207 6th St. (OP 12) 

2405-2407 4th St. 

1917 17th St. 





7 PNHTF 1987 Other CCSM 

6 LIHF 1987 Family/Senior CCSM 

6 LIHF 1987 Family/Senior CCSM 

10 

Colorado Place 

Housing Mitigation 1982 Family 


2/28/2021 + 10 

years 

12/6/2020 +15 

years 

8/13/2021 +15 

years 

12/13/2021 +15 

years 

3/31/2022 +15 

years 

12/30/2020 +15 

years 

12/30/2020 + 15 

years 

Owned by PJG/LP Corp., 

Leased to CCSM 2081 

12/18/2021 +15 

years 

A-2

1314 18th St. 

1427 Berkeley 

2009-15 Cloverfield 

2323 4th St. 



10 PNHTF/CHARP 1988 Family CCSM 

6 CHARP 1988 Senior Alternative Living for Aging 

8/6/2022 +15 

years 

1/15/2021 + 15 

years 

5/25/2023 + 15 

years 

3/18/2032 + 10 

years 

2121 Arizona 

6/3/2023 + 15 


years 

Ocean Park 43 Coop: 504 

Ashland; 536 Ashland; 3005 

Highland; 642 Marine St.; 518 

Pier Ave. 43 HODAG/Redev 1989 Family CCSM 10/21/2021 

3 Vicente Terrace 

4/4/2023 + 15 

25 CHARP/Rental Rehab 1989 SRO CCSM 

years 

2020-30 Cloverfield 32 Rental Rehab/LIHTC 1989 Family/Senior CCSM 4/25/2025 

1038 2nd St. 15 CHTF 1991 Family CCSM 5/15/2066 

1952-56 Frank St. 

5 PNTHF/CHARP 1992 Family CCSM 

1434 Santa Monica 24 Rental Rehab 1992 Family 

7/16/2030 + 10 

years 

1968 19th St. (Garcia) 


1544 Berkeley St. (Garcia) 

7 LIHTC/RHCP/CHTF 1993 Family CCSM 



10/2031 + 10 

years 

10/2031 + 10 

years 

10/2031 + 10 

years 


10/2031 + 10 


years 

6/2032 + 10 

2423 Virginia Ave. 


years 

1423 2nd St. 44 CHTF 1994 SRO CCSM 6/1/2043 

9/2043 + 25 

1328 2nd St. 

36 CHTF 1994 SRO Step Up on Second 

years 

A-3

1206 Pico Blvd. 

11/2044 + 25 

26 HOME 1995 SRO CCSM 

years 

815 Ashland Ave. 

8/2049 + 25 

45 CHTF/RHCP/LIHTC 1995 Family CCSM 

years 

1343 11th St. 8 CDBG (Rehab) 1996 Family CCSM 2050 


1144 12th St. 5 CDBG 1996 Family 1144 12th St. LLC 2028 

931 Euclid St. 3 CDBG (Rehab) 1996 Family Euclid LLC 2025 

1422 7th St. 28 CDBG 1997 Family JSM Ravenna 2026 

1430 7th St. 28 CDBG 1997 Family JSM Siena 2026 

1422 6th St. 28 CDBG 1997 Family JSM Firenze 2026 

908 14th St. 3 CDBG 1997 Family 908 14th St. LLC 2026 


205 Washington Ave. 22 CDBG (Rehab) 1997 Family The Sovereign 2026 

1117 3rd St. 4 CDBG 1997 Family Edward James York 2026 

Special 

1020 12th St. 

22 HOME 1997 Needs Upward Bound House 2046 

11301 Wilshire Blvd. 12 HOME (Rehab) 1997 Disabled New Directions, Inc. 2046 

1002 Marine St. 30 CDBG (Rehab) 1998 Family CCSM 2050 

1128-1144 5th St. 32 CDBG/CHTF 1998 Family CCSM 2051 

1118 5th St. 10 CDBD (Rehab) 1998 Family CCSM 2052 

1423 6th St. 24 CDBG 1998 Family JSM Napoli 2027 

1425 6th St. 24 CDBG 1998 Family JSM Cielo 2027 



1438 16th St. 17 CDBG 1999 Family CCSM 2053 

1544 9th St. 3 CDBG 1999 Family Pines LLC 2028 

855 Bay St. 15 HOME/CHARP(Rehab) 1999 Family CCSM 2048 

1227 9th St. 10 HOME/RHTF (Rehab) 1999 Family CCSM 2048 


911 2nd St. 16 CHTF/HOME (Rehab) 1999 Family CCSM 2055 

1925 20th St. 34 CHTF/TORCA(Rehab) 1999 Family CCSM 2054 

1514 14th St. 36 CHTF (Rehab) 2000 Family CCSM 2055 

821 11th St. 10 RHTF (Rehab) 2000 Family CCSM 2055 

A-4

1344 14th St. 11 RHTF/HOME (Rehab) 2000 Family CCSM 20254 

225 San Vicente Blvd. 36 RHTF (Rehab) 2000 Family CCSM 2055 

RHTF/THTF/CDBG 

2112 Delaware Ave. 

38 

(Rehab) 2000 Family CCSM 2055 




1005 Pico Blvd. 7 CDBG 2000 Family Art Colony LLC 2028 

708 Pico Blvd. 20 CDBG/PNHTF/LIHTC 2000 Family CCSM 2051 





2404 Kansas Ave. 10 CDBG (Rehab) 2002 Family CCSM 2057 

420 Pico Blvd. 25 HOME/RHTF (Rehab) 2002 Family CCSM 2056 

2449 Centinela Ave. 20 RHTF (Rehab) 2002 Family CCSM 2056 

502 Colorado Ave. 44 CHTF 2002 SRO CCSM 2057 

2028 14th St. 22 RHTF/THTF (Rehab) 2002 Family CCSM 2055 

1942 High Place 13 CDBG/THTF (Rehab) 2002 Family CCSM 2057 

1943 High Place 14 RHTF (Rehab) 2002 Family CCSM 2057 

2122 Pico Blvd. 8 RHTF (Rehab) 2003 Family CCSM 2058 

2907 3rd Street 11 RHTF (Rehab) 2003 Family CCSM 2056 

Special 

1525 Euclid St. 

13 CDBG 2003 Needs United Cerebral Palsy 2058 

1944 20th St. 8 RHTF 2006 Family CCSM 2061 



2209 Main st. 44 CHTF/LIHTC/MHP 2007 Family CCSM 2062 

1424 Broadway 44 CHTF/RHTF/LIHTC 2007 Family CCSM 2062 

1329 26th St. 44 CDBG/RHTF/LIHTC 2007 Family CCSM 2062 

1751 Cloverfield Blvd. 51 HOME/RHTF/THTF 2007 Homeless OPCC 2062 

3031 Santa Monica Blvd. 47 RHTF 2007 Family CCSM 2061 

2411 Centinela 36 RHTF/LIHTC 2008 Family CCSM 2063 

A-5


2320 34th St. 6 RHTF/HOME 2009 Family CCSM 2063 

Special 

1548 5th St. 

46 HOME/RHTF/LIHTC 2009 Needs Step Up on Fifth 2063 

750 Marine St. 8 RHTF 2009 Family CCSM 2063 

Special 

2624 Santa Monica Blvd. 

8 RHTF 2009 Needs Step Up 2062 

1458 14th St. 20 RHTF/LIHTC 2010 Senior Simpson Housing 2063 


2418 5th St. 6 RHTF/HOME 2010 Family CCSM 2063 

1513 Centinela 8 RHTF 2010 Family CCSM 2063 

844 Lincoln Blvd. 10 RHTF 2010 Family CCSM 2063 

217-225 Bicknell Ave. 13 RHTF 2011 Family CCSM 2064 


2602 Broadway 33 RHTF Est. 2012 Family CCSM 2063 

THTF/RHTF/HOME/CD 

1930 Stewart St. 

105 

BG/CHTF Est. 2012 Family City of Santa Monica 2055 

2802 Pico Blvd. 33 RHTF Est. 2013 Family CCSM 2064 

1754 19th St. 49 RHTF Est. 2013 Senior FAME 2064 

1959 High Place 45 RHTF Est. 2013 Family CCSM 2064 

1701 Ocean Ave. 324 RHTF Est. 2014 Family Related/S.M. Village LLC 2063 

520 Colorado Ave. 26 RHTF Est. 2014 SRO Step Up 2065 

Total Units 3,633 

Source: City of Santa Monica and HUD Multifamily Assistance and Section 8 Contracts database 

CCSM: Community Corporation of Santa Monica 

MHP: State of California Multifamily Housing Program 

RHTF: Redevelopment Housing Trust Fund 

CHTF: Citywide Housing Trust Fund 

CDBG: Federal Community Development Block Grant 

CHARP: City Housing Acquisition and Rehabilitation Program 

THTF: TORCA Housing Trust Fund 

HODAG: Housing Development Action Grant 

LIHTC: Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits 

MERL: Multifamily Earthquake Repair Loan Program 

PNHTF: Pico Neighborhood Housing Trust Fund 

A-6

APPENDIX B 

HUD WORKSHEET: 

REVIEW OF ZONING AND PLANNING CODES, POLICIES 

AND PRACTICES THAT MAY POSE AN IMPEDIMENT TO 

FAIR HOUSING CHOICE

Review of Santa Monica Zoning and Planning Codes, Policies and Practices 

That May Pose an Impediment to Fair Housing Choice 

HUD Worksheet 

1. Does the Code definition of “family” have the effect of discriminating against unrelated 

individuals with disabilities who reside together in a congregate or group living 

arrangement? Yes ____ No _X__ 

a. Background 

Local zoning and land use laws that treat groups of unrelated persons with disabilities less 

favorably than similar groups of unrelated persons without disabilities violate the Fair Housing Act. 

