HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 07-07-99(1)MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Wednesday, July 7, 1999
The Ukiah City Council met at a Special Meeting on July 7, 1999, the notice for which had
been legally noticed and posted, at 5:28 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300
Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers
were present: Smith, Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. Staff present: Assistant
City Manager Flad, City Manager Horsley, Planning Director Sawyer, and City Clerk Ulvila.
Mayor Mastin explained that a Special Meeting of the City Council has been called to
allow Council the opportunity to interview Planning Commission applicants. Effective June
30, 1999, there is one vacancy on the Planning Commission.
2. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS
Mayor Mastin advised that each Planning Commission applicant will be interviewed by the
Council, with a maximum of 20 minutes per interview. Three applications were received
prior to the June 25, 1999 deadline.
2a. James Mulheren
James Mulheren gave a summary regarding his applicable skills, experience,
expertise/perspective, and other organizational affiliations with reference to his interest in
serving on the Planning CommisSion. He stated he is self-employed and is the owner of
Ukiah Custom Cabinets. He also stated it is his objective to become involved in City
government and to be a participant in the City's growth plan.
Councilmember Libby inquired with regard to applicant's viewpoint on the Ukiah General
Plan.
Mr. Mulheren replied the Ukiah General Plan is a carefully crafted document which
provides quality planning standards and/or implementation.
Councilmember Ashiku inquired whether applicant is able to implement and make
applicable the current specific architectural and landscape standards with reference to the
downtown area.
Mr. Mulheren replied he supports uniformity planning standards as opposed to no specific
aesthetic design standards. He felt he would be able to consider each individual
perspective planning project without prejudice.
Mayor Mastin inquired regarding applicant's response to "discouraging inappropriate land
use" and what categories would constitute such use.
Mr. Mulheren replied he defines inappropriate land use as actions taken by property
owner(s) which destroy valuable agricultural land for housing projects. He further replied
July 7, 1999
Page 1 of 8
housing projects should be constructed in areas other than on agricultural designated land.
He noted it is the City's Planning Department and Planning Commission's responsibility
to help preserve and maintain as much existing agricultural land as possible with regard
to planning projects and implementation of appropriate land use as outlined in the City's
various Codes.
Councilmember Baldwin inquired regarding applicant's opinion with reference to "mixed
use zones" which incorporate a mixture of residential and retail/commercial development
projects.
Mr. Mulheren stated it is his understanding, although such aforementioned projects do
exist, these projects must be considered for approval individually, and whether the project
is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan and appropriate Zoning District. He noted that
he supports residential construction in the westside hills.
Councilmember Smith inquired if applicant supports environmental regulation as it
relates to and affects project development.
Mr. Mulheren stated he supports project environmental regulation and he would require
a proposed planning project be modified and/or conditioned in order for a project to comply
with Code standards and other associated regulatory requirements. Although he favors
community growth, he encouraged the City to adopt an annexation plan and/or program
wherein additional land parcels would be considered for residential building use.
He further noted the population in Ukiah will increase and the City Planning Department
must provide planning projects proportional to this growth.
He stated annexation should include a mixture of residential and commercial zoned areas.
A general discussion followed regarding growth and specific annexation areas which would
not affect and/or violate agriculturally zoned areas.
It was noted although the City Council and the Planning Department mutually recommend
approval and/or agree on a perspective project objectives, final approval should be subject
to the Ukiah General Plan's project consistencies and requirements.
It was also noted by applicant with regard to growth management and the current land
availability, certain development limitations and/or discretions as well as neighborhood
compatibility restrictions should exist in connection with construction of second units and
subdivision of larger lots pertinent to specific residential areas.
It was further noted by applicant that treatment centers, group-homes, day care center,
residential care homes, and other similar agencies, profit/nonprofit organizations already
exist in residential neighborhoods. Additions to such businesses or organizations in
residential areas should be subject to the Planning Department's discretion.
July 7, 1999
Page 2 of 8
A general discussion followed regarding Use Permit applications and appropriate project
aesthetics to include building compatibility and landscaping with reference to State Street.
Mr. Mulheren reported project design standards should be consistent with neighborhood
compatibility and project approval should be contingent upon this factor as well as the
other City Code requirements.
Mr. Mastin inquired whether applicant, with regard to City growth and public safety issues,
favored such proposed solutions as construction of larger streets, construction of
additional public transportation facilities, additional traffic light installation, and
implementation of the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Mr. Mulheren stated, although he did not have an immediate answer to growth and public
safety issues, he stated it is the Planning Commission's responsibility to find alternative
solutions.
A general discussion followed between applicant and City Council regarding solutions
and/or favorable alternatives constituting affordable housing and multi-story buildings.
