LOS ANGELES CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. LOS ANGELES CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. CPC CA DATE: May 11, 2006

Transcription

1 LOS ANGELES CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT LOS ANGELES CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. CPC CA DATE: May 11, 2006 CEQA: ENV CE TIME: After 8:30am* PLACE: 200 N. Spring Street (City Hall) 10th floor, Room 1010 Los Angeles, CA PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON: MARCH 14, 2006 LOCATION: Citywide Neighborhood Council: Various Council District: All Plan Area: All Plan Land Use: Various Zone: Various District Map: Various SUBJECT/REQUEST: APPLICANT: Amendment to the Los Angeles Municipal Code (L.A.M.C.) adding Section 13.12, and amending Sections 12.04, and to add enabling language pertaining to initiation and establishment of Off-campus Housing (OCH) Districts citywide. City of Los Angeles. RECOMMENDATION: 1. APPROVE the proposed ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code, attached as Exhibit A. 2. ADOPT the Staff Report and Finding as the Commission s Report. Attached: Summary and Recommendations to the City Planning Commission Page 2-4 Staff Report Page 5-13 Proposed Ordinance Amending L.A.M.C. Exhibit A Council Motion Exhibit B Categorical Exemption Exhibit C ADVICE TO PUBLIC: *The exact time this report will be considered during the meeting is uncertain since there may be several other items on the agenda. Written communications may be mailed to the Commission Secretariat, 200 N. Spring Street, Room 532, Los Angeles, CA 90012, (Phone No ). While all written communications are given to the Commission for consideration, the initial packets are sent to the week prior to the Commission s meeting date. If you challenge these agenda items in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing agendized herein, or in written correspondence on these matters delivered to this agency at or prior to the public hearing. As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Los Angeles does not discriminate on the basis of disability, and upon request, will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to this programs, services and activities. Sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, or other auxiliary aids and/or other services may be provided upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request not later than three working days (72 hours) prior to the meeting by calling the Commission Secretariat at (213)

2 CPC CA SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION The proposed ordinance (Exhibit A) establishes enabling language, which will allow for the initiation and establishment of Off-Campus Housing (OCH) districts to be established, by means of the procedures for adopting a Supplemental Use District. ACTION RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF: That the Commission: ADOPT the staff report as the Commission s report on the matter; APPROVE the proposed ordinance attached as Exhibit A; ADOPT the following findings: 1. In accordance with Charter Sections 556 & 558, that the subject proposed ordinance (Exhibit A) is in substantial conformance with the purposes, intent and provisions of the City s General Plan in that it creates an implementing procedure to ensure that development conforms with conditions created pursuant to Community Plan policies; the General Plan Framework policy to "Consider the formulation of plans that facilitate the local community s identification of precise uses, densities, and design characteristics for development and public streetscape for neighborhood areas smaller than the community plans, provided that the Framework Element s differentiation and relationships among land use districts are generally maintained, there is no significant change in the population and employment capacity of the neighborhood, and there is no significant reduction in overall housing capacity; and (A) In accordance with Charter Section 558 (1)(a), that the ordinance is directly related to the General Plan, specific plans, or other plans being prepared by the Planning Department and will have a beneficial effect upon said plans in that it will provide a simplified mechanism for the implementation of urban design policies contained in the Community Plans for single family residential neighborhoods; The South Los Angeles Community Plan calls for Multi-family neighborhoods that enhance the quality of life for the City's existing and future residents. Additionally, city policies call to: Provide for the stability and enhancement of multi-family residential neighborhoods so that the residents' quality of life can be maintained or improved. Improve the quality of new multi-family dwelling units based on the standards in Chapter 5 Urban Form and Neighborhood Design Chapter of this Element. (B) In accordance with Charter Section 558 (1)(b) that the ordinance is in substantial conformance with the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice in that it will require a comprehensive examination of a proposed use and its surroundings design and residential intensity to determine if a proposed multi-bedroom development provides adequate parking and the scale and size of the project is not detrimental to its surrounding uses; and that new developments or the enlargement of existing multiple unit buildings do not create 2