For example, suppose a city’s zoning ordinance defines “family” to include up to six unrelated 

persons living together as a household unit, and gives such a group of unrelated persons the right 

to live in any zoning district without special permission. If that ordinance also disallows a group 

home for six or fewer people with disabilities in a certain district or requires this home to seek a 

use permit, such requirements would conflict with the Fair Housing Act. The ordinance treats 

persons with disabilities worse than persons without disabilities. 

In 1980, the California Supreme Court in City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson struck down the City’s 

ordinance that permitted any number of related people to live in a house in a R1 zone, but limited 

the number of unrelated people who were allowed to do so to five. Under the Santa Barbara 

ordinance, a group home for individuals with disabilities that functions like a family could be 

excluded from the R1 zone solely because the residents are unrelated by blood, marriage or 

adoption. 

Both State and Federal fair housing laws prohibit definitions of family that either intentionally 

discriminate against people with disabilities or have the effect of excluding such individuals from 

housing. Fair housing laws, for instance, prohibit definitions of family that limit the development 

and siting of group homes for individuals with disabilities (but not families similarly sized and 

situated). Such definitions are prohibited because they could have the effective of denying housing 

opportunities to those who, because of their disability, live in a group setting. The failure to modify 

the definition of family or make an exception for group homes for people with disabilities may also 

constitute a refusal to make a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act. 

For example, one city – not Santa Monica – defines family as follows: 

“Family” means a householder and one or more other people living in the same household 

who are related to the householder by birth, marriage or adoption. 

A definition of family should look to whether the household functions as a cohesive unit instead of 

distinguishing between related and unrelated persons. 


TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE B-1 


. City of Santa Monica Zoning Regulations 

The Zoning Regulations do not include a definition of “family”. Instead, the Zoning Regulations 

define the persons who occupy a housing unit as a “household”. A household is defined as follows: 

9.04.02.030.415 Household 

Persons living together in a single dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of 

all living and eating areas and all areas and facilities for the preparation and storage of food 

within the dwelling unit. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

A dwelling unit is defined as follows: 

9.04.02.030.270 Dwelling unit 

One or more rooms designed, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living 

quarters, with full cooking, sleeping, and bathroom facilities for the exclusive use of a single 

household. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

9.04.02.030.265 Dwelling, single family. 

A building containing one dwelling unit which contains only one kitchen and which is located 

on a permanent foundation. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

c. Conclusion 

The City of Santa Monica zoning regulations define the occupants of a housing unit as a 

“household”, not as a “family”. Furthermore, the zoning regulations do not refer to related or 

unrelated persons who may occupy a housing unit. Therefore, the zoning regulations do not 

discriminate against unrelated individuals with disabilities who reside together in a congregate or 

group living arrangement. 

2. Is the Code definition of “disability” the same as the Fair Housing Act? Yes ______ No ___X___ 

a. Background 

The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicap or disability, and defines 

persons with disabilities as: “individuals with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit 

one or more major life activities; has a record of such impairment; or is regarded as having such 

impairment.” 

The term physical or mental impairments may include conditions such as blindness, hearing 

impairment, mobility impairment, HIV infections, AIDS, AIDS Related Complex, mental retardation, 

chronic alcoholism, drug addiction, chronic fatigue, learning disability, head injury, and mental 

illness. The term major life activities may include walking, talking, hearing, seeing, breathing, 

learning, performing manual tasks, and caring for oneself. 





The City’s zoning regulations do not contain a definition of disability. However, specific disabilities 

are mentioned as part of a use definition. For instance, terminally ill (hospice definition) and 

chronic illness/infirmity (nursing home definition). 

c. Conclusion 

In order to affirmatively further fair housing, the City will add to the zoning regulations a disability 

definition that is consistent with the one in the Fair Housing Act. 

3. Are the personal characteristics of the (disabled) residents considered? Yes _____ No _X___ 

a. Background 

Under the Fair Housing Act, cities may have reasonable restrictions on the maximum number of 

occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling; however, the restrictions cannot be based on the 

characteristics of the occupants; the restrictions must apply to all citizens, and are based upon 

health and safety standards. Similarly, a conditional use permit or variance requirement triggered 

by the number of people with certain characteristics (such as a disability) who will be living in a 

particular dwelling, is prohibited. Because licensed residential care facilities serve people with 

disabilities, imposing a variance requirement on family-like facilities of a certain size and not 

similarly sized housing for people without disabilities violates fair housing laws. 

According to the DOJ and HUD, “group home” does not have a specific legal meaning. In the 

DOJ/HUD Joint Statement* - 

“…the term group home refers to housing occupied by groups of unrelated individuals with 

disabilities. Sometimes, but not always, housing is provided by organizations that also offer 

services for individuals with disabilities living in the group home. Sometimes it is this group 

home operator, rather than the individuals who live in the home, that interacts with local 

government in seeking permits and making requests for reasonable accommodations on 

behalf of those individuals.” 

“The term group home is also sometimes applied to any group of unrelated persons who 

live together in a dwelling – such as a group of students who voluntarily agree to share the 

rent on a house. The Act does not generally affect the ability of local governments to 

regulate housing of this kind, as long as they do not discriminate against residents on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, handicap (disability) or familial status 

(families with minor children).” 

“Local zoning and land use laws that treat groups of unrelated persons with disabilities less 

favorably than similar groups of unrelated persons without disabilities violate the Fair 

Housing Act.” 

[*Joint Statement of DOJ and HUD, Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the Fair Housing 

Act, August 18, 1999, page 3] 





The City’s zoning regulations explicitly permit group home housing in practically all single-family 

and multi-family residential districts. Specific examples are cited below. 

9.03.02.030.405 Hospice 

A facility that provides residential living quarters for up to six terminally ill persons. A 

hospice is a permitted use in all residential districts. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 1 

(part), adopted 11/7/95) [emphasis added] 

9.04.02.030.710 Residential care facility for the elderly 

A State-licensed housing arrangement chosen voluntarily by residents over sixty years of age 

where varying levels and intensities of care and supervision, protective supervision, personal 

care or health-related services are provided, based upon residents’ varying needs, as 

determined in order to be admitted and remain in the facility, as defined in Chapter 3.2 of 

the California Health and Safety Code, Section 1569 et. seq. A residential care facility for the 

elderly serving six or fewer persons shall be considered a family dwelling for all zoning 

purposes. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) [emphasis added] 

c. Conclusion 

Licensed residential care facilities providing housing for disabled persons are allowed in single and 

multi-family residential zone districts. Therefore, the City’s policies are consistent with the Fair 

Housing Act. 

4. Does the zoning ordinance restrict housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities 

and mischaracterize such housing as “boarding or rooming house” or “hotel”? 

Yes _______ No _X_____ 

a. Background 

Housing for disabled persons in some communities is limited to certain residential zones. Often, 

housing for disabled persons is included in how cities define a boarding house or hotel. 

Under California state law, licensed facilities serving six persons or fewer receive special land use 

protection. California requires that many types of licensed facilities serving six persons or fewer be 

treated for zoning purposes like single-family homes. Except in extraordinary cases in which even 

single-family home requires a conditional use permit, these laws bar conditional use permits for 

facilities that serve six or fewer persons. The land use protection applies to – 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Intermediate care facilities for individuals who have developmental disabilities 

Residential facilities for persons with disabilities and for abused children 

Residential care facility for the elderly 

Alcoholism and drug treatment facilities 

Residential facilities for persons with chronic life threatening illness 




For example, Health and Safety Code Section 11834.23 (Zoning Laws) states: 

“Whether or not unrelated persons are living together, an alcoholism or drug abuse 

recovery or treatment facility, which serves six or fewer persons shall be considered a 

residential use of property for the purposes of this article. In addition, the residents and 

operators of such a facility shall be considered a family for the purposes of any law or 

zoning ordinance which relates to the residential use of property…” 

Furthermore: 

“No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required 

of an alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility which serves six or fewer 

persons that is not required of a single – family residence in the same zone.” 

