Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/03/2003 B A K E R S F I E L D Alan Tandy, City Manager Sue Benham Staff: John W. Stinson Mike Macgard AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITI'EE Monday, March 3, 2003, 3:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room - City Hall 1. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 3:05 p.m. Present: Councilmembers David Couch, Chair; Sue Benham and Mike Maggard Councilmember Mike Macgard arrived at 3:20 p.m. 2. ADOPT FEBRUARY 3, 2003 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Transportation Development Fees Public Works Director Raul Rojas stated work is progressing. Since the last Committee meeting in February, Marian Shaw, Public Works Civil Engineer, has met twice with County staff. They will be meeting again next week to check information with the traffic model. The information is being entered into the computer; however, there is nothing new to report. This item will be put back on the Committee agenda. (Committee Member Macgard absent for this item) B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding group homes Development Services Director Jack Hardisty explained State statutes preempt local zoning controls over residential care facilities. For facilities serving six or fewer persons (does not include care givers), State law states this is a residential use and, therefore, cannot be treated differently from a typical family living situation. The City cannot require any special permits, business license, home occupation permit, fire code restrictions, AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 2 - building codes, etc., unless such is required of any other residential dwellings. The operator is required to have a license from the State. There is legislation being proposed to amend requirements on group homes to require notifying the local jurisdiction when a group home is proposed to be opened. At the present time no notice to the City is required for group homes serving six or fewer people, except the State notifies the City in cases where facilities are closer than 300 feet to each other (except for foster and elderly care). If closer than 300 feet, an exemption must be granted by the City, otherwise the State license is denied. This separation exemption does not apply to licenses issued by the State Department of Alcohol and Drugs for rehabilitation homes. For group homes serving seven or more people (does not include care givers), a conditional use permit is required in all residential zones, except R4 for people with disabilities. These group homes are permitted by right in a commercial or industrial zone that permits commercial uses. Also, a City business license is required. The conditional use process is discretionary and conditions can be imposed to regulate the homes. These conditions can include occupancy limits, fire sprinkler, alarm systems and vehicular prohibitions. Because the permit is discretionary, it also may find use incompatible in a neighborhood and denied. Committee Member Benham spoke regarding over-concentration of group homes. She has received calls from residents in her ward who are very concerned about clusters of group homes in some neighborhoods. She requested staff to check with the State agency to see if there is some administrative approach or proposed legislation to avoid over-concentration of group homes in residential areas. Committee Member Maggard asked if there were any notification if a resident in a group home is a sex offender. He requested staff to check with the State agency to see if there could be an exception made or legislation proposed to exclude sex offenders from residential group homes. City Manager Alan Tandy explained realistically everything the State does in regard to group homes is designed to preclude cities from knowing or having any influence. There may be hope of getting some refinement of statutes relative to the over- concentration issue, excluding sex offenders from the eligible list, and perhaps certain types of criminal activity. Committee Member Maggard explained another issue was brought to his attention where a group home is going in and it is three houses down from a deputy district attorney. There are concerns clients living in the group home may have been prosecuted by the same district attorney. While staff is exploring exceptions, he would like this issue explored for an administrative and/or legislative remedy. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 3 - Committee Member Maggard asked if a group home is not complying with ordinances and statutes they operate under, what recourse does the City have and how can that be expedited to preclude them from continuing. There was an instance of illicit behavior occurring late at night. How much can the City influence what occurs in the home through City ordinances and can the ordinances be extended to further control these types of activities and/or a legislative remedy. Jack Hardisty responded for group homes with seven or more, the City can regulate activities through the Conditional Use Permit process. For group homes with six people or less, any ordinance would have to be in the context that certain activities are prohibited in single-family residential neighborhoods. For group homes with six or less, the State can be called to investigate activities. Committee Chair Couch requested the City Attorney's Office to sort through the rules for cases where someone is conducting a business and has, for example, 10 or 12 group homes in Bakersfield serving six or less clients to see if it would be possible to require the business owner to have a City business license, not the group home itself. Staff was asked to research the information requested and report back to the Committee. 