3 CPC CA overcrowded conditions in those areas of the City that are proximate to colleges and universities. 2. The Transportation Element of the General Plan will not be affected by the recommended action herein. 3. The Sewerage Facilities Element of the General Plan will not be affected by the recommended action. 4. California Environmental Quality Act: The proposed ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), pursuant to Article II, Section 2 (m) of the City s Guidelines in that adoption of the proposed Ordinance will not result in any impacts on the physical environment. 5. Fish and Game. The subject project, which is located in Los Angeles County, will not have an impact on fish or wildlife resources or habitat upon which fish and wildlife depend, as defined by California Fish and Game Code Section

4

5 CPC CA STAFF REPORT REQUEST The proposed ordinance is in response to a council motion initiated by the Council Office for the 8 th District, and would amend Sections 12.04, and and add Section to the Los Angeles Municipal Code. The proposed amendment addresses neighborhoods that are impacted by the proliferation of oversized multi-bedroom Off-Campus Housing development and all the attendant adverse impacts. The proposed ordinance establishes enabling legislation to allow Off- Campus Housing overlay district(s) to be established by ordinance, by means of the procedures for adopting a Supplemental Use District (Section of the L.A.M.C.) Any project that provides five (5) or more habitable rooms in an OCH district will be subject to the provisions of Section W Conditional Use Permit (CUP) of the LAMC. BACKGROUND Residents and homeowners proximate to colleges and universities in various parts of the city are becoming increasingly aware of the need to address the issue of oversize multi-bedroom offcampus housing apartment complexes, or further divisions of existing units into 5 or more habitable rooms. The manner in which these types of multi-bedroom complexes are developed or subdivided creates traffic, parking and land use incompatibility problems within respective neighborhoods. Allowing oversized multi-bedroom buildings without regard to adjacent or nearby low-density units has particularly compromised the design and quality of life in many neighborhoods that are proximate to colleges and universities. If these problems are left unchecked, existing stable neighborhoods and communities would be undermined and subject to the development of oversized buildings lacking adequate parking for their residents. This results in excess on-street parking and in many cases, complaints of blocked driveways and other access points to adjacent properties. The city s goal to promote well-planned housing and livable neighborhoods will be jeopardized. On March 12, 2004, the City Council adopted a motion instructing the Department of City Planning to prepare an Interim Control Ordinance (ICO) temporarily regulating the issuance of all permits for multi-family housing in the residential area located adjacent to the University of Southern California (USC). The council motion was initiated to address some of the problems associated with the proliferation of out-of-scale multi-bedroom Off-Campus Housing development near the University of Southern California, and Mount St. Mary s College s South Los Angeles Campus, whose design may lead to explicit overcrowding, create a greater demand for off-site street parking, and increase traffic congestion in neighborhood streets. To curb proliferation of non-compatible land uses, the Department of City Planning has in the past devised and implemented various planning tools that protect, preserve and promote the integrity of livable communities. These tools also help maintain visual appeal and historic significance of urban neighborhoods and communities. Although current tools have proven useful in achieving the above-stated goals, it has become evident that the increasing proliferation of oversized multi-bedroom developments in residential communities that are located near various colleges and universities can not adequately be addressed with the existing available planning tools. 5