Essentially, identical provisions are stated with regard to a residential facility, which serves six or 

fewer persons. A residential facility 

“…means any family home, group care facility, or similar facility for 24-hour nonmedical 

care of persons in need of personal services, supervision, or assistance essential for 

sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual.” 

Health and Safety Code Section 1566.3 states: 

“No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be 

required of a residential facility which serves six or fewer persons which is not required 

of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone.” 

Further: 

“’family dwelling’ includes, but is not limited to, single-family dwellings, units in 

multi-family dwellings, including units in duplexes and units in apartment dwellings, 

mobile homes, including mobile homes located in mobile home parks, units in 

cooperatives, units in condominiums, units in townhouses, and units in planned 

developments.” 

State law requires that residential care facilities not be defined within the meaning of boarding 

house, rooming house, institution or home for the care of minors, the aged, or the mentally infirm, 

foster care home, guest home, rest home, sanitarium, mental hygiene home, or other similar term 

which implies that a residential facility is a business run for profit. 

b. City of Santa Monica Zoning Regulations 

The City’s zoning regulations define Residential Facilities as follows: 

9.04.02.030.715 Residential facility 

A community care facility which consists of any family home, group care facility, or similar 

facility as determined by the Director of the State Department of Social Services, for 

twenty-four-hour non-medical care of persons in need of personal services, supervision or 




assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the 

individual, as defined in Article 1 of Chapter 3 of the California Health and Safety Code, 

Section 1500 et seq. A residential facility serving six or fewer persons shall be considered a 

family dwelling for all zoning purposes. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS § 1 (part), adopted 

11/7/95) 

Boardinghouse and Hotel are defined as follows: 

9.04.02.030.145 Boardinghouse 

A residential building with common cooking and eating facilities where a room or any 

portion of a room is rented for periods of generally at least thirty days, where meals are 

provided, and where there is on-site facility management. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 

1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

9.04.02.030.410 Hotel 

A building, group of buildings or a portion of a building which is designed for or occupied as 

the temporary lodging place of individuals for generally less than thirty consecutive days 

including, but not limited to, an establishment held out to the public as an apartment hotel, 

hostel, inn, timeshare project, tourist court or other similar use. (Added by Ord. No. 

1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s zoning regulations facilitate the development of a complete range of housing 

opportunities for disabled persons. State-licensed residential facilities serving six or fewer persons 

are considered a family dwelling for all zoning purposes, and the definitions of boarding house and 

hotel do not mention housing for the disabled. Consequently, the City’s zoning regulations are 

consistent with the State law. 

5. Does the zoning ordinance deny housing opportunities for disabled individuals with on 

site housing supporting services ? Yes _____ No __X___ 

a. Background 

Housing for disabled persons often must incorporate on-site supportive services. Zoning provisions 

that limit on-site supportive services will, in effect curtail the development of adequate housing for 

the disabled. As the joint statement by DOJ and HUD indicates: 

“Sometimes, but not always, housing is provided by organizations that also offer services 

for Individuals with disabilities living in the group home.” 


The City’s zoning regulations include “supportive services” within the definition of a residential 

care facility – that is, “care and supervision, protective supervision, personal care or health-related 




services”. Likewise, supportive services are included in how a residential facility is defined – “nonmedical 

care of persons in need of personal services, supervision or assistance essential for 

sustaining the activities of daily living”. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s zoning regulations facilitate the provision of on site supportive services in housing for 

disabled persons. Therefore, the zoning regulations are consistent with the Fair Housing Act. 

6. Does the jurisdiction policy allow any number of unrelated persons to reside together, 

but restrict such occupancy, if the residents are disabled? Yes _____ No __X___ 

a. Background 

The joint statement by DOJ and HUD describes this issue as follows: 

“A local government may generally restrict the ability of groups of unrelated persons to 

live together as long as the restrictions are imposed on all such groups. Thus, in the case 

where a family is defined to include up to six unrelated people, an ordinance would not, 

on its face, violate the Act if a group home of seven unrelated people with disabilities was 

not allowed to locate in single-family zoned neighborhood, because a group of seven 

unrelated people without disabilities would also not be allowed.” 


As previously explained, the City’s definition of a household does not mention the number of 

persons who may occupy a dwelling unit. The “household” definition is: 

“Persons living together in a single dwelling unit, with common access to, and common 

use of all living and eating areas and all areas and facilities for the preparation and storage 

of food within the dwelling unit.” 

The City’s zoning regulations also do not establish occupancy limits. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s policy does not specify the number of unrelated persons that may reside together. Zoning 

Regulations follow the State licensing requirements for group housing for six or fewer people. 

7. Does the jurisdiction policy not allow disabled persons to make reasonable modifications or 

provide reasonable accommodation for disabled people who live in municipal-supplied or 

managed residential housing? Yes ______ No_X____ 

a. Background 

A joint statement by DOJ and HUD explains this issue as follows: 




“As a general rule, the Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to refuse to make ‘reasonable 

accommodations’ (modifications or exceptions) to rules, policies, practices, or services, 

when such accommodations may be necessary to afford persons with disabilities an equal 

opportunity to use or enjoy a dwelling.” 

“Even though a zoning ordinance imposes on group homes the same restrictions it imposes 

on other groups of unrelated people, a local government may be required, in individual 

cases and when requested to do so, to grant a reasonable accommodation to a group home 

for persons with disabilities. For example, it may be a reasonable accommodation to waive 

a setback required so that a paved path of travel can be provided to residents who have 

mobility impairments. A similar waiver might not be required for a different type of group 

home where residents do not have difficulty negotiating steps and do not need a setback in 

order to have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” 

“Where a local zoning scheme specifies procedures for seeking a departure from the general 

rule, courts have decided, and the Department of Justice and HUD agree, that these 

procedures must ordinarily be followed. If no procedure is specified, persons with 

disabilities may, nevertheless, request a reasonable accommodation in some other way, 

and a local government is obligated to grant it if it meets the criteria discussed above. A 

local government’s failure to respond to a request for reasonable accommodation or an 

inordinate delay in responding could also violate the Act.” 

“Local governments are encouraged to provide mechanisms for requesting reasonable 

accommodations that operate promptly and efficiently, without imposing significant costs 

or delays. The local government should also make efforts to insure that the availability of 

such mechanisms is well known within the community.”* 

[*Joint Statement of DOJ and HUD, Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the Fair Housing Act, 

August 18, 1999, pages 3 and 4] 

The Fair Housing Act requires housing providers to make reasonable accommodations for persons 

with disabilities. A reasonable accommodation is a change in rules, policies, practices, or services so 

that a person with a disability will have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling unit or 

common space. A housing provider should do everything s/he can to assist, but s/he is not required 

to make changes that would fundamentally alter the program or create an undue financial and 

administrative burden. Reasonable accommodations may be necessary at all stages of the housing 

process, including application, tenancy, or to prevent eviction. 

Example: A housing provider would make a reasonable accommodation for a tenant with mobility 

impairment by fulfilling the tenant’s request for a reserved parking space in front of the entrance to 

their unit, even though all parking is unreserved. 





The City’s zoning regulations do not currently describe a formal “reasonable accommodation 

procedure”. Santa Monica Community Corporation, who owns and manages nearly 1,500 units of 

affordable rental housing, has adopted reasonable accommodation procedures for its units. The 

Santa Monica Housing Authority has also adopted policies and procedures for reasonable 

accommodation. 

c. Conclusion 

The City is in the process of a comprehensive update of its Zoning Code and will be developing 

reasonable accommodation procedures in conjunction with the update. The Zoning Code and 

reasonable accommodation procedures are projected to be adopted in mid 2012. One of the main 

reasons for a reasonable accommodation procedure is to provide a way – other than through a 

variance – for disabled applicants to request a modification from zoning, building and land use rules, 

standards, and policies. 

8. Does the jurisdiction require a public hearing to obtain public input for specific 

exceptions to zoning and land use rules for disabled applicants and is the hearing only for disabled 

applicants rather than for all applicants? Yes _____ No __X___ 

a. Background 

Persons with disabilities cannot be treated differently from non-disabled persons in the application, 

interpretation and enforcement of a community’s land use and zoning policies. 


All applicants requesting exceptions from the zoning and land use rules must apply for a variance. 

