HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 10-28-98 MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
Regular Adjourned Meeting
Joint City Council and Planning Commission
Wednesday, October 28, 1998
The Ukiah City Council and the Planning Commission convened in a Regular Adjourned
Meeting on October 28, 1998, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted,
at 5:30 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah,
California. The following Councilmembers were present: Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin,
and Mayor Malone. The following Planning Commissioners were present: Larson, Chiles,
Puser, Correl, and Chairman Pruden. Staff present: Director of Public Utilities Barnes,
Community Services Director DeKnoblough, Finance Director Elton, Fire Marshal Evans,
Risk Manager/Budget Officer Harris, City Manager Horsley, Public Works Director
Kennedy, City Attorney Rapport, Planning Director Sawyer, Senior Planner Stump, Police
Chief Williams, and City Clerk Ulvila.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Malone led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
3a. Introduction of Ordinance Amending Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Ukiah
Municipal Code (Demolition Permit Review)
Planning Director Sawyer discussed the Ordinance presented for Council's consideration
which amends the City Code pertaining to processing and reviewing demolition permits as
they relate to older structures which might embody historical, architectural, or cultural
significance. He noted that staff has determined that the project is exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section
15061 (b)(1). He discussed the following main features of the proposed ordinance:
1. Retains the 50-year threshold as the cut-off date for historical review by the Council.
2. Establishes a public noticing requirement, which is intended to make demolition
applications more open to public scrutiny and provide for a wider range of input leading
to a Council decision.
3. Provides criteria by which the decision-makers can determine if a structure should be
considered a candidate for preservation.
4. Broaches the subject of suspending the demolition permit approval process for a period
of 90 days if the Demolition Permit Review Committee (DPRC) finds that any of the
criteria for historical significance apply.
5. Delves into the subject of possible acquisition by: providing for a public hearing on the
demolition permit; providing the demolition permit applicant an opportunity to discuss
whether or not a viable market and/or economic return exists for the structure if
preservation is otherwise warranted; and provides for the formal imposition of the 90-
day suspension period, during which time various private sector or public sector
options are explored and/or commended to achieve preservation.
6. Requires the Planning Director to provide written notification to the applicant of the
Council's determination, and an explanation of the ensuing process for seeking
alternatives to demolition.
7. Provides for the salvaging of materials for reuse after the demolition permit has been
issued.
8. Contains provisions and criteria for reconsidering a decision made by the City Council
in regards to demolition permits and historically significant structures.
He further advised that the new demolition permit review procedures have been deemed
discretionary in nature by the City Attorney, which means that all demolition permits
subject to these provisions will require environmental review pursuant to the requirements
of CEQA. He discussed the composition of the current DPRC and recommended Council
consider whether it should be changed, reconstituted, or possibly abolished.
City Attorney Rapport discussed the proposed ordinance, noting that two significant
portions of the ordinance consider whether to allow a building to be demolished and also
addresses the reconsideration process. He recommended that if a building is determined
to be historically significant, the demolition permit could be suspended for a 90 day period
October 28, 1998
Page 1
while Staff works with the applicant to preserve the building. If the applicant establishes
there is a viable market for the building, the issuance of the demolition permit would be
stayed for a period of 90 days. He discussed the 90 day delay process as well as other
sections to the proposed ordinance. He noted that the proposed ordinance amends the
1984 ordinance.
Planning Commissioner Larson discussed the CEQA process and how it will relate to
the historical preservation ordinance forthcoming.
Councilmember Ashiku expressed concern with the inventory of buildings over 50 years
old placing property owners in a difficult position. It is important that the property owners
have a voice in determining if they want their property placed on this list. He discussed
the financial burden placed on property owners to complete an EIR or the pursuit of
possible litigation. He noted the possibility of fraud occurring during the public hearing
process and questioned if that would constitute revocation of the permit. It was his
recommendation that architectural and renovation criteria be established, and a more
comprehensive historical preservation ordinance be initiated, rather than the proposed
urgency ordinance.