6 CPC CA DISCUSSION There are over 15 colleges and universities in the city of Los Angeles with student population ranging from the lower end of 4,000 to the higher end of 36,000. Some colleges and universities do not provide housing to their students. In some case, colleges- and universities-provided housing (fraternity and sorority housing) only meet a fraction of the overall housing demands of any respective student population. Staff spoke with several facility managers for several institutions, including the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), University of Southern California (USC), California State University in Northridge and Los Angeles, Harbor and Los Angeles City colleges. The one common theme in all these various institutions is that the overwhelming majority of their students are housed in off-campus apartment complexes. Thus, most students seek housing accommodations in outlaying neighborhoods, resulting in overcrowding of existing, newly developed or enlarged multi-bedroom buildings. Most of the surveyed colleges and universities do not have their own comprehensive plans to address student housing inside or outside their campuses. Only a handful of the institutions surveyed have policies, and these policies only address a fraction of the housing needs of their respective student population. Meanwhile, developers are building oversized multi-bedroom complexes, resulting in multi-bedroom developments with insufficient parking, and overcrowding conditions. Need for a New Tool Off-Campus Housing District (OCH) is conceived as a tool to address problems associated with the proliferation of oversized multi-bedroom buildings in neighborhoods near colleges and universities. This is a simple tool which, when applied in accordance with each neighborhood s particular issues and problems, would help curtail adverse impacts, mainly parking, traffic and compatibility problems, and help stabilize, preserve and enhance the quality of life in these communities. As Community Design Overlay (CDO) districts are intended to preserve and protect commercial and industrial areas of the City, OCH districts are similarly intended to stabilize residential areas proximate to colleges and universities. New Regulations The proposed ordinance will establish enabling legislation to allow Off-Campus Housing Overlay District(s) to be established by ordinance, by means of the procedures for adopting a Supplemental Use District (Section of the L.A.M.C.) Any neighborhood that is proximate to a college or university that wants to establish such a district must make two findings prior to establishing the district: (1) That the Off-Campus Housing regulations will protect and enhance the character of the district; and 6

7 CPC CA (2) Owing to its proximity to a college or university, the district is uniquely impacted by lack of parking, increased traffic congestion, and oversized/out of scale multi-bedroom housing, which can partially be mitigated by the provisions of the district. The proposed ordinance will apply to any new project consisting of multi-bedroom residential developments whose individual units have 5 or more habitable rooms, or the enlargement of an existing unit into 5 or more habitable rooms in the R2, RD, R3, RAS, R4, R5, CR, C1, C1.5, C2, C4, C5 or CM. zones located within an established OCH district. Pursuant to Section of the Code, any such projects will be subject to the provisions of W. and be required to provide one additional parking space for every habitable room at or above 5 habitable rooms. In addition to the findings otherwise required by this section, prior to approving a residential structure with 5 or more habitable rooms or an enlargement of an existing unit to 5 or more habitable rooms, the Zoning Administration shall make the following findings: (a) (b) (c) That the project provides adequate on-site parking for the expected number of residents for the proposed number of habitable rooms based on the above standard. That no detrimental concentration of large scale, campus serving housing exists in the vicinity, within one-thousand-foot radius, of the proposed development. That the project conforms to any applicable Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ) or Specific Plan. This proposed ordinance does not impact any project that provides less than 5 habitable rooms per unit or single-family homes located in single or multiple family zones. Instead, these projects will continue to be regulated by the provisions of Sections and of the LAMC that regulate any multi-family developments in the City. 7

8 CPC CA SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC HEARING On March 14, 2006, a public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Los Angeles Municipal Code (Case No. CPC CA) together with the proposed establishment of the University Off-Campus Housing Overlay District (Case no. CPC OCH) was held at the Donald P. Locker Conference Room at the California Science Center. Approximately, four hundred (400) people attended the hearing. Due to the cultural and language diversity of the attendees, the hearing was in conducted with simultaneous translation in Spanish. There were a total of 19 speakers who presented testimony. Although the testimony at the public hearing was mainly in regards to the proposed establishment of the University Off-Campus Housing district, bounded by the Santa Monica Freeway to the north, the Harbor Freeway to the east, Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, to the south and Normandie Avenue to the west, testimony emphasized the proliferation of large size multi-habitable rooms in those parts of the city with colleges and universities. Some of the speakers complained about overcrowded apartments in their neighborhoods and felt that the proposed establishment of an Off-Campus Housing Supplemental Use District would give them the right tools to address this particular trend. Others still proposed that, in additional to the proposed parking increase, a set of design standards must be required of new developments with five (5) or more habitable room. Council District Eight: Representing the Council Office, David Roberts spoke in support of the proposal. He also explained how his office initially collaborated with different stakeholders in the area to stabilize the neighborhoods, which is facing encroachment of incompatible development as a result of pressure from increased need for student housing. Drawing on his district s experience, Mr. Roberts addressed the following issues as common issue in all those parts of the city with similar trends of land use development: The proliferation of multi-habitable rooms is eroding the quality of life in the district in that such developments encourage overcrowding conditions in units with multi-habitable rooms. Units with multi-habitable rooms, without enough on-site parking, have led to parking problems in the impacted area. In low-density area, design features, as well as the quality of life, have been compromised. Most speakers for and against also presented similar comments or suggestions to modify the limitations and or provisions of the proposal. While most of the testimony was related to the specific establishment of the University OCH district, a summary of the testimony has been provided below for information purposes. Of the 19 individuals who presented testimony, 7 of these speakers stated they were in support of proposal, 10 stated they were opposed. However, of the 10 who stated opposition several believed this was a USC initiated project and/or this proposal would result in construction of more student housing and displacement of long-time residents. 8