The public hearing process is streamlined because the hearing is conducted before the Zoning 

Administrator. A notice of this hearing is mailed to all property owners and tenants located within 

300 feet of the property. The decision of the Zoning Administrator can be appealed to the Planning 

Commission. 

Variances from the terms of the zoning regulations shall be granted only when, because of special 

circumstances applicable to the property (not the user) in question, including site, shape, 

topography, location, or surroundings, or to the intended use or development of the property that 

do not apply to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. 

In approving a variance, the Zoning Administrator may impose reasonable conditions. 

c. Conclusion 

Reasonable accommodation procedures do not require public hearings before a planning 

commission or city council. Consequently, once adopted, the reasonable accommodation procedure 




will enable the City to streamline the process for disabled applicants to request modifications from 

the development standards of the Zoning Regulations. 

9. Does the zoning ordinance address mixed uses? Yes __X__ No ______ 

How are the residential land uses discussed? What standards apply? 

a. Background 

Housing for disabled persons in a mixed-use development that includes commercial and residential 

land uses in a multi-story building could be a challenge. In such a development, it is especially 

important to correctly interpret the Title 24 accessibility requirements. 


Section 9.04.02.030.500 defines a mixed-use development as follows: 

The development of a parcel or building with two or more different land uses such as, but 

not limited to, a combination of residential, office, manufacturing, retail, public or 

entertainment in a single or physically integrated group of structures. (Added by Ord. No. 

1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

The City also provides for development in the RVC Zone – Residential-Visitor Serving Commercial 

District. This district is defined as follows: 

The RVC District is intended to protect the existing residential mix in the area while 

providing for the concentration and expansion of coastal-related lodging, dining, recreation, 

and shopping needs of tourists and others in the oceanfront area. The RVC District is 

designed to preserve and enhance the unique scale, character, and uses along the 

Promenade and on the Santa Monica Pier. Development intensity is intended 

accommodate new hotel and other desired uses. The RVC District is also intended to 

conditionally permit other uses such as office, new residential, and cultural uses to ensure 

consistency with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. (Prior code ss 

9015.1) 

Several housing uses are permitted in the RVC Zone District, including congregate housing, domestic 

violence shelters, single- and multi-family dwellings, senior housing, senior group housing, SRO and 

transitional housing. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s mixed-use policy is neutral with respect to housing for disabled persons. The policy may 

be clarified with respect to how accessibility requirements will be enforced in a mixed-use 

development. 

10. Does the zoning ordinance describe any areas in this jurisdiction as exclusive? 




Yes _____ No ___X__ 

Are there exclusions or discussions of limiting housing to any of the following groups? 

Yes ____ No __X__ If yes, check any of the following that apply: 

___Race ___ Color ___ Sex ___Religion ___Age ___Disability 

___Marital or Familial Status ___ Creed or National Origin 

a. Background 

Fair housing means the ability of persons of similar income levels to have available to them the 

same housing choices. The City’s land use and zoning policies cannot exclude persons from living in 

the neighborhoods in which they want to reside. 


The City’s planning and housing efforts focus on maintaining and improving the quality of life in all 

neighborhoods. Official neighborhood organizations include: 

Wilshire/Montana Neighborhood Coalition 

Ocean Park Association 

Pico Neighborhood Association 

Friends of Sunset Park 

North of Montana Association 

The General Plan and Specific Plans guide development of land and do not exclude or limit housing 

choices because of the characteristics listed above. The Housing Element has policies to encourage 

the production of senior housing, housing for disabled persons and family housing. 

The City’s land use planning encourages safe, connected neighborhoods to help preserve 

“community character”, which is viewed as a shared value among many Santa Monicans. Functional, 

healthy communities are the result of thoughtful planning that respects the existing neighborhood 

fabric, and that improves linkages to uses and activities that serve both the individual and the larger 

community. Through proper design, the City believes that public spaces (including parks, cultural 

centers, pathways and residential streets) can connect places and people using a variety of 

transportation modes, not just drivers. Some important neighborhood connections include: 

- Pedestrian access to local parks 

- Safe routes to school 

- Transitions between neighborhoods 

- Access to local goods and services 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s land use policies do not designate certain areas as neighborhoods exclusively for one 

particular population. Rather, through land use planning, the City strives to connect people and 

neighborhood by enjoying shared spaces. 




11. Are there any restrictions for Senior Housing in the zoning ordinance? Do the restrictions 

comply with Federal law on housing for older persons (i.e., solely occupied by persons 62 years 

of age or older or at least one person 55 years of age or older and has significant facilities or 

services to meet the physical or social needs of older people?) Yes _____ No ___X___ 

a. Background 

According to HUD, the Fair Housing Act protests all citizens from discrimination on the basis of 

familial status – that is, families with children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal 

guardians; pregnant women; and people trying to secure custody of children under 18. However, 

housing that meets the Fair Housing Act’s definition of ‘housing for older persons’ is exempt from 

the law’s familial status requirements, provided that: 

o 

o 

o 

HUD has determined that the dwelling is specifically designed for and occupied by elderly 

persons under a Federal, State or local government program, or 

It is occupied by persons who are 62 or older, or 

It houses at least one person who is 55 or older in at least 80% of the occupied units, and 

adheres to a policy that demonstrates intent to house persons who are 55 or older. 

The Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 eliminated the requirements for “significant services and 

facilities” (mentioned in Q. 11) within designated senior housing units or areas. 

In California, Section 51 of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, also defines seniors as meaning persons 62 

years of age or older, or 55 years of age and older in a senior citizen housing development. A senior 

citizen housing development is one for senior citizens that has at least 35 dwelling units. 


Section 9.04.02.030.770 of the Municipal Code defines senior housing as follows: 

Multi-family residential housing, other than a residential care facility for the elderly or senior 

group housing, developed with individual dwelling units, in which each unit is restricted for 

occupancy by at least one person in each household who is sixty years of age or older. 

Without restriction as to age of occupant, units may also be occupied by management or 

maintenance personnel who are required to live on the premises. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS 

ss 1(part), adopted 11/7/95) [emphasis added] 

Section 9.04.02.030.760 of the Municipal Code defines senior citizen as follows: 

An individual sixty-two years of age or older. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS § 1 (part), 

adopted 11/7/95) 

c. Conclusion 




The City’s land use and zoning policies promote housing for seniors, as well as families. The 60 year 

age threshold cited in the definition of senior housing in the Municipal Code should be modified to 

reference the 62 and 55 age thresholds in the Fair Housing Act. 

12. Does the zoning ordinance contain any special provisions for making housing accessible to 

persons with disabilities? Yes __X___ No ______ 

a. Background 

Fair housing laws that require accessible units apply to “covered multifamily dwellings” constructed 

for first occupancy after March 13, 1991. First occupancy is defined as a “building that has never 

been used for any purpose”. 

There is no timetable for the production of accessible housing; as such housing is constructed when 

residential projects are built. The Fair Housing Act does not require any renovations to existing 

buildings. Its design requirements apply to new construction only. 

Both privately owned and publicly assisted housing – including rental and for sale units – must 

meet the accessibility requirements when they are located in 1) buildings of four or more dwellings 

if such buildings have one or more elevators, and 2) all ground floor dwellings in other buildings 

containing four or more units. 


The accessibility regulations are found in the Building Code, not the zoning regulations. The City has 

adopted and enforces the 2010 California Building Code, which has been enhanced by the 

incorporation of the more restrictive building standards of the Federal Americans with Disabilities 

Act as well as the Fair Housing Amendments Act. 

c. Conclusion 

The City complies with State and Federal laws that require making housing accessible to persons 

with disabilities. 

13. Does the ordinance establish occupancy standards or maximum occupancy limits? 

Yes____ No__X___ 

Do the restrictions exceed those imposed by state law? Yes ___ No __X__ 

a. Background 

Occupancy standards sometimes can impede the development of housing for disabled persons. 

Some zoning regulations – not Santa Monica’s – limit occupancy to five related persons occupying a 

single family home. Such regulations can prevent the development of housing for disabled persons. 




The Fair Housing Act provides that nothing in the Act “limits the applicability of any reasonable 

local, State or Federal restrictions regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted to 

occupy a dwelling”. 

HUD implements section 589 of the QHWRA by adopting as its policy on occupancy standards for 

purposes of enforcement actions under the Fair Housing Act, the standards provided in the 

Memorandum of General Counsel Frank Keating to Regional Counsel dated March 20, 1991. 

Specifically, HUD believes that an occupancy policy of two persons in a bedroom, as a general rule, is 

reasonable under the Fair Housing Act. However, HUD has pointed out, that there is nothing in the 

legislative history which indicates any intent on the part of Congress to provide for the development 

of a national occupancy code. 