2b. John Slonecker
Mr. Slonecker presented a brief summary regarding his work history, education, skills,
general interests, organization affiliations, and further expressed his interest in serving on
the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Libby inquired how applicant viewed the Ukiah General Plan.
Mr. Slonecker replied, although he is not familiar with the Ukiah General Plan
requirements, he would consider individual planning projects with regard to specific needs,
interests, and investment opportunities.
He reiterated he accepts change as a reality and understands this concept should be
applicable when planning for community growth.
Councilmember Ashiku inquired if applicant has identified planning issues he would
change with regard to land use.
Mr. Slonecker stated he supports the opportunity for new businesses to come to the City.
He noted there are many existing vacant buildings within the City and its parameters.
Mayor Mastin inquired regarding applicant's response with reference to "clean industries."
Mr. Slonecker replied "clean industries" refers to electronic business or other associated
businesses wherein people benefit. He stated "chemical industries" are costly,
environmentally restrictive, and not conducive to this area. He advocated with the
availability of computer technology, many people favor living, and are now able to conduct
July 7, 1999
Page 3 of 8
business in rural areas. As a Planning Commissioner he would like to work with public and
private individuals in order to support businesses with economic values.
Councilmember Baldwin inquired whether applicant favors a Design Review Ordinance
regarding design preference and continuity for the downtown and other applicable areas.
Mr. Slonecker replied, although the Design Review Committee and/or Ordinances assist
in aesthetically pleasing projects, each proposed project should be individually considered.
Mr. Baldwin further inquired whether applicant supports a City policy which actively
encourages "mixed use" to include residential apartments and/or condominium
development over retail development.
Mr. Slonecker replied in other areas many former business buildings are converted into
apartments and/or condominiums or a building may be converted for retail purposes on
the bottom floor and residential purposes on the top floor. He stated some people
welcome condominium living.
Mr. Smith inquired whether applicant supports City growth by annexation of County land
and if so, would this option encompass residential only, commercial only, or mixed use.
Mr. Slonecker replied in other places growth by County land annexation is common. He
further replied, in this area, it is his understanding such annexation is unlawful. He stated
if County land annexation was an option, he supports resident use first. He also stated he
favors the option wherein the City supports the County with reference to growth issues and
employment opportunities.
Mr. Smith inquired whether applicant supports environmental regulations as
developmentally pertinent to the good of the community, or in the alterative, unnecessarily
burdensome on developers.
Mr. Slonecker stated, although environmental law and regulations are cumbersome, he
supports environmental regulation because there is positive value and public benefit
associated with such adoption. He further stated, as a Planning Commissioner, he would
work with potential project applicants so that their projects are approved and also comply
with the required environmental standards.
Mrs. Libby inquired regarding limited growth availability due to surrounding agricultural
land and in what direction(s) would applicant advocate continued growth.
Mr. Slonecker replied he supports agriculture and it is his understanding there is
agricultural land available wherein farmers do agree to sell their land for the "right" price.
He further replied he favors building on agricultural land if the parties involved and public
benefit.
July 7, 1999
Page 4 of 8
Councilmember Baldwin inquired whether applicant supports hillside building particularly
on the west side.
Mr. Slonecker replied he favors hillside building as long as the site is geologically stable
and not environmentally disruptive. He further stated the individual property owners should
be financially responsible for property access, utilities, and/or land improvements, and if
such conditions are met, then building limitations by the City Planning Department would
not be appropriate.
Mayor Mastin inquired regarding the increased traffic congestion and whether applicant
has any proposed solutions to the problem.
Mr. Slonecker replied one solution to traffic congestion on State Street would be to input
two lanes in each direction with a turn lane in the middle. He noted this proposed solution
would eliminate some parking on State Street. He further noted traffic is functioning
adequately with the street improvements made to Perkins and Orchard. He stated traffic
flows smoothly on Dora Street.
Mr. Baldwin inquired whether applicant envisions higher building heights in the future.
Mr. Slonecker replied affirmatively should property owners choose to build condominiums
or other similar buildings.
Councilmember Smith inquired regarding the relationship between the Planning
Commission and the City Council and whether the Commission be independent and
autonomous from the Council in its land use decision making.
Mr. Slonecker replied both entities, with reference to proposed projects, should combine
their efforts to reflect and consider the good will intentions of a particular applicant.
2c. Judy Pruden
Mayor Mastin noted Ms. Pruden did not complete questions 7 through 17 on the
Application for Planning Commission Appointment.
Ms. Pruden stated it is her understanding that a reapplying Commissioner is not required
to complete these questions.
