Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 05-10-06 joint planningCITYCOUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING/PUBLIC WORKSHOP May 10, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT Doug Crane John McCowen Vice Mayor Baldwin Mari Rodin Mayor Ashiku OTHERS PRESENT Listed below, Respectively CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT None PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT Ken Anderson Kevin Jennings James Mulheren, Chair Judy Pruden Mike Whetzel PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Candace Horsley, City Manager Charley Stump, Planning Director Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER a. City Council - Roll Call The meeting of the Ukiah City Council was called to order by Mayor Ashiku at 4:30 p.m. at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken for the City Council and the Planning Commission with the results listed above. 2. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Marlene Werra is not opposed to the development of hiking trails on City property provided they can be appropriately maintained and measures implemented that address trash collection, fire protection, public safety, and other relevant/potential nuisance issues. Robert Werra recommended reconsidering moving forward on the development of planned public hiking trails in the Western Hills. The only justification for development of hiking trails is if there is an obvious need. His observations concerning the use of public County/City parks or other recreational facilities do not support the development of additional facilities in this community. Bill Smith addressed the City Fire Department's intent to provide for 10 miles of fuel break, and stated two miles have been completed in four years. He maintains that portion of the MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 May 10, 2006 fuel break that runs through his property. He concurs with Robert Werra's comments concerning construction of public trails in the hillside. g UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Status Report Concerning Public Benefits Program Financials and Request from Menton Builders for Photovoltaic Incentive Rebate Related To Twelve Unit Townhouse Development on Apple Avenue City Manager Horsley recommended dispensing with a formal presentation of the staff report concerning this agenda item. Mayor Ashiku advised that there is approximately $1.9 million dollars in public benefit funds remaining at this time where on the average $86,000 is the amount unused in any given year. Vice Mayor Baldwin stated the surplus of funding has narrowed over the years. Councilmember McCowen addressed the request from Menton Builders for photovoltaic (P¥) incentives rebates, and reiterated while use of P¥ systems is not currently covered in the Public Benefits program this could change when the program is updated. He questioned whether the $4/AC Watt request is consistent with what would likely become a part of the updated Public Benefits program. Electrical Distribution Engineer Liz Kirkley stated the purpose of having a consultant would be to determine the dollar amount per AC Watt, while evaluating how to most effectively use the funds to keep control of the City's load. Councilmember McCowen commented that the nature of the use would assist the City in reducing its peak load demand. Electrical Distribution Engineer Liz Kirkley acknowledged the above statement, and commented the most important aspect of the Menton Builders project is that there are so many high efficiency energy measures incorporated into the structure being built. The City's previous solar rebate incentives have gone towards projects that do not have high efficiency measures incorporated into the project. Councilmember McCowen stated the point was made in an earlier staff report regarding incentives that those types of energy efficiencies warrant the higher subsidy per watt. Electrical Distribution Engineer Liz Kirkley agreed that this approach is what other city utilities do to promote energy conservation. On A Motion by Councilmember McCowen, seconded by Vice Mayor Baldwin, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Councilmembers present to approve the request for PV incentives, as provided for in the staff report and as discussed above. Vice Mayor Baldwin seconded the motion with an amendment that any further such subsidies be suspended until a program has been developed which provides for an "lnclusionary Housing" concept for such subsidies. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 May 10, 2006 Councilmember Crane requested clarification whether this means for all subsidies or only those subsidies over the amount currently established in the program. Vice Mayor Baldwin noted the novel part of the program pertains to new construction, which is the case for the Menton Builders request. Councilmember McCowen did not favor the motion amendment, and recommended Council look at formulating an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. Subsidy requests should not be limited to just applicants that are seeking subsidies for Inclusionary Housing developments and that a rebate incentive program should probably apply to new development. Vice Mayor Baldwin concurred with this statement, and commented before proceeding with future subsidies in this regard that an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance should be in effect. He supported the motion, as originally stated. However, he will oppose any further subsidy requests for significant developments having this type of government subsidy request until some permanent below market units are developed that may desire such a subsidy. City Manager Horsley requested clarification that Vice Mayor Baldwin is referring to subsidies that are outside of the current Public Benefits program. Vice Mayor Baldwin replied "yes." 4. CALL TO ORDER a. Planning Commission - Roll Call 5. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Direction Concerning the Draft Revised Hillside Development Regulations Mayor Ashiku recused himself, and stated Vice Mayor Baldwin would conduct the meeting. Councilmember Crane recused himself. Vice Mayor Baldwin suggested the first part of the meeting should be for public testimony where questions/concerns can be directed to City Council/Planning Commission and/or staff. The later part of the meeting should be reserved for discussion between City Council and the Planning Commission. He recommended those persons who commented on the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations at the March 29, 2006 meeting, not duplicate their testimony because the information is already a matter of public record. Councilmember McCowen favored the concept of allowing the Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners adequate time to discuss the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations. Planning Director Stump stated the intent of tonight's meeting is to conduct a second joint meeting to discuss the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations Ordinance. The Planning Commission conducted a series of public workshops and public hearings to discuss draft revisions to the 1982 Hillside Zoning District Regulations. The Commission finalized its review and made a formal recommendation to City Council in this regard. After the City Council conducted a public hearing about the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations, the Council remanded a number of issues to the Commission for further discussion. These issues include the following topics: MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 May 10, 2006 1. Second Residential Units - Should they be allowed on hillside property? Staff recommends continued discussion of this matter, and noted that CityCouncil/Planning Commission have the ability with State law to preclude second residential units from the Hillside Zoning District provided the appropriate findings are made demonstrating that such developments would cause specific adverse impacts on the public health, safety, and general welfare. If it is found that these impacts would occur, that Council/Planning Commission consider disallowing second units in the hillside area. 2. Day Care Homes and the State preemption - Can the City regulate them? The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council was to allow Small Family Day Care Homes (6 to 8 children) and require a Use Permit for Large Family Day Care Homes (up to 14 children) on the basis that while Large Family Day Care Homes and community care facilities in single family dwellings can be regulated through the Use Permit process. The City is pre;empted by State law in requiring a Use Permit for Small Family Day Care Homes. Staff recommends further discussion concerning day care and community care land uses. 3. The Architecture/Design Elements - Are they too strict? Staff recommends further review in this regard. 4. The Number of Allowed Accessory Buildings - Should the number of accessory buildings be regulated or limited? Staff recommends further review in this regard. 5. The Required Soils/Geotechnical Information- Are the requirements too detailed and inflexible? Council heard testimony from local engineer, George Rau, who expressed concern about the complexity and amount of soils/geotechnical information required for projects. He submitted Guidelines for Engineering and Geologic Reports prepared by the State Division of Mines and Geology at the March 29th joint meeting with City Council/Planning Commission for review/consideration. Additionally, at that same meeting, Engineering Geologist, Julie Bawcom suggested that the City require a third party review of geotechnical studies for project applications submitted to ensure the reports are adequately prepared, as staff does not have the actual expertise to review a comprehensive geotechnical study. Staff recommends review of Attachment 2 of the staff report, "Alternative Language for Engineering Geologic Reports" where information concerning slope stability analysis was included. The alternative language prepared by staff was adapted from the material Mr. Rau submitted. 6. The Proposed Upper and Lower Hillside Areas - How should the dividing line be created? Staff suggests the 1,000-foot elevation could represent a demarcation line between the proposed upper and lower hillside areas, and recommends discussion to consider the 1,000-foot MSL elevation as the separation line. 7. The Helen Avenue Parcels - Should these parcels be included in the Hillside Zoning District. If so, should they be in the upper or lower areas? Should the property owners of these parcels be provided more opportunity to participate in the development of the Regulations? Staff recommends further discussion to determine if the parcels above Helen Avenue should be included in the Hillside Zoning District, and if so, whether they should be situated in the MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May 10, 2006 Page 4 lower hillside area and also recommends the interested Helen Avenue property owners have additional time to participate in the development of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 5:05 PM Ric Piffero stated a third party geotechnical report review would not be necessary if the soils/geotechnical analysis were completed by a licensed engineer from the State of California. Residential development in the hillside is very costly so a property owner would want to protect his/her investment by having the most qualified engineer complete the required soils/geotechnical study/report without having to incur the extra expense of a third party review. Mr. Piffero agreed with distinguishing between an upper and lower division in the Western Hillside. Susan Fritz opposes second unit development in the hillside primarily for fire safety reasons. Phil Ashiku commented on a summary description of his property on Maple Avenue as follows: · There are factual errors in that the property is comprised of five parcels, not four. · Two parcels are developed with single family residences. One residence fronts Maple Avenue and the second is served by 350 feet of paved driveway. · The Ashiku residence is not the highest residence on the Maple Avenue subdivision, as there are several residences above its elevation. · The remaining land above the Ashiku residence is City-owned. · The Ashiku properties are not visible from any location in town other than the County Administration Complex on Low Gap Road. Phil Ashiku requests that his parcels be removed from the Residential Hillside Zoning District on the following basis: · Of the five existing parcels, two are already developed and three remain vacant and should be considered as a natural extension of the Maple Avenue subdivision. · The five parcels overlay the same geology as the Maple Avenue subdivision that has been determined to be suitable for development. · Fire protection water is directly across Maple Avenue. · Five parcels have near zero visual impacts to City residences. · The site is improved, clear, and in an unnatural state. · Utilities are presently on site. Phil Ashiku further commented on the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations as follows: · Some properties are clearly appropriate for the development of second units while others cannot accommodate such development. Therefore, all properties should "not be painted with the same brush." · He agrees with the 1,000-foot elevation demarcation. Maple Avenue has a 794-foot elevation. His residence has an approximate elevation of 880 feet. The City water tanks in the area probably have a 1,000-foot elevation. · Some areas in the hillside are more visible than others. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 May 10,2006 He reviewed other hillside ordinance regulations in other city/county jurisdictions where none of these areas had the same geological requirements as proposed for Ukiah. John Rogers lives in the hillside and his property is subject to the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations. He supports development of Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations because it is important to adequately protect the natural beauty and unique aesthetics of the hillside. He further supports the 1,000-foot elevation demarcation distinguishing between the upper and lower hillside. He added the lower portions of the hillside have more developments than the upper. Upper level developments would be more visible than lower level developments. While he does not particularly favor the concept of second units, they may be acceptable provided size limitations are placed. He desires additional information concerning the Helen Avenue parcels. Geotechnical studies are vital to the community and favored critical review of any geotechnical report even if this requires a third party review. Linda Sanders stated degradation will occur on the hillside with developments, and supports the concept of providing for a mitigation fund to assist in this regard. She emphasized the importance of implementing measures to protect some of the pristine elements in the Western Hillside. She referred to a letter she wrote to the City Council and Planning Commission addressing issues in the hillside and requesting that size limitations be placed on second units. Douglas Crane stated his family owns property in the Western Hills, and the two parcels consisting of approximately 13 acres is addressed in the staff report. It is likely that the original Hillside Zoning Regulations were likely formulated out of dissatisfaction from some community members regarding the potential developments of one or two property owners in the hillside and the development standards were extended south to include other parcels. He commented on the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations insufficiencies as follows: · A property owned is restricted from constructing a fence to the property line. Fencing can be constructed a distance from the property line to protect "ornamentals" which is a discrepancy because ornamentals are not allowed. · The excavation volume and/or volume of a utility trench would be included as part of the allowed yardage for grading. · The definition of slope is onerous since a gradient above 10 percent is considered "hillside" topography where the methodology is to average the percentage of the slope to determine whether a particular site is feasible for development rather than looking at the actual building site. There are many areas in the hillside having Iow visibility from the valley or even view of the valley that are appropriate building sites. In other words, the language addresses the averaging of a parcel according to the slope standards established without consideration given to the specific land formation of a building site. Doug Crane recommended further review of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations with regard to fire resistant construction and residential fire sprinklers as mitigation measures, language modification referencing "most stable" is replaced with "by suitably stable" and language referencing cluster development be replaced with "may" rather than "shall." The Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations restrict property owners from effective use of their land. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 May 10, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 5:27:21 PM Commissioner Whetzel inquired whether information is available concerning the number of buildable parcels and/or acceptable building pads above the 1,000-foot elevation. Planning Director Stump stated such information is not available. The information could probably be garnished from the 2001 Western Hills Constraints Analysis because the study addresses the number of homes that could reasonably be constructed in the entire hillside area. Commissioner Whetzel commented with the building constraints and engineering/ geotechnical reports required that it may not be feasible for a property owner to build in the hillside. Therefore, the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are essentially self-regulating. It may be that of the 66 possible homes identified in the Western Hills Constraints Analysis that only five homes could be developed at buildout. There are not many homes that could be developed above the 1,000-foot elevation. Commissioner Pruden commented that virtually every person residing in the community has an opinion about the Western Hills. Aside from the fire, landslides, and earthquake issues, the primary concern is about how developments look and how they function. People residing on the valley floor do not desire to view homes developed in the hillside and that discretionary approval of such developments be completed thoughtfully, carefully, and within public safety boundaries. The Hull/Piffero subdivision developments that have occurred are visible from town. The property owners in the Hull/Piffero subdivision have done a commendable job with regard to environmental work. It has been very costly for the homeowners in the Hull/Piffero subdivision to develop their parcels. Commissioner Pruden commented on the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations and Western Hills developments as follows: · Compromises are becoming apparent such as possible concession at the 1,000-foot elevation level concerning upper and lower division of the hillside. · She recommended using the geotechnical standards in the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations referred to above as "bare bones" as guidelines for developments in the lower portions of the hillside and use more stringent geotechnical standards for the upper hillside as a compromise. · She addressed Mr. Crane's comments regarding existing building pads and acknowledged while there are some flat building pads, accessibility is a problem. Accordingly, the geotechnical standards are likely more critical for access as opposed to actual building