Thus, HUD believes that in appropriate circumstances, owners and managers may develop and 

implement reasonable occupancy requirements based on factors such as the number and size of 

sleeping areas or bedrooms and the overall size of the dwelling unit. 

In this regard, it must be noted, in connection with a complaint alleging discrimination on the basis 

of familial status, HUD will carefully examine any such nongovernmental restriction to determine 

whether it operates unreasonably to limit or exclude families with children. 


The City’s Zoning Regulations do not establish occupancy limits. The Uniform Housing Code – on the 

basis of square footage – establishes occupancy limits for all housing. Assisted housing - such as 

Section 8 rental assistance – establishes standards on the basis of the number of bedrooms. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s regulations do not impede housing for disabled persons. 

14. Does the zoning ordinance include a discussion of fair housing? Yes ____ No __X___ 

If yes, how does the jurisdiction propose to further fair housing? 

a. Background 

Affirmatively furthering fair housing is an important responsibility of local government. Although a 

city may have numerous plans, policies, and standards, fair housing is rarely discussed in a zoning 

ordinance. Other documents of a city may further fair housing. 


As required by under State Housing Element Law, Santa Monica’s 2008-2014 Housing Element 

includes the following policy and program to ensure equal housing opportunity for all persons: 




Policy 6.1: Continue to enforce fair housing laws prohibiting arbitrary discrimination in the 

building, financing, selling or renting of housing, on the basis of race, religion, national 

origin, sex, sexual preference, age, disability, family status, AIDS, or other such 

characteristics. 

Program 6a: Maintain Fair Housing Programs. Continue to implement fair housing 

programs. Educate landlords about discrimination and educate the real estate community 

on the necessity of ensuring that their practices meet the objectives of the fair housing laws. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s Housing Element contributes to promoting and furthering fair housing in Santa Monica. 

The City’s program involves the investigation of discrimination complaints, enforcement of fair 

housing laws, and education and programs to residents on their rights and responsibilities under fair 

housing laws. 

15. Describe the minimum standards and amenities required by the ordinance for a multiple 

family project with respect to handicap parking? 

a. Background 

Federal and State laws require handicap parking. To further fair housing for disabled persons, a 

city’s requirements should equal or exceed the minimum standards of Federal and State laws. 


The City requires the provision of handicapped parking spaces consistent with State and Federal 

standards. In addition, the City has provisions for establishment of disabled parking zones at the 

diiscretion of the City Parking and Traffic Engineer upon the request of any individual or upon the 

recommendation of the Parking and Traffic Engineer, if either of the following factors exist: 

(1) Curb parking is insufficient due to heavy area parking; or 

(2) Sufficient vehicular activity by disabled persons exists at the location. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s requirements for handicapped parking are consistent with state and federal 

requirements. 

16. Does the zoning code distinguish senior citizen housing from other single- and multifamily 

residential uses by the application or a conditional use permit (CUP)? Yes ____ No __X __ 

a. Background 




Senior housing is an important component of the community’s housing stock. As a population ages, 

seniors need a variety of housing opportunities. 


The Zoning Regulations permit “senior group housing” and “senior housing” in the R2, R3, and R4 

residential districts. 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s land use and housing policies encourage and promote senior housing. There is no barrier 

- such as a CUP – requirement to the production of senior housing. 

17. How are “special group residential housing units” defined in the jurisdiction’s 

zoning code? 

a. Background 

The term group home does not have a specific legal meaning. According to the DOJ/HUD Joint 

Statement the term ‘group home’ is sometimes applied to any group of unrelated persons who live 

together in a dwelling – such as a group of students who voluntarily agree to share the rent on a 

house. The Fair Housing Act does not generally affect the ability of local governments to regulate 

housing of this kind, as long as they do not discriminate against residents on the basis of race, color, 

national origin, religion, sex, handicap (disability) or familial status (families with minor children). 


The Zoning Regulations do not define group home or special group residential housing. However, 

the regulations do provide for “senior group housing” and establish performance standards for this 

housing use. The definition and performance standards are described below. 

9.04.02.030.765 Senior group housing 

A building or buildings, including a single family dwelling, that provides residence for a group of 

senior citizens with a central kitchen and dining facilities and a separate bedroom or private living 

quarters. (Added by Ord. No. 1826CCS ss 1 (part), adopted 11/7/95) 

9.04.12.070 Senior group housing 

The purpose of this section is to ensure that senior group housing developments in residential 

districts do not adversely impact either the adjacent residential parcels or the surrounding 

neighborhood and that they shall be developed in a manner which protects the health, safety, and 

general welfare of the nearby residents, while providing for the housing needs of an important 

segment of the community. The following performance standards shall apply to Senior Group 

Housing: 

(a) Property Development Standards. The senior group housing facility shall conform to all 




property development standards of the zoning district in which it is located. The senior group 

housing shall conform with all local, state, and federal requirements for senior group housing. 

(b) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units. The number of dwelling units may exceed that 

which is permitted in the underlying zoning district if the dwelling units consist of individual 

rooms that contain full bathrooms and small, efficiency kitchens located in a building that also 

contains a common kitchen, dining and living space, adequate to serve all residents. 

(c) Lighting. Adequate external lighting shall be provided for security purposes. The 

lighting shall be stationary, directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way, 

and of an intensity compatible with the residential neighborhood. 

(d) Laundry Facilities. The development shall provide laundry facilities adequate for the 

residents. 

(e) Common Facilities. The development may provide one or more of the following specific 

common facilities for the exclusive use of the senior citizen residents: 

(1) Central cooking and dining rooms. 

(2) Beauty salon and barber shop. 

(3) Small pharmacy. 

(4) Recreation room. 

(f) Security. Parking facilities shall be designed to provide security for residents, guests, 

and employees. 

(g) Landscaping. On-site landscaping shall be installed and maintained pursuant to the 

standards outlined in Part 9.04.10.04. 

(h) Minimum Age. Residential occupancy shall be limited to single persons over 62 years 

of age or to couples in which one is over 62 years of age. 

(i) Minimum Unit Size. New units constructed shall not be less than 410 square feet in 

floor area. (Prior code ss 9050.7) 

c. Conclusion 

The City’s response to Q. 17 is positive in that provisions are made to permit housing for seniors in a 

group living environment. 

18. Do the jurisdiction’s planning and building codes presently make a specific reference to the 

accessibility requirements contained in the 1988 amendments to the Fair Housing Act? 

Yes __X___ No _____ 

Is there any provision for monitoring compliance? Yes __X__ No ____ 

a. Background 

The Fair Housing Act establishes accessibility requirements for new housing. Title 24 of the 

California Code of Regulations, known as the California Building Standards Code or just ‘Title 24’, 

contains the regulations that govern the construction of buildings in California. Chapter 11A 

contains the regulations governing housing accessibility. The City enforces the Title 24 accessibility 

regulations. 





The living arrangements of disabled persons depend on the severity of the disability. Many disabled 

persons live at home in an independent fashion or in a semi-independent fashion with assistance 

from a caretaker or family member. To maintain independent living, the City funds the Westside 

Center for Independent Living, which provides home accessibility modifications and grants to make 

rental units accessible to disabled residents. The City also enforces the Federal Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA) provisions requiring new multi-family construction to be fully accessible. 

The City’s building code requires new residential construction to comply with the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA). ADA requires minimum design standards for buildings of 4 or more units if 

such building has an elevator or if ground floor units in other buildings consist of four or more units. 

These requirements include the incorporation of the following: (1) adaptive design features for the 

interior of the units, (2) accessible public use and common use portions, and (3) sufficiently wider 

doors to allow wheelchairs access into the unit. 

c. Conclusion 

The accessibility regulations are found in the Building Code, not the Zoning Regulations. The City 

has adopted and enforces the 2010 California Building Code, which has been enhanced by the 

incorporation of the more restrictive building standards of the Federal Americans with Disabilities 

Act as well as the Fair Housing Amendments Act. 




APPENDIX C 

DISCRIMINATORY ADVERTISING – 

EXAMPLES OF WORDS AND TERMS

Discriminatory Advertising – Examples of Words and Terms 

The California Newspaper Publishing Association (CNPA) guidance on terms and words 

that do and do not violate the Act is described below: 

1. Race, color, national origin. Real estate advertisements should state no discriminatory 

preference or limitation on account of race, color or national origin. Use of words describing 

the housing, the current or potential residents, or the neighbors or neighborhood in racial or 

ethnic terms (i.e., white family home, no Irish) will create liability under this section. 

However, advertisements, which are facially neutral, will not create liability. Thus, 

complaints over use of phrases such as master bedroom, rare find, or desirable 

neighborhood should not be filed. 