Ms. Pruden stated she has served on the Planning Commission for five years and should
she be appointed, this will be her last term. She further stated the existing Planning
Commission has done an exemplary job implementing the Ukiah General Plan. She noted
the Commissioners, with reference to proposed planning projects, have made Zoning Code
text modifications and/or changes. She further noted the Commissioners made decisions
as applicable and consistent with the provisions outlined in the Land Use Code and the
Ukiah Bicycle and pedestrian Master Plan. She reiterated she is pleased to participate in
the Gobbi Street/Riverside Park project, preparation of a Historical Preservation
July 7, 1999
Page 5 of 8
Ordinance, and other City projects.
Councilmember Libby inquired of the applicant what is the most important land use
related issue presently facing our community.
Ms. Pruden replied this area is nearly at "build out" and what is left to build on is more
problematic than ever before. She replied current planning projects encompass mitigation
problems and involve other highly impacted issues which require solutions and/or project
modification. She noted there is not a lot of room for housing and further noted the Hillside
Ordinance has not been resolved. She stated the City must at some point, choose to
annex or increase boundaries. She reported the Planning Commission considers many
applications for controversial, high-density second units.
Mrs. Libby inquired what direction would City boundary expansion take place, provided
City boundaries must be expanded.
Ms. Pruden replied she would like to see boundary expansion to Orr Springs Road, but
stated issues such as the high commercial corridor and the tax situation would prevent
boundary expansion. She stated one of the best options would be for City boundary
expansion to the Boonville Road.
Councilmember Ashiku inquired whether it is the City or County's responsibility, and/or
both to manage the pressures of growth.
Ms. Pruden stated both organizations should share responsibility to make the State Street
corridor and gateways all "one presentation." She also stated the County does not favor
citizen advisory groups and prefers to manage planning issues at staff level. She further
stated the continued competition for property tax appropriation hinders the community.
A general discussion followed by applicant regarding proposed City aesthetic and/or
architectural improvements in the downtown gateway corridors and other City incorporated
areas.
Ms. Pruden stated incorporated into the Ukiah General Plan is a Design Review element.
She would like the City Council to give Planning Department staff direction to begin
implementation of the Design Review Guidelines by strengthening them into a City
Ordinance.
She noted the height limit in the downtown area should probably not exceed three stories
in order to maintain current aesthetic building proportions.
She stated the Planning Commission is sensitive toward second unit and/or second story
buildings, which is often a large "bone of contention" between neighbors due to potential
loss of privacy.
July 7, 1999
Page 6 of 8
She further stated what makes Ukiah unique and beautiful is the east and west hills. She
noted with proper design and vegetation as well as compliance with regard to fire
standards set forth by the California Department of Forestry, this area can accommodate
more growth. She does not support row after row of houses in the surrounding hillsides.
Mayor Mastin inquired of the applicant regarding the Ukiah General Plan implementation
progress and further inquired if she recommended any changes to the Plan.
Ms. Pruden replied initially implementation of the Ukiah General Plan into planning
projects was slow, but when land use coding became a project issue, application of the
Plan was a necessity. She stated the Planning Commission had to make the Plan's land
use designation compatible with the Zoning Code.
Councilmember Baldwin inquired whether applicant had any opinion regarding
restoration of the three major creeks within the City boundaries.
Ms. Pruden replied she has been in contact with a creek restoration consultant and creek
restoration in the western hills is not likely because, unfortunately, a lot of property
ownership came with "center creek line deeds" which makes it difficult to properly channel
creeks since certain creek alterations have already been made. She reiterated, although
creeks are a community asset, full restoration is not likely because these creeks have
been channeled and changed for 135 years.
Mrs. Libby inquired of the applicant what the relationship should be between the City
Council and the Planning Commission.
Ms. Pruden replied both entities should complement one another with regard to planning
issues and interpretations. She stated it is the Planning Commission's business to be
concerned with land use issues and planning as well as to handle such matters as
effectively and efficiently as possible. She also stated it is the Planning Commission's
responsibility to not burden the City Council with planning issues so that Council can
concentrate on the complicated California regulatory process. She noted there have been
no Planning Commission appeals.
Ms. Pruden noted she supports mixed land use with reference to residential construction
over retail development. She stated she would like to see some of the older second-story
downtown buildings converted into apartments with the bottom floor housing a business.
She further stated she supports such a mixed use project if it is presented as a Use Permit
to ensure construction or conversion is neighborhood compatible.
She reported serving on the Planning Commission has been a pleasure and she would like
to continue serving on the Commission wherein she is able to fulfill her planning
aspirations as well as to continue to apply her planning experience and expertise.
July 7, 1999
Page 7 of 8
3. ADJOURNMENT
At 6:32 p.m., Council adjourned to their Regular Meeting of July 7, 1999.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
July 7, 1999
Page 8 of 8