Planning Commissioner Chiles inquired if a single Councilmember could bring an item
back for reconsideration.
City Attorney Rapport advised that the matter may be placed on the agenda by any
Councilmember who voted in favor of the decision. He discussed considerations for
revoking the permit. He further discussed the possibility of changing the ordinance so that
the demolition permit would be suspended from the point at which the matter was put on
the City Council Agenda. The City Manager would be notified if the matter is scheduled
on the Agenda, and would, in turn, notify the Building Official to suspend the permit until
such time as the City Council makes a decision concerning the matter.
Councilmember Mastin addressed the procedure for "reconsideration", as noted on page
6, beginning with line 17. He noted the 90-day time frame has passed with regard to the
demolition permit for St. Mary's Church.
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden advised that demolition permits are issued
for 180 days after the City Council finds the structure to be historically significant. She
questioned whether the City Council should review the permit again, if the structure has
not been demolished within the 180 day time frame, or if the permit should automatically
be renewed.
Planning Director Sawyer advised that the UBC references extending the expiration of
a building permit. Sometimes delays in construction, or demolition, are beyond the control
of the permittee, such as weather conditions.
Public Hearing Opened: 6:20 p.m.
Dan Haehl, 230 South Highland Avenue, inquired if a building is found to have historical
significance, and is viable, can a party make a new application if, in the future, the property
seems not to be viable.
City Attorney Rapport advised that, the way the ordinance is currently written, the
property owner most likely couldn't reapply for another permit. The circumstances, or
market, could change, and there isn't an allowance in the proposed ordinance for possible
future changes to the property.
Jeff Trouette, 807 Maple Avenue, advised that he has been through the demolition permit
process three times. He felt the current process is flawed. He noted that on several
occasions, building materials have been saved or recycled, however, it is has been difficult
to find a party interested in moving a structure to another location or to purchase the
building and conduct renovation. He felt the 60 day waiting period for demolition is
adequate. He inquired as to who makes the determination if a structure is to be
remodeled. With regard to the demolition of St. Mary's Church, the public was notified
October 28, 1998
Page 2
three years ago that the Perkins Street property would be surplus after their new church
is constructed. He felt the cost for conducting an EIR is prohibitive to many property
owners, and may result in the building becoming blighted. It was his opinion that the City
Council should not reconsider a demolition permit and that this proposed ordinance not
fit a mold just for one project, referring to the demolition permit for St. Mary's Church.
Reconsideration should encompass all pads of the City's decisions, not just for demolition
permits.
City Manager Horsley advised that the City has been in contact with State and Federal
groups and is obtaining information on funding sources. The City is taking a proactive
approach to funding sources, which could be available in the future.
Mr. Trouette discussed property owners making alterations to their homes without
conforming to the architectural features or age of the structure. When instilling a historical
preservation designation upon properties, the property owner should be informed of
limitations and restrictions related to historically significant buildings.
Councilmember Kelly discussed the City Council's vote regarding the demolition permit
for St. Mary's Church and making their decision, not knowing important information was
available which may have influenced their vote. She felt that with a delayed period of time,
there would be adequate time for further information to be presented regarding a permit,
and it could be used in a timely manner.
Mr. Trouette discussed the takings law. He felt the process concerning St. Mary's Church,
which the City Council followed, was fair and that Council should not take the matter under
reconsideration.
Public Hearing Closed: 6:35 p.m.
Planning Commissioner Chairperson Pruden discussed her involvement with the
demolition permit process during the past 15 years, noting that she has donated her time
to conducting historical significance evaluations and histories of structures in Ukiah.
Several people have had their homes moved, thereby preserving the historical significance
of the structures. She further reviewed demolition permits at various locations in the City
and noted that since 1984, approximately 40 demolition permits have been approved by
the City. She estimated it would cost approximately $15,000 to take CEQA through
litigation concerning St. Mary's Church.
Councilmember Ashiku expressed concern with litigation if the City did not provide
adequate CEQA evaluation on a project. He felt that architectural and renovation
standards should be established in order to protect the historical character of the
community.