9 CPC CA Of the opposition, these are the some of the main issues raised: $ Concerned that subject ordinance would add more student housing and would result in displacement of families. $ Believed this is a USC initiated project, therefore eminent domain would somehow be involved. $ A better solution would be parking restrictions on the street. $ Ordinance would benefit big developments, and would only serve USC and its students not the community. $ An environmental impact report was not prepared for this proposal. There is a need to address economic and social impacts of the proposed ordinance. $ Two other speakers testified with general comments that addressed issues of real estate and property values. Representative of Conquest apartments, who owns several studentservicing projects in the area, opposed the proposed ordinance on the grounds that the ordinance is tantamount to devaluation of real estate assets. Instead of the ordinance, he suggested to downzone the entire impacted area to R1 zone which, in this speaker=s opinion, would limit any future developments to not more than single-family units. Of the testimony in support these are some of the comments, some of which include recommended changes to the ordinance: $ Need to preserve the traditional residential neighborhood. $ Father Bill Delaney representing ONE LA and St. Agnes Catholic Church with a congregation membership of approximately 1,100 households, and representing 5,000 households also spoke in support of the proposal. Father Delaney=s main concern is the issue of protecting existing affordable housing stock while exempting future affordable units from the provisions of the proposed ordinance. $ A representative of Empowerment Congress North Area Neighborhood Development Council spoke in support of the proposal and further suggested that the proposed ordinance be made less permissive by requiring more parking spaces per room at five (5) or more habitable rooms. $ Representing several grassroots groups in the area of Strategic Action for Just Economy (SAJE) and Figueroa Corridor Coalition for Economic Justice, suggested that the city design polices which encourage affordable student housing. The representative further suggested that the city require of the University of Southern California (USC) to have a master plan with expressed policies to house its growing student population. $ One speaker suggested that the word Aconstruction@ in Section 5D of the proposed ordinance, dated March 14, 2006, be deleted or made clearer to apply to only expansions adding more units or developments with five or more habitable rooms. This speaker argued that subjecting all types of Aconstruction@ jobs to the provisions of this ordinance could mean that minor construction jobs such as re-roofing or repainting jobs can not be 9

10 CPC CA done without a conditional use procedure. Other issues raised by speakers, some of which were raised by both opposition and proponents $ There is a need to protect the design and low-density character of the area. Exemption clause for owner-occupied single-family housing units. $ Exemption of all affordable housing units, both single- and multi-family housing $ One general issue raised by several speakers was the financial impact that the proposed conditional use permit (CUP) procedure may have, on expanding existing owneroccupied units to five (5) or more units, which would require an application fee of approximately $4,500. Many worried that such a fee requirement, as part of the CUP application would place an un-proportional burden on low-income families. WRITTEN COMMENTS There were a total of 31 written comments received following the Public Workshops conducted on March 4, 2006 & March 11, 2006 and the Public Hearing conducted on March 14, The majority of these letters, raised similar issues as those raised at the public hearing, for example the need to protect the long-time residents of the community from high-density incompatible student housing. Many of the comments received stated that there is a severe lack of street parking resulting from student housing that does not contain sufficient on-site parking. Other issues raised in the written comments were that the community is facing high levels of crime and other negative impacts such as noise, and littering, which claimed was a direct result of living next to college students. Others stated that the USC is not a good neighbor, adding that the University has a history of expanding into the community without regard to the wellbeing of the long-time residents of this residential community. All correspondence received is incorporated as part of the official case file. 10