2. Religion. Advertisements should not contain an explicit preference, limitation or 

discrimination on account of religion (i.e., no Jews, Christian home). Advertisements which 

use the legal name of an entity which contains a religious reference (for example, Roselawn 

Catholic Home), or those which contain a religious symbol (such as a cross), standing alone, 

may indicate a religious preference. However, if such an advertisement includes a 

disclaimer (such as the statement “This home does not discriminate on the basis of race, 

color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap or familial status”) it will not violate the Act. 

Advertisements containing descriptions of properties (apartment complex with chapel), or 

services (kosher meals available) do not on their face state a preference for persons likely to 

make use of those facilities, and are not violations of the Act. 

The use of secularized terms or symbols relating to religious holidays such as Santa Claus, 

Easter Bunny or St. Valentine’s Day images, or phrases such as “Merry Christmas”, “Happy 

Easter”, or the like does not constitute a violation of the Act. 

3. Sex. Advertisements for single-family dwellings or separate units in a multi-family 

dwelling should contain no explicit preference, limitation or discrimination based on sex. 

Use of the term master bedroom does not constitute a violation of either sex discrimination 

provisions or the race discrimination provisions. Terms such as “mother-in-law suite” and 

“bachelor apartment” are commonly used as physical descriptions of housing units and do 

not violate the Act. 

4. Handicap. Real estate advertisements should not contain explicit exclusions, limitations, 

or other indications of discrimination based on handicap (i.e., no wheelchairs). 

Advertisements containing descriptions of properties (great view, fourth-floor walk-up, walkin 

closets), services or facilities (jogging trails), or neighborhoods (walk to bus-stop) do not 

violate the Act. Advertisements describing the conduct required of residents (“nonsmoking”, 

“sober”) do not violate the Act. Advertisements containing descriptions of 

accessibility features are lawful (wheelchair ramp). 

5. Familial status. Advertisements may not state and explicit preference, limitation or 

discrimination based on familial status. Advertisements may not contain limitations on the 

number or ages of children, or state a preference for adults, couples or singles. 

Advertisements describing the properties (two bedroom, cozy, family room), services and 

facilities (no bicycles allowed) or neighborhoods (quiet streets) are not facially discriminatory 

and do not violate the Act. 

C-1

APPENDIX D 

FAIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN MATRIX


Fair Housing Action Plan 

FY 2012-16 

Fair Housing Activity Recommendation/Action Implementing Agency Funding Resource FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 

Education & Outreach 1.1: Continue proactive outreach to residents, real estate professionals, apartment City Attorney's Office; Rent Control Board General Fund x x x x x 

owners/managers, bankers and advocacy groups. [Tangential Groups: AAGLA; BHGLAAR; HRC] Rent Control Registration Fees 

1.2: Conduct focused outreach and education to small property owners/landlords on fair City Attorney's Office; Rent Control Board General Fund; x x x x x 

housing, and familial status and reasonable accommodation in particular. Conduct [Tangential Groups: HRC] Rent Control Registration Fees 

property manager workshops in Santa Monica, targeting managers of small properties 

and Section 8 landlords, and promote HRC landlord certification training. 

1.3: Coordinatate with the Rent Control Board's outreach to tenants and landlords to City Attorney's Office; Rent Control Board General Fund; x x x x x 

incorporate information onf fair housing. 

Rent Control Registration Fees 

1.4: Conduct targeted outreach to Hispanic households to solicit particpiation in the Rent Control Board Rent Control Registration Fees x x x 

Rent Control Program. 

1.5: Evaluate under-representation of Asian households in SMHA Rental Assistance SMHA General Fund x x 

Program, and conduct targeted outreach as warranted. 

1.6: Designate a staff disability coordinator at City Hall to assist disabled residents. Human Services Division; Housing Division General Fund x 

D-1



FY 2012-16 


Enforcement 2.1 Continue to provide investigation and response to allegations of City Attorney's Office General Fund x x x x x 

illegal housing discrimination and refer as applicable. 

2.2 Review discrimination reports on an annual basis to assess City Attorney's Office; Housing Division General Fund x x x x x 

trends and patterns over time, and tailor education and outreach 

accordingly. 

2.3: Continue to enforce and promote the City's anti-discrimination City Attorney's Office; Rent Control Board General Fund x x x x x 

laws in the Municipal Code. 


2.4: Continue to enforce and promote the City's just cause eviction City Attorney's Office; Rent Control Board General Fund; x x x x x 

and tenant harrassment laws. 


2.5: Continue to provide counsel to tenants and landlords through City Attorney's Office; Rent Control Board General Fund; x x x x x 

the Consumer Protection Unit and referral to outside agencies. [Tangential Groups: Center for Civic Mediation; Legal Aid] Rent Control Registration Fees 

Provide mediation services for rent controlled units. 

2.6: Coordinate review of hate crime data annually between Police City Attorney's Office; Santa Monica Police Dept General Fund x x 

Dept. and City Attny's Office and evaluate as a fair housing issue. 

Monitoring Lending, Housing 3.1: Coordinate with BHGLAAR in outreach on predatory mortgage City Attorney's Office General Fund x x x x x 

Providers, and Local Real lending/loan modification scams/tenant rights in foreclosures. [Tangential Groups: BHGLAAR] 

Estate Practices 

Disseminate a fact sheet on City website and in public locations. 

3.2: Monitor mortgage loan denial rates among Hispanic households Housing Division; City Attorney's Office General Fund x x x x x 

and in census tracts 7018.01, 7018.02, 7017.01 and 7014.02. 

Contact the City's major mortgage lenders to discuss concerns. 

3.3: Follow-up with major mortgage lenders to discuss expanded Housing Division; City Attorney's Office General Fund x x x x x 

marketing of government backed loans, first-time homebuyer loans, 

[Tangential Groups: CCSM] 

foreclosure prevention programs, and transfer of REO's to nonprofits 

for affordable housing. 

3.4: Contact local lenders to request they direct applicants ineligible Housing Division; City Attorney's Office General Fund x x x x x 

for privately financed home improvement loans to the City's 

rehabilitation loan program. 

3.5: Continue to encourage the Santa Monica Mirror and Santa Monica Daily City Attorney's Office General Fund x 

Press to publish a fair housing disclaimer, and encourage these newspapers, 

as well as the L.A. Times, to publish a "no pets" disclaimer. 

3.6: Continue to include non-discriminatory and fair housing Housing Division General Fund x x x x x 

language all City affordable housing contracts and agreements. 

Enforce Affirmative Marketing Policies that are required as part of 

HOME-assisted rental projects. 

D-2



FY 2012-16 


Investigative Testing and Auditing 4.1: Conduct rental audits and/or testing to evaluate apparent patterns City Attorney's Office General Fund x x x 

Local Real Estate Markets of discrimination related to race, familial status and disability. [Tangential Groups: HRC] 

Widely publicize results and require remediation. 

Land Use Policies to Affirmatively 5.1: Amend current 60 year age threshold for senior housing in the Planning Division General Fund x 

Further Fair Housing 

Zoning Code consistent with Fair Housing Act and Unruh Civil Rights Act. 

5.2: Incorporate definition of disability in Zoning Code consistent with Planning Division General Fund x 

Fair Housing Act. 

5.3: Develop and adopt Reasonable Accommodation procedures to Planning Division General Fund x 

facilitate accessibility improvement requests. 

5.4: Develop inventory of publicly-assisted accessible units and make Housing Division; Rent Control Board; General Fund x 

available on City's website. Encourage apartment owners utilizing the 

Planning Division 

Rent Control Apartment Listing Service to identify accessible units. 

[Tangential Groups: CCSM] 

Increasing Geographic Choice 6.1: Provide financial and regulatory incentives for affordable housing Housing Division; Planning Division Variety of local, State, Federal x x x x x 

throughout the community, particularly in locations near transit and that [Tangential Groups: CCSM] and private resources 

promote walkability. Provide affordable and accessible housing to 

special needs populations. 

6.2: Integrate affordable units within market rate projects through Planning Division; Housing Division General Fund x x x x x 

implementation of the Affordable Housing Production Program. 

6.3: Pursue alternative funding sources for affordable housing activities Housing Division; Planning Division Variety of local, State, Federal x x x x x 

previously funded through the Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency, including [Tangential Groups: CCSM] and private resources 

replacement funding for the 70 families assisted under the former Agency’s 

Rental Assistance Program. 

6.4: If eligible, apply to HUD for an increase in the Section 8 payment standard Housing Division; City Attorney's Office General Fund x x 

to provide greater parity with market rents. Evaluate adoption of an ordinance 

prohibiting discrimination against Section 8 voucher holders. 