Mayor Malone referred to Exhibit A, page 1, "Exclusion", inquiring why the Public Works
Department is excluded from the provisions of Article 3. He also inquired about the
process when a public agency building is purchased by a member of the private sector.
City Attorney Rapport noted that it could be possible that the court could order the City
to pay all attorney fees should the City loose its case against CEQA. He advised that the
Exclusion paragraph is part of the existing ordinance and Chapter 1 applies to all building
codes.
Planning Director Sawyer advised that City Staff's response time to applications to
demolish structures over 50 years of age is approximately two weeks. He discussed the
proposed ordinance, comparing it to the existing ordinance. Should the project require a
Negative Declaration or an EIR, the process with the applicant could take from four to six
months to complete. He discussed the public comment period for the City to receive input
from the community.
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden discussed the residential building record
that the City obtains from the County during the process of establishing the age of a
structure. She noted the importance of tracking construction on properties for historical
October 28, 1998
Page 3
purposes.
Mayor Malone discussed establishing criteria for designating the historical significance
of a building, and noted that, once a list of properties has been established, property
owners may be contacting the City offices. He was of the firm belief that the ancestors of
the designated property should have the first option of what the future of the property
should be. The community has an interest in various properties, however, if the property
owner lacks interests in preserving the structure, the structure may deteriorate due to lack
of maintenance. He noted that the existing ordinance does not refer to a maintenance
program. It is his hope that the new ordinance will encourage property owners to keep
their buildings maintained. He felt that it is not right to approve this ordinance without
getting the input of the property owners who will be affected by the ordinance. He
opposed the reconsideration portion of the proposed ordinance, noting that it should be
for all decisions, not just demolition permits. There should be more exemptions for
continuous owners and to have more of a say than the community at large.
Councilmember Ashiku noted that, since the City Council has taken up the matter so
quickly, many people in the community do not understand how they will be affected by the
ordinance.
Discussion followed concerning the process that the property owner will need to go
through once their property is placed on the list of historical significant buildings.
City Attomey Rapport responded to a Point of Order by Planning Commissioner Larson
regarding whether both the Planning Commission and City Council would be voting on the
proposed ordinance. He advised that the City Council will vote on the ordinance, however,
the Planning Commission may express their views on the matter. He discussed CEQA
standards for determining if an EIR is necessary for a project, noting that if the matter were
to be pursued in court, attention will be drawn to any adverse environmental effects of the
projects. Substantial evidence would need to be submitted and the applicant could be
compelled to provide an EIR. If the structure is not historically significant, it could be
categorically exempt. He discussed the takings issue.
Planning Director Sawyer discussed some of the problems when placing a structure on
the inventory, noting that some property owners do not want their property on the list. The
time frame for completion of the list is unknown at this time as the consultant needs to go
through the existing inventory first.
Planning Commissioner Correll felt that many issues have been addressed and should
be considered prior to voting on the ordinance. The ordinance should incorporated these
concerns.
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden advised that in October 1988 she requested
the City Council go forward with a historical preservation ordinance, but little progress has
been made since that time. She felt the City needs to make the demolition process more
workable and that the new ordinance provide more guidelines. As the ordinance is
implemented, its strengths and weaknesses will be shown, and the City Council can make
revisions as needed.
Discussion followed concerning the cost of an EIR and the CEQA process. It was noted
by Staff that a Negative Declaration on a project is completed internally by Staff. The
importance of keeping the public informed of the process and historical listings was
stressed. It was noted that the current historical listing is 10 years old.
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden drew attention to Exhibit A, page 2, line 1,
and recommended the word "garage" be omitted from the sentence because from a
historical standpoint, many garages were formerly carriage houses on older properties.
She discussed other outbuildings which are not attached to main structures.
Planning Director Sawyer advised that the City should not make garages explicitly
exempt and recommended not deleting the word "garage" from the sentence. He will
consult with the City Attorney and provide alternate language for item "a." on page 2.