11 CPC CA HEARING OFFICER S COMMENTS Prior to the March 14, 2006 public hearing, which attracted approximately 400 attendees, staff carried out an extensive outreach program to maximize citizen participation and input into the proposed ordinance. On January 18, 2006, approximately 1,200 residents, property owners and other stakeholders, were in attendance. However, due to lack of seating spaces and potential fire code violations (the room could only accommodate 250 persons), staff decided to call the meeting off. One of the main reasons for such a large turn out was the result of misinformation disseminated in the community anonymously. Flyers that likened the proposed establishment of the University Off- Campus Housing Overlay District to eminent domain or to a grandiose for plan uprooting of residents of the community for private interests were distributed to residents and business owners in the community. Public Workshops Over two consecutive weekends March 4, 2006 and March 11, 2006, staff organized two workshops held at the Exposition Park Inter-Generational Community Center (EPICC), in South Los Angeles. Altogether, more than 250 people attended and staff answered questions and took comments on the proposed ordinance. These two workshops were followed by the March 14 th, 2006 public hearing, which attracted about four hundred (400) people. Those who addressed the proposed code amendment to enable the establishment of Off-Campus Housing (OCH) District spoke in favor of it. No speaker spoke in opposition. However, all opposition was aimed at the establishment of the University Off-Campus Housing (OCH) District located in the USC area. 11

12 CPC CA RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE Staff is recommending the following changes as a result of testimony and comments received. Changes have been incorporated into the attached draft ordinance (Exhibit A). Change #1. Section C. Development Regulations in Section C of the enabling code amendment to establish Off-Campus Housing Supplemental Use District shall be modified to provide for affordable housing. >The Department of Building and Safety shall not issue a building permit for the erection or enlargement of any non-affordable residential structure, or that portion or unit(s) of any development that qualifies for affordable housing, with five (5) or more habitable rooms within a AOCH@ Off- Campus Housing District unless a conditional use approval has been granted pursuant to Section W.= By altering this Section of the ordinance, staff agree with some of the speakers that units that are designated as affordable units shall be exempt from the regulations of this ordinance. Findings: At both the public hearing and at the workshops, many interested parties highlighted the need for including language to provide for affordable housing. It is the policy of the City as well as the Planning Commission to encourage the production of affordable housing for low income residents and create neighborhoods that are inclusive of all Aeconomic, age, and ethnic segments of the community.@ To include this provision in the ordinance would be in conformance with Finding #1, under Charter Sections 556 & 558. Change #2. To ensure that future developments with multi-habitable rooms must be designed to be compatible with their adjacent or across the street structures, and this condition must be included as part of the findings that the approving Zoning Administrator makes prior to approval. Findings: The South Los Angeles Community Plan lists Residential Goal 1":A safe, secure and high quality residential environment for all economic, age, and ethnic segments of the community.@ Objectives and policies listed under goal the Community Plan=s Goal 1 states the need to protect existing single-family and low density residential neighborhoods from encroachment by higher density residential and other incompatible uses (Objective 1-1-Policy 1-1.2) The proposed District boundary primarily includes properties located within existing low-density residential neighborhoods developed with one- and two-story houses which are zoned for low-medium and medium density development. In recent years, developments of two- and three-story multi-bedroom apartment complexes with five or more habitable rooms per unit have been built, at times immediately adjacent to single-family dwelling units. These units, built in close proximity to the local higher learning campuses, 12

13 CPC CA were not built for family housing but have been marketed by their owners for student housing. These units are not unregulated by the University. CONCLUSION The proposed code amendment ordinance provides a planning tool to establish Off-Campus Housing Overlay districts and helps protect and promote neighborhoods character and sense of community within those respective districts. Approval of this ordinance will provide an appropriate mechanism to address many concerns raised in multi-family residential neighborhoods proximate to colleges and universities in various parts of the City. Staff is therefore recommending that the City Planning Commission approve the attached draft ordinance, with all of the proposed changes in the section listed above. 13

14 Case No. CPC CA ATTACHED EXHIBITS: Proposed Ordinance Amending L.A.M.C. Council Motion Categorical Exemption Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C