D-3

13-A 

November 27, 2012 

CITY CLERK’S OFFICE - MEMORANDUM 

To: 

From: 

City Council 

Councilmember McKeown 

Date: November 27, 2012 

13-A: Request of Councilmember McKeown that the Council direct staff to 

evaluate how best to divest fossil fuel investments from the City's 

portfolios, and return with policy options as part of the February mid-year 

budget review. 

13-A 

November 27, 2012

Climate Activists Hit Hard With 'Do the Math' National Tour | The Nation 

11/18/12 12:30 PM 

Walmart Strike Spreads to Texas; Organizers Promise Black Friday Protest 

Climate Activists Hit Hard With 'Do the Math' National Tour 

Tom Hayden November 13, 2012 

Like 165 

| Tweet 133 | | Recommended by 0 | Text Size A | A | A 

Email | Print | Share | Single Page | Web Letter (0) | Write a Letter | Take Action | Subscribe Now 

LOS ANGELES —Less than a week after the presidential election, a fired-up crowd of climate activists cheered Bill 

McKibben and the “Do the Math” roadshow at their UCLA stop. “Do the Math” is on a three-week caravan traveling by 

biodiesel-powered bus, with a stop in Washington, DC, to challenge the president to take quick action on the 

environment. 

About the Author 

Tom Hayden 

Senator Tom Hayden, the Nation Institute's 

Carey McWilliams Fellow, has played an 

active role in American politics and... 

Also by the Author 

Remember and Thank George 

McGovern (Lived History) 

The Democrats and historians threw George 

McGovern under the bus. Now it is time for his 

resurrection, in a search for history’s lessons. 

Tom Hayden 

Remembering Russell Means (Lived 

History) 

Russell was a reminder that the wars against 

indigenous people, and the conquest of their 

resources, are far from over, and that we 

cannot be fully human until remorse with our 

eyes wide open allows the possibility of 

reconciliation. 

Tom Hayden 

The twenty-one-city tour promises to be a model for progressives 

committed to aggressively pushing Obama and Congress even 

before Obama’s second term formally begins in January. 

One hundred chanting, marching students attended the UCLA 

event from the Claremont Colleges, fifty miles away, to announce 

their campaign to seek a campus divestment from the “rogue” fossil 

fuel industry. Already this week Seattle’s mayor instructed his 

finance team to investigate how to divest city funds, and Maine’s 

Unity College announced its plan to divest. 

350.org, the sponsoring organization for “Do the Math,” is calling on 

colleges, religious institutions and public pension funds to make no 

new investments in fossil fuels, “wind down” current investments in 

five years. Divestment would lead fossil fuel providers to begin to 

curtail lobbying activities in Washington, DC, and prepare to 

transition to a future as “energy companies.” The strategy is partly 

modeled on the global campaign of divestment from South Africa, 

although the analogy is incomplete. South Africans were carrying 

out a liberation war that could not be defeated, with powerful 

African-American and clergy constituencies in America. Legislators 

like Maxine Waters and Willie Brown carried divestment bills for 

seven years before being signed in California, tipping the balance 

against apartheid. Despite its efforts, 350 is not inclusive of black or 

Latino constituencies although is message is one of environmental 

justice. The UCLA event was overwhelmingly white on a campus 

where a majority of undergraduates are non-white. 

How to explain 350’s scale? Just as a pointless war can spark a massive peace movement, the corporategovernmental 

attack on the sources of life itself causes an instinctive human response on behalf of the earth. The 

scale and energy of this movement goes far beyond the considerable organizational power of the well-funded and 

well-staffed national environmental groups. It rests on the collective legacy of many previous upsurges going back as 

far the millions who gathered at the first Earth Day, the vast anti-nuclear power movement and the Nuclear Freeze 

effort. It has something to do with the 51-year-old McKibben’s flexible, improvisational, gentle and grounded style of 

leadership. A longtime resident of Vermont, a graduate of Harvard and a lyrical nature writer, his personal authenticity 

contains echoes of Henry David Thoreau. He seems to know that he is a prophetic instrument of an emerging force 

much greater than himself. 

The 350.org plan to attack the fossil fuel companies fully complements the peace movement’s demand to end the 

Long War on Terrorism, which is also an energy resource war. 350.org, however, is a single-issue movement lacking 

a platform on wars and military spending. Rapid progress towards renewables, however, will solidify public support for 

avoiding energy wars in the Persian Gulf. 

The renewable resource that 350.org taps into is one of human protest energy rarely seen in recent years. In late 

2010, for example, 350.org coordinated nearly 8,000 actions, most of them colorful and symbolic, across 188 

countries. 

http://www.thenation.com/article/171225/climate-activists-hit-hard-do-math-national-tour# 

Page 1 of 7

Climate Activists Hit Hard With 'Do the Math' National Tour | The Nation 

11/18/12 12:30 PM 

This article is brought to you by The Nation Builders. Find out more… 

The 350.org approach borrows in part from the “anti-globalization” and rainforest action movements’ focus over two 

decades on attacking corporate power directly, although this time at its core power rather than the reputation of its 

brand. Naomi Klein is a key supporter, and is featured in one of several videos employed in the caravan’s multi-media 

presentation. 

“If they are trying to take away our planet,” McKibben argues, “we simply have to try to take away their profits.” As he 

has in many writings, McKibben relies on environmental science to make an apocalyptic case. In order to keep rising 

climate heat below 2 degrees Celsius, he says, only 565 more gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions can be allowed; 

but the fossil fuel industry already has 2,795 gigatons of CO 2 in its reserves. Therefore, he concludes the very 

“business model” of giants like Chevron, Exxon Mobil and BP must be changed before they overheat the planet by 

implementing their conventional model. 

If the “do the math” argument is too speculative for some, the 350 argument is bolstered powerfully by the rash of 

catastrophic weather events ranging from droughts to superstorms now slamming the continent with increasing force 

and regularity. Superstorm Sandy put Michael Bloomberg into Obama’s column, and New York governor Andrew 

Cuomo has vociferously attacked the climate-deniers. With California and New York becoming major supporters of 

energy efficiency and green infrastructure, any Obama energy or climate initiatives will begin with stronger support 

than four years ago. Even Obama’s former regulatory chief, Cass Sunstein, is writing about the economic benefits of 

environmental regulations compared to the status quo. Sunstein says the cost of the East Coast hurricane will be $50 

billion and will reduce US economic growth by one-half percent. 

On the XL Pipeline project, Obama soon may face another round of civil disobedience like that which caused him to 

delay the approvals process last year. Van Jones, formerly Obama’s “green jobs” representative, who now endorses 

350, says the pipeline was a “done deal” until the protesters circled the White House. Obama now faces competing 

pressures from two core constituencies on the pipeline, from building trades and environmentalists. A likely rerouting 

of the pipeline around the Nebraska Sand Hills and most of the Ogallala Aquifer could mitigate objections from 

Nebraskans, but the dangers of disastrous spills, escalating costs and polluting emissions will remain. Attempts by 

Transcanada to open an alternative route through British Colombia face enormous First Nation and environmental 

opposition. Hanging over the controversy is the chilling judgment of NASA’s leading climate scientist, James Hansen, 

that it’s “game over” for the climate if the pipeline is completed. 

Obama’s options seem to be: first, continuing to defer a final decision while monitoring the costs, risks and levels of 

opposition; second, meet with the 350.org protesters to hear their concerns directly; or make a dramatic counter-offer 

involving conservation, renewables and global leadership over the next four years, to be announced in his second 

Inaugural Address in January. 

While the environmental caravan demanding renewable resources rolls towards Washington, Obama and top US 

officials are scheduled to visit Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar and Australia to shore up the American military 

presence in the navigation routes carrying oil and resources from Asia to the Persian Gulf. The so-called US 

geostrategic “pivot” towards Asia inevitably begins a new cold war with China over fossil fuels. Game over? Perhaps 

it’s sudden death overtime. As Al Gore described the terrible dilemma in Earth in The Balance (1992): “At this stage, 

the maximum that is politically feasible still falls short of the minimum that is truly effective.” 

Now’s the time to read Naomi Klein on whether Superstorm Sandy will push us to realign our relationship with the 

natural world: Superstorm Sandy: A People’s Shock? 

Tom Hayden November 13, 2012 

Like 165 

| Tweet 133 | | Recommended by 0 | Text Size A | A | A 

Email | Print | Share | Single Page | Web Letter (0) | Write a Letter | Take Action | Subscribe Now 

If you like this article, consider 

making a donation. 

Reprint this article. Click here 

for rights and information. 