October 28, 1998
Page 4
Councilmember Mastin recommended deleting item (3) on page 6, beginning on line 6
concerning "Reconsideration of Decisions". It was his desire to narrow the reasons for
reconsidering and that item (3) is worded too broadly. He expressed concern that the City
apply the reconsideration issue to other matters as well, not just for the demolition process.
City Attorney Rapport discussed the fraud issue as it relates to item (1) on page 6.
Mayor Malone polled the Council on various issues concerning the proposed ordinance,
with the following Consensus was reached:
- Reconsideration: Page 6, "a.", leave (1) and (2), but omit (3).
- Exemptions: Do not have an exemption for owner occupied structures.
- Suspension of demolition permits: Suspend demolition permit during reconsideration
process.
- Viable market: A new application can be submitted at a later date.
- Eliminate the 90 day time line, Page 4, item 2, line 11.
Recessed' 8:10 p.m.
Reconvened: 8:25 p.m.
EMERGENCY ITEM
City Manager Horsley advised that an emergency matter has developed which the
Council needs to take under consideration at this meeting regarding a budget amendment
in the amount of $31,200 for the Perkins Street Reconstruction Project.
MIS Ashiku/Mastin to place the emergency item regarding the Perkins Street
Reconstruction Project on the Agenda, and carried by a unanimous voice vote.
4. NEW BUSINESS
a. Establish Updated Priority List of General Plan Implementation Measures
Senior Planner Stump discussed the process of implementing the General Plan over the
years and reviewed some of the complex projects that have been completed, or are
underway, which fulfill implementation measures contained in the General Plan. He
reviewed various rezoning projects completed by the Planning Department as well as
streetscape guidelines. It is Staff's hope that most of these projects will be completed by
the Spring of 1999. The 12 major projects currently underway are:
o
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
,
10.
11.
12.
Revisions to the City Zoning Code
Preparation of a Master Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Preparation of a Gobbi Street Riverside Park Site Design Study
Conduct a historical preservation program
Preparation of a stream and creek restoration/enhancement study
Preparation of an EIR for the Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue extension
project
Revisions to the Hillside Zoning District regulations
Creation of computer generated General Plan land use and zoning maps
Participation in the planning for the railroad depot property and downtown transit
center project
Preparation of an Airport overlay zoning district and disclosure ordinance
Revisions to the City Subdivision Ordinance
Air quality issue research/AQMD participation
City Manager Horsley reported that each Department has received a copy of the General
Plan Implementation Status Report to use as a guideline.
Mayor Malone recommended a copy of the Plan be sent to the Ukiah Daily Journal. He
discussed transportation issues and the Mendocino Council of Government's (MCOG)
influence over funding. The City's General Plan Implementation Plan should be consistent
with MCOG's plans.
Councilmember Kelly discussed the matter of an independent contractor which was hired
to complete the air quality study.
October 28, 1998
Page 5
Planning Director Sawyer reported that the City was not included on the list to receive
the administrative draft from the AQMD. After contacting the agency, a copy was
forwarded to the City and Staff is in the review process.
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police Chief Williams discussed items listed on page 46. He advised that the Police
Department is finishing Measure CF-8.1(a), which involves a coordinated response to
incidents involving multiple agencies by developing a central dispatch for all Emergency
Medical Response, Fire and Law Enforcement in the valley. He reported that the Police
Department continues to work with the schools. Poor bicycling habits and helmet laws
were discussed. He invited all City Council and Planning Commission members to tour
the Police Department facility.
Councilmember Chavez advised that the Mendocino County Public Health Department
can provide helmets to individuals.
Fire Marshal Evans reported that, through a Public Safety Grant, the Fire Department can
purchase helmets at an estimate cost of $2.00 each.
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Councilmember Chavez recommended that utility bill mailings to promote education on
energy efficiency and solar energy, Measure EG-7.1(a), be printed in Spanish as well as
English.
Planning Commissioner Puser queried staff about Measure EG-8.1 (b) regarding offering
financial or other incentives to residential and commercial customers to install more
efficient systems.