15 EXHIBIT A REVISED CPC CA (CITYWIDE CODE AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE NO. An ordinance adding a new Section to the Los Angeles Municipal Code to enable the establishment of Off Campus Housing (OCH) Districts AND AMENDING Sections and to make technical changes. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subsection D of Section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code is amended to read: D. Certain portions of the City are also designated as being in one or more of the following districts, by the provision of Article 3 of this chapter O S G RPD K CA POD CDO MU FH SN OCH Oil Drilling District Animal Slaughtering Surface Mining District Residential Planned Development District Equinekeeping District Commercial and Artcraft District Pedestrian Oriented District Community Design Overlay District Mixed Use District Fence Height District Sign District Off Campus Housing District The Zoning Map is amended to indicate these districts and the boundaries of each district. Land classified in an O Oil Drilling District, S Animal Slaughtering District, G Surface Mining District, RPD Residential Planned Development District, K Equinekeeping District, CA Commercial and Artcraft District, POD Pedestrian Oriented District, CDO Community Design Overlay District, MU Mixed Use District, FH Fence Height District, SN Sign District or OCH Off Campus Housing District is also classified in one or more zones, and land classified in the P Automobile Parking Zone may also be classified in an A or R Zone. These classifications are indicated on the Zoning Map with a combination of symbols, e.g., R2-2-O, C2-4-S, M1-3-G, M1-1-P and R2-O, C2-G, etc., where height districts have not been established.

16 EXHIBIT A Section 2. Paragraph (b) of Subdivision 1 of Subsection S of Section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code is amended to read: (b) Districts. In order to carry out the provisions of this article, the following districts are established: O S G RPD K CA POD CDO MU FH SN OCH Oil Drilling District Animal Slaughtering Surface Mining District Residential Planned Development District Equinekeeping District Commercial and Artcraft District Pedestrian Oriented District Community Design Overlay District Mixed Use District Fence Height District Sign District Off Campus Housing District Section 3. Subparagraph (2) of Paragraph (c) of Subdivision 1 of Subsection S of Section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code is Amended to read: (2) Additional Requirements for Application. One or more of the owners or lessees of property within the boundaries of the proposed district may submit a verified application for the establishment of a district. An application for the establishment of a Commercial and Artcraft District, a Pedestrian Oriented District, an Equine keeping District, a Community Design Overlay District, a Mixed Use District, or a Sign District shall contain the signatures of at least 75 percent of the owners or lessees of property within the proposed district. An application for the establishment of a Fence Height District or a Off Campus Housing District shall contain the signatures of at least 75 percent of the owners or lessees of property with the proposed district. An application shall be accompanied by any information deemed necessary by the Department. If establishment of a district is initiated by the City Council, City Planning Commission, or Director of Planning, the signatures of the property owners or lessees shall not be required. Section 4. Subparagraph (iii) of Subparagraph (3) of Paragraph (c) of Subdivision 1 of Subsection S of Section is amended to read: (iii) Time for Commission to Act on Application. The City Planning Commission shall act on an application to establish an O, S, G, K, CA, POD, CDO, MU, FH, SN or OCH District within 75 days from the date of the filing of the application. The City Planning Commission shall act on an application to establish an RPD District within 75 days from the receipt of the Subdivision Committee report and recommendation. The City Planning Commission shall act on proceedings initiated by the Council within 75 days of receipt of that action from the Council, or within the time that the Council may otherwise specify.