PAID ADS 

http://www.thenation.com/article/171225/climate-activists-hit-hard-do-math-national-tour# 


It's time for fossil fuel companies to do the right thing - latimes.com 

11/18/12 12:23 PM 

Sign In or Sign Up Like 366k 

Membership Services Jobs Cars Real Estate Subscribe Rentals Weekly Circulars Custom Publishing Place Ad 

OPINION 

LOCAL U.S. WORLD BUSINESS SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT HEALTH LIVING TRAVEL OPINION DEALS 

EDITORIALS OP-ED ENDORSEMENTS LETTERS OPINION L.A. READERS' REP 

TRENDING NOW UFC 154 UCLA-USC MIDLAND TRAIN CRASH ISRAEL-GAZA SARAH PALIN LAPD 

Search 

OP-ED 

Cut the power of fossil fuel 

Until the world's fossil fuel companies become energy companies, their perks must go. 

Comments 48 Email Share 1 Tweet 157 

Recommend 467 

Connect 

Recommended on Facebook 

Like 

Create an account or log in to 

Sign Up 

see what your friends are 

recommending. 

366k 

No recommendations for this website yet. 

Put some Like buttons on your website to 

engage your users. Details can be found here. 

advertisement 

Oil-producing countries like Venezuela must change. (Chico Sanchez / EPA) 

By Bill McKibben 

November 9, 2012 

Superstorm Sandy: How soon we forget 

It's not just Sandy. Sandy was off-the-charts terrible, a storm 

that broke every record in the books: for storm surge, for 

barometric pressure, for sheer size. But it also blew in toward 

the end of what will be the warmest year in U.S. history. It 

was a year that already had seen a summer-in-March heat 

wave described by meteorologists as the most statistically 

freakish weather event in the continent's history, an epic 

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-mckibben-climate-change-20121109,0,7030709.story 



11/18/12 12:23 PM 

drought that raised grain prices 40% around the world and a 

record-setting melt of Arctic ice. 

Cartoons » 

On thin ice in the Arctic 

The pros and cons of trying to adjust 

the global thermostat 

America's water mirage 

Safety and sea life at Diablo Canyon 

It was a year in which scientists at NASA's Goddard Institute 

for Space Studies, who couldn't take the subway to their 

Manhattan offices in the days following Sandy, calculated 

that the 1-degree rise in global temperature we've already 

seen has raised the chance of extreme heat events by an order 

of magnitude. 

In other words, this year has been a wake-up call. There's no 

longer any room for doubt or for wishful thinking about the 

future. We know the damage that global warming has done so 

far, and we can predict with ugly certainty what will happen if 

we don't change course. 

The world's governments — the Group of Eight, the Group of 

20, Brazil, Indonesia, Russia, China, the U.S. — have all 

agreed to try to prevent the planet's temperature from rising 

by more than 2 degrees. That's too high a threshold — we've 

already seen that a 1-degree rise is melting the Arctic — but 

it's the red line the world has drawn, and it's better than 

nothing. 

The world's scientists have agreed, roughly, about how much 

more carbon we can emit and have a reasonable chance of 

staying below that 2-degree line: about 500 billion tons by 

2050. At current rates of emissions, we'll blow past that mark 

in less than 15 years. 

Photos: Flip through Ted Rall's editorial 

cartoons 

Can you trust online hotel 

reviews? 

Sandy and the winds of change 

Ads by Google 

See more stories » 

E15 Puts Engines at 

Risk 

Study Finds 5 Millions 

Vehicles Are Unfit for E15. Get 

the Facts. 

SmarterFuelFuture.org 

We'll have our work cut out for us to meet that target in the 

best of circumstances. But here's a really scary complication: 

a number recently supplied by the Carbon Tracker Initiative 

in Britain. The world's fossil fuel companies, and the 

countries that operate like fossil fuel companies (think 

Venezuela or Kuwait), already have about 2.8 billion tons of 

carbon in their reserves, five times more than the most 

conservative governments on Earth think is safe to burn. 

That coal and oil and gas hasn't yet been taken from the 

ground, but the companies and governments that own it 

clearly plan to extract it. They've declared it to the U.S. 

Securities and Exchange Commission, borrowed money 

against it, sold shares based on it. And they are searching for 

more. Exxon alone already has in its reserves 6% of the 

carbon necessary to take us past 2 degrees , and they boast of 

spending $100 million a day looking for more. 

This math has a clear pragmatic meaning: We have to figure 

out how to keep that coal and oil and gas in the ground so it 

never gets burned, and the only way to do that is by speeding 

up the transition to renewable energy. That will require spending on research, and it will require a 

stiff price on carbon to spur conservation. That will be hard, but it's not impossible. Germany is the 

one big country that's taken this crisis seriously, and there were days this summer when it generated 

more than half its power from solar panels within its borders. Germany's program isn't perfect, but 

then, Germany doesn't have Florida and Arizona and New Mexico and the California desert. 

The math has a clear moral meaning too: Companies that are determined to continue searching for 

and encouraging the use of fossil fuel are, in the age of global warming, rogue forces. They could 

choose instead to be part of finding solutions by spending more of their massive research budgets on 

developing clean energy instead of finding and marketing more fossil fuels. Instead, they make 

massive political contributions to ensure their continued input on the laws that affect them. (Just 

weeks before Sandy, Chevron gave $2.5 million to a conservative "super PAC" with close ties to 

Ads by Google 

Final 'Twilight' just shy of 

franchise record 

LAPD officer used Taser 

on handcuffed woman 

Hollywood legacy is 

auction house dream 




11/18/12 12:23 PM 

House Speaker John A. Boehner.) 

Reining in the fossil fuel purveyors will probably require revoking their social license, as we did in 

the past with tobacco companies and with firms that did business in apartheid South Africa. Until oil 

companies decide to stop blocking change in Washington and other world capitals and start turning 

themselves from fossil fuel companies into energy companies, their favored status — with its tax 

breaks and other perks — should be revoked. 

All of us, clearly, help fuel global warming. But we don't always have the choice not to because we live 

in a world with highways instead of trains and subsidized oil instead of subsidized solar power. We 

can make changes in our personal lives, but until we can break the power of the fossil fuel industry, 

it's useless to expect our leaders to act. The 20-year bipartisan resistance in Washington to making 

real progress on climate is the ultimate proof of the industry's power. 

This year should have opened our eyes. And now that they're open, maybe we'll finally read the math 

that's written on the wall. 

Most Viewed 

Latest News 

Feinstein has 'concern' about Rice's Benghazi 

talking points 11/18/2012, 11:12 a.m. 

Israeli airstrike hits Gaza family's home, killing 12 

11/18/2012, 11:02 a.m. 

NFL Sunday night spotlight: Steelers vs. Ravens 

11/18/2012, 10:02 a.m. 

Obama lands in Thailand even as Gaza crisis 

draws his attention 11/18/2012, 10:02 a.m. 

Former Romney supporters leading immigration 

reform 'super PAC' 11/18/2012, 9:40 a.m. 

Bill McKibben is the founder of the global climate action campaign 350.org. The organization is 

currently visiting 21 American cities in 21 days with its "DoTheMath" roadshow, which comes to 

Los Angeles on Sunday. 

Copyright © 2012, Los Angeles Times 

Comments 48 Email Share 1 Tweet 157 

Recommend 467 

MORE FROM THE TIMES 

Why Petraeus strayed -- and it's not what you 

think 

Karl Rove can't handle the truth 

Illegal exports to Iran on the rise, say U.S. 

officials 

Paul Ryan's Wisconsin neighbors supported his 

opponents 

Hilary Swank hopes to sell her 9-million-dollar 

baby 

FROM AROUND THE WEB 

102-Year-Old Woman Still Drives Her 82-Year- 

Old Car | AOL Autos 

The 12 Worst Supermarkets in America | The Fiscal 

Times 

10 Worst-Rated States for Retirement | AARP 

Why Richard Branson Gave $400,000 to an 18- 

Year-Old | OPEN Forum 

Is Mexico the new China? | Business Without Borders 

[what's this] 

Video 

Law Prof: BP Settlement 'Drop in… 

AP Nov 15, 2012 

Ads by Google 

California's Clean Future 

With nuclear power, we can meet CO2 emissions reduction goals songscommunity.com/clean 

Natural Gas Short Films 

Watch the Natural Gas Films That Will Change the Energy Conversation RationalMiddle.com 

Oil Drilling Industry 

Earn Direct Oil Well Ownership With Small Investment & Large Potential! BreitlingOilandGas.com 

Law Prof: BP 

Settlement 'Drop in… 

Dramatic Video Shows 

Sandy Fl… 

UFO Mystery Over 

Denver, Col… 

Name of FBI Agent in 

Petraeus S… 

Save. Share. Connect. 

RSS » Twitter » Facebook » Mobile » Letters »

City Council Report - City of Santa Monica

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?