Public Utilities Director Barnes explained that the program was inactive for a time. He
advised that the cost to print their brochures in Spanish should not be too costly, as they
are picture oriented. He reported that the undergrounding of utilities has the largest price
tag for completion. He advised that the electric utilities are located in the sidewalk along
Perkins Street and should not be affected by the Perkins Street Reconstruction Project.
City Manager Horsley reported that P.G.& E. has stopped undergrounding old utility lines.
Mayor Malone recommended that mention should be made of JPA on Measure CF-I. 1 (d),
page 67, noting that the City participates as a member of the Inland Water and Power
Agency.
Public Utilities Director Barnes referenced Measure CF-7.1(c) and reported that the
Sphere of Influence has been submitted to LAFCO and is complete. With regard to the
City working with the Ukiah Unified School District regarding their new school site, he will
keep the City Council and Planning Commission informed of the status regarding utilities.
City Manager Horsley discussed Measure CF-3. l(a) regarding water conservation and
the City's efforts to place plants in parks and other surroundings that conserve water
usage. She advised that the City has been very conservative with expenses but is hoping
to implement the utility conservation program again in the future.
AIRPORT
City Manager Horsley advised that the new Assistant City Manager will provide
management of the Airport facilities and will prepare a strategic plan for the Airport. The
plan should address such issues as noise which the Airport Commission has been
discussing.. She discussed the day to day operations of the Airport.
CITY CLERK
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden discussed records management and
advised that former City Clerk Kathy McKay did an excellent job and kept her informed of
records due for destruction so that she could determine if they had any historical
significance. She advised that she is a Commissioner on the Mendocino County Historical
Records Commission and that their services have not been used by the City since Ms
October 28, 1998
Page 6
McKay was City Clerk. She felt the City should go back on line using these types of
programs. During reconstruction of records of historical buildings, they have found little
information regarding building plans over 25 years ago since most were destroyed. She
discussed the City's legal retention schedule and records management program.
City Manager Horsley advised that the records retention schedule is reviewed by the City
Clerk each year. Newly appointed City Clerk Marie Ulvila will continue to follow this
procedure. She noted that former City Clerk Colleen Henderson did a tremendous amount
of work in records management and revised the retention schedule in cooperation with the
City Attorney and each Department.
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden advised that Kathy McKay provided her with
plans and specifications of buildings as retention schedules expired, and they were turned
over to one of the historical units for retention. This has not occurred since Ms McKay left
the City's employment. She stressed the'importance of Implementation Measure HA-
1.5(a), utilizing the volunteer services or staff services of the Mendocino County Historical
Records Commission. She noted that the City has the option of storing its historical
archives or sending them to the Historical Society.
Discussion followed concerning plan and specifications and their archival value. It was
noted by Planning Staff that Building Department plans and specifications are kept in a
seperate storage area from those handled by the Records Retention system, and are not
destroyed. Preliminary plans have been included in Planning Commission and City
Council packets for review. A suggestion was made to compose a list of records for
historical archives.
City Attorney Rapport discussed retention schedules and City procedures prior to the
destruction of records. It was his opinion that the process that Ms. McKay followed, as
outlined by Planning Commissioner Pruden, was not in accordance with the City's policies.
However, if there is a procedure that was not incorporated into the City's policies, and that
subsequent City Clerk's were not aware of, they should be presented to City Clerk Ulvila
for consideration.
CITY PARKING SPACES
There was a brief discussion of the City's parking lots, as noted on page 72.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
City Manager Horsley advised that there is no room for bike lanes on Perkins Street,
which is in the process of being paved.
Planning Commissioner Chiles discussed logging trucks on Maple Street and the
deterioration of City streets due to large trucks.
Mayor Malone recommended MCOG be sent a copy of the City's General Plan
Implementation Measures. Discussion followed concerning MCOG's plan being updated.
Planning Commissioner Larson discussed stream restoration and flood control, as noted
on page 44. He stressed the importance of a residential traffic management program.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Community Services Director DeKnoblough advised that the Community Services
Department has not begun implementation measures because they are waiting for the
County to adopt their General Plan.