17 EXHIBIT A Section 5. A new Section is added to the Los Angeles Municipal Code to read: Section OCH OFF CAMPUS HOUSING DISTRICT A. Purpose. This section sets forth procedures and guidelines for the establishment of Off Campus Housing OCH Districts in residential areas of the City which are proximate to colleges/universities. It is the intent of this section to promote well planned housing to meet the needs of colleges/universities, student housing, and the needs of the community; to address impacts of multi-bedroom projects which may impact surrounding development; to encourage well-planned neighborhoods with adequate parking and to individually review proposed large projects with multi-bedroom units. B. Establishment of the District. The procedures set forth in Section S shall be followed, however each OCH Off Campus Housing District shall include only properties in the R2, RD, R3, RAS, R4, R5, CR, C1, C1.5, C2, C4, C5 or CM. No OCH Off Campus Housing District shall encompass an area generally less than one mile, or generally within walking distance of a college/university. The precise boundary of a District may be adjusted for urban features such as topography, freeways or streets/highways. Boundaries shall be along street frontages and shall not split parcels. The District shall not generally be less than one quarter mile wide. A OCH Off Campus Housing District may encompass an area which is designated, whole or in part, as an Historic Preservation Overlay Zone and/or Specific Plan. The OCH Off Campus Housing District shall include contiguous parcels of residentially and commercially zoned parcels which may only be separated by public streets, ways or alleys or other physical features, or as set forth in the rules approved by the Director of Planning. Precise boundaries are required at the time of application for or initiation of an individual district. In addition the following findings must be made before a OCH Off Campus Housing Overlay District can be established: (1) That the Off Campus Housing regulations will protect and enhance the character of the district; and (2) Owing to its proximity to a college/university, the district is uniquely impacted by parking, incompatible housing development, which can be partially mitigated by the provisions of the district. C. Development Regulations. With the exception of a single-family home, the Department of Building and Safety or a change of occupancy permit shall not issue a building permit for the erection or enlargement of any non-affordable residential structure, or that portion or unit(s) of any development that qualifies for affordable housing, with five (5) or more habitable rooms within a OCH Off-Campus Housing District unless a conditional use approval has been granted pursuant to Section W. Where a OCH Off Campus Housing District encompass an area which is designated in whole or in part, as an Historic Preservation Overlay Zone or Specific Plan, then the provisions of the OCH Off Campus Housing District shall be satisfied in addition to the requirements of an Historic Preservation Overlay District, a legally-adopted Specific Plan or Zoning Regulation. Should there be a

18 EXHIBIT A conflict, as determined by the Director of Planning or his/her designee, then the most restrictive provisions shall prevail. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and have it published in accordance with Council policy, either in a daily newspaper circulated in the City of Los Angeles or by posting for ten days in three public places in the City of Los Angeles: one copy on the bulletin board located in the Main Street lobby to the City Hall; one copy on the bulletin board located at the ground level at the Los Angeles Street entrance to the Los Angeles Police Department; and one copy on the bulletin board located at the Temple Street entrance to the Los Angeles Count Hall of Records. I hereby certify that this ordinance was passed by the Council of the City of Los Angeles, at its meeting of City Clerk REVISED

19 EXHIBIT A CPC CA ORDINANCE NO. An ordinance adding a new Section W 52 to the Los Angeles Municipal Code relating to Zoning Administrator Conditional Use Permits for five or more habitable rooms within a OCH Off Campus Housing Overlay District. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subdivision 52 of Subsection W of Section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code is added to read: 52. To permit 5 or more habitable rooms per unit within the OCH Off Campus Housing Overlay District, pursuant to Section provided that the project provides one additional parking space for every habitable room at or above 5 habitable rooms. In addition to the findings otherwise required by this section, prior to approving a residential structure with 5 or more habitable rooms per unit pursuant to Section 13.12, the Zoning Administrator shall make the following findings: (a) The project provides adequate on-site parking for the proposed number of habitable rooms based upon the above standard. (b) That there is not a detrimental concentration of incompatible campus serving housing within the OCH District. (c) That the project conforms with any applicable Historic Preservation Overlay Zone or Specific Plan. (d) That the future developments with multi-habitable rooms must be designed to be compatible with structures adjacent and across the street.

20 EXHIBIT A Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and have it published in accordance with Council policy, either in a daily newspaper circulated in the City of Los Angeles or by posting for ten days in three public places in the City of Los Angeles: one copy on the bulletin board located in the Main Street lobby to the City Hall; one copy on the bulletin board located at the ground level at the Los Angeles Street entrance to the Los Angeles Police Department; and one copy on the bulletin board located at the Temple Street entrance to the Los Angeles Count Hall of Records. I hereby certify that this ordinance was passed by the Council of the City of Los Angeles, at its meeting of City Clerk

21

22