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding northeast bluffs steep-slope issues This item was referred to the Committee for review by the Council due to a request to increase the setback for permitted structures to 200 feet for development on the bluffs to maintain the view for the public and prevent erosion. Assistant Building Director Jack Leonard explained the current requirements that regulate development on the bluffs are found in the California Building Code. Basically, the setback requirement is a function of the height of the hill and the steepness of the incline. The higher the hill and the greater the incline, the further the setback needs to be. This code requirement is to ensure the structure is placed on stable ground. An example was given for a home placed on a hill 100 feet high. The building code requires the setback to be the height of the hill divided by three (h/3). For this examPle the setback would be 100 feet/3 = 33 feet. The setback is measured from the footing of the structure to the edge of the slope. The maximum required setback for a structure is 40 feet. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 4- For vertical, cliff-type situations, the setback is measured on a one to one basis (45 degree angle), plus the height of the hill divided by three. Examples for this type of situation were given as: 1) a vertical cliff 100 feet high would required a setback of 100 ft. + 33 ft. = 133 foot setback; 2) a vertical cliff 200 feet high would require a setback of 200 ft. + 40 ft. (the maximum setback) = 240 foot setback. There are exceptions to these requirements. If a soil slope stability or geotechnical study is provided and shows the slope stability can accommodate a lesser setback, the building director may approve a smaller setback. Also, if a soils report has findings of unstable soil, a larger setback may be required. There is also an exception for a swimming pool to be built one-half the distance of the required setback for a structure (h/6). There have been pools placed on the edge of a slope, but this would be considered an exception and a slope stability study was required. The bluffs in the northeast have many variables relating to height, incline, and soils type. Due to this, each development needs to be addressed on a case by case basis in this area. Craig Smith, Bakersfield Bluff and Open Space Committee, explained what they wanted to refer to the Urban Development Committee was to study development on the northeast bluffs, not a particular setback. He had concerns about trees being watered and swimming pools draining water over the edge of the cliffs. Their Committee is asking City staff to review development standards in the northeast, have public workshops/meetings to review development standards including locations for fencing, lot lines, soils, open space, maintaining views, and the homeowner-caused erosion issues. Michelle Beck, Bakersfield Bluffs and Open Space Committee, spoke regarding a plan to develop the whole northeast bluff area, instead of considering each development separately. Clay Maynard, landowner, spoke regarding purchasing 40 acres, 25 years ago, to build a retirement home and to develop the balance of the property as an investment. He lives and works in Yuba City and cannot come to meetings requested by people who do not live in the area. He spoke about property owners' rights to develop their land within state and local laws. He expressed issues regarding trails, soil erosion and site development should be left to the experts and civil engineers who make decisions based on facts. Patricia Stockton Leddy, representing their family trust who own choice property on the edge of the bluffs, expressed if the City establishes one rule for the entire bluffs, you AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 5 - will be taking their land. The City should just follow the State Building Codes and stay with the ordinances now in place. Their plans are to continue grazing sheep on their land and if requirements are made for trails on their property (before it is developed), it will prevent them from grazing sheep. Robert Kapral, General Holdings, Inc., spoke regarding their property in the northeast. They have already participated in meetings and workshops with City staff and landowners in the area over several months. During those meetings was the time everyone was supposed to put all their concerns on the table. It was agreed that there were not going to be any special restrictions for development in the bluffs, other than those in place at that time. Landowners/developers were to make the decision of how much land they wanted to sell to the City for open space and to work with the City on how the trails are going to be integrated into their property. General Holdings has hired engineers and architects and development should be left up to the experts. The General Plan is already in place and it is too late to go back and change the rules now for developments already in progress. Dave Dmohowski, Project Design Consultant, stated he also participated in Councilmember Maggard's meetings to review open space in the northeast. There was a lot of participation by property owners and special interest groups for recreation, parks and trails. Some of the best parcels are now coming forward with site plans for development and he would encourage the Council to support these early developments that will be economically successful to encourage development of the northeast. 'Roger Mclntosh, Mclntosh Associates, explained a couple of years ago the Building Industry and the City worked together to establish the hillside ordinance that covers hillside grading. Building density is already reduced in this area by the State Building Code which addresses setbacks and the grading ordinance. This makes development in the northeast very expensive with the infrastructure associated with the slopes. There is also a large sewer assessment for the sewer trunk lines. He expressed this is not a public policy issue, but it is a private-property rights issue. Tom Carosella spoke regarding private property rights and development of the premium lots on the bluffs. The view is what will make development in the northeast profitable. There would be no view with a 200 foot setback. Craig Carver spoke about the bluffs being torn up over the last 50 years with all kinds of vehicle traffic. They are planning to put common fencing and trees in the backyards of their development. He spoke in favor of designing the trails system and parks master plan now, as this will allow others to share the area. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 6 - Pauline Larwood, Smart Growth Coalition, spoke regarding her appreciation of the view and the architecture of the hills. She expressed concerns about soil erosion and in support of the trails master plan. Committee Member Maggard stated there was a list of landowners and addresses established during his meetings on open space. He requested staff to notify everyone on that list when this issue is going to be on the Urban Development Committee agenda in the future. City Manager Alan Tandy explained the hillside ordinance was established through a public process over a long period of time with public input. The City must remain aware to impose any setbacks above those required by State Building Codes/City ordinances that would deny landowners of their property through inverse condemnation may require the City to purchase their property. There is an active program to acquire portions of the bluff areas for permanent preservation and this affords an opportunity to achieve balance between development and preservation. Committee Member Maggard explained the comments made by the property owners today are in agreement with the discussions during meetings he had with the staff and landowners in the bluffs area. If their land is developable, they could develop it. There was agreement the City would purchase land volunteered for sale by landowners for open space, but would not take their property. The land may be ravines and areas that are unbuildable. The 2800 open space area that was discussed at length will only happen if the landowners are willing to sell their property. If the way we require development to occur makes it less economically feasible for the landowners to sell the surplus property, we will not have the 2800 acres of open space. In response to a question, Committee Member Maggard explained the nature of the bluffs area is very different on the west side and on the north face than it is on the eastside and some property has two faces. Because the topography and soils are so different, each development needs to be considered separately. Staff has been working on the master trails plan as developments are proposed, but it is difficult because there are many landowners and undeveloped parcels with no roads. Parks sites have not yet been designated. Committee Member Maggard requested staff to provide examples of the setbacks for: 1) the west exposure of Mr. Kapral's property; 2) the north and east slopes where Mr. Maynard's property is located; and 3) Mrs. Stockton's property (hang-glider hill). This will give the Committee a better sense of the setbacks in those areas with the current Building Code and ordinances. Also, interface the Fire Code setbacks with the Planning issues. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 7- Committee Chair Couch requested a five minute recess. Committee Member Benham had a prior commitment and left the meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 5:15 p.m. B, Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding off-road vehicle recreational facility Development Services Director Hardisty stated staff has looked at various locations for an off-road vehicle recreational facility and looked into obtaining grants (green sticker monies). The green sticker money is collected by the State from off-road vehicle owners to be used at a later time for off-road facilities. The grant program is difficult and funds are hard to access. The State has indicated that only grants of $1 million or less are being considered. To purchase a suitable piece of property for an off-road vehicle park will cost from $5 to $7 million. CORVA (California Off-Road Vehicle Association) has been looking into pursuing legislation remedies to move the funds into an account that will allow the funds to be disbursed to construct off-road vehicle parks. Dick Taylor, Kern OHV Association, spoke regarding the difficulty in obtaining grant funding for land acquisition and his appreciation for the help City staff has given. The Green Sticker Trust Fund is controlled by the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission. The funds have been going to law enforcement, restoration of areas and studies. The State Parks Department may have Green Sticker funds that could be legislatively designated for an Off-Road Vehicle Park. Committee Member Maggard explained the 2003 Convention and Annual meeting of CORVA will be held on Saturday, March 8th, and local legislators will be attending. Hopefully, the message can be conveyed to legislators about the need for land acquisition for an Off-Road Vehicle Park. C, Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Committee possible special meeting dates There were no additional dates that worked with everyone's calendar at this time. Committee Chair Couch asked the Committee Members to review the list of referrals to the Committee and submit the two most urgent/important to them (staff was requested to call Committee Member Benham). Staff will then place the six requested, most urgent items on the next Urban Development Committee agenda. 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS None. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 3, 2003 Page - 8- 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. Attendance - staff: City Manager Alan Tandy; Assistant City Manager John W. Stinson; Deputy City Attorney Ginny Gennaro; Public Works Director Raul Rojas; Development Services Director Jack Hardisty; Assistant Public Works Director Jack LaRochelle; Planning Director Stan Grady; and Assistant Building Director Jack Leonard. Others: Roger Mclntosh, Mclntosh and Associates; Patricia Stockton Leddy; Clay Maynard; Robert Kapral; John Cicerone; Peter J. Rudy, KUZZ; Brian Todd; Pauline Larwood; Craig Carver; Tom Carosella; Lorraine Unger; Craig Smith; Michelle Beck; Dick Taylor; Burton Ellison; and Dave Dmohowski. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers S:~JOHN\Council Committees\Urban Development 2003\ud03mar03summary.doc