City Manager Horsley discussed funding for Riverside Park, working with the Ukiah
Unified School District regarding recreational programs, and working within the City's
sphere of influence.
Planning Commissioner Larson discussed the City establishing a parks and recreational
district which encompasses the entire valley. The City should separate that vision from
the goals confined within the City limits. Identifying parks and recreational needs of the
community was seen as a priority. He discussed the South Washington Park and
October 28, 1998
Page 7
Wagonsellers Park and felt the needs assessment should be completed soon for those
neighborhoods.
Consensus of Council was to have the needs assessment of South Washington Park and
the Wagonsellers Park be made a priority.
Discussion followed concerning the City being the funding mechanism for parks and
recreation in the Ukiah valley. Joint use of recreational facilities was also discussed. In-
lieu fees, as noted on page 61, Implementation Measure PR-6.1, for Riverside Park was
discussed. The matter of the property owner donating the land rather than paying the fees
was noted as an option.
Planning Commission Chairperson Pruden discussed Orr Creek and inquired as to the
City's economic constraints regarding parks.
Mayor Malone felt that the issue concerns economics, whereby the needs are greater than
the money available.
Discussion followed concerning maintenance and security of the City's parks.
Planning Commissioner Larson discussed Implementation Measure PR-7.1 (b), as noted
on page 72, regarding the continuance of public use of the existing community garden at
the Observatory site, and reported that the community garden has been discontinued.
City Councilmember Kelly advised that she took a proposal to the Sun House Guild for
a garden, but they had already found a new site.
EMERGENCY ITEM
Request For Authorization Of Budget Amendment And The Expenditure Of Gas Tax
Funds To Fund Required Change Order Work For The East Perkins Street
Reconstruction Project- Specification No. 98-11
City Manager Horsley distributed an Urgency Item Summary Report to Council, as
submitted by Public Works Director Kennedy. She advised that during the reconstruction
of Perkins Street on October 23 and 26, 1998, unsuitable material within the roadway
subgrade was found at various locations, as well as unstable areas. The Contractor was
directed to remove unsuitable material within the roadway subgrade at various locations
along the eastbound lane of East Perkins Street. Since the subgrade has been exposed
and inspected by Staff, it has been determined by Public Works Director Kennedy that it
is necessary to install geotextile material (fabric) on the subgrade prior to the placement
of the new structural section. On October 15, 1998, the grinding machine hit the steel rail
culvert top at the Gibson Creek crossing and a Notice of Claim has been received from the
Contractor indicating that additional costs in the amount of $8,700 have been incurred.
There was no indication on the plans that the rails were there, nor was City Staff aware of
their existence. Additionally, the number of existing detector lead cables to which the
Contractor is to splice the new detector loops to are not as indicated on the contract plans.
She noted that a lot of the composition of Perkins Street is not shown on the maps. She
discussed the Contingency and Gas Tax Funds.
Finance Director Elton advised that the emergency expense would involve an internal
Budget amendment and expenditure of $31,200 from Gas Tax Fund 2105 to the Project
Account of 303-9646.250.000.
MIS AshikulMalone authorizing a Budget amendment and expense of $31,200 from Gas
Tax Fund 2105 to the Project Ac, count of 303-9645.250.000 for the purpose of funding the
required Change Order work and the potential claim for the Perkins Street Reconstruction
Project, and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin,
and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None.
4b. RECEIVE HOUSING ELEMENT STATUS REPORT
Senior Planner Stump advised that the Ukiah General Plan Housing Element Status
Report was prepared by staff, and noted that much more needs to be done. He discussed
October 28, 1998
Page 8
recent rezoning of various areas throughout the City and their affect on housing. He noted
that there is vacant land available, however, the majority of vacant properties are located
in the western hillside area or in the Flood Zone.
Consensus of Council accepted the Housing Element Status Report presented by
Planning Staff.
5. ADJOURNMENT
MIS Malone/Ashiku to adjourn the joint meeting at 10:10 p.m., and carried by a
unanimous voice vote of the City Council.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
October 28, 1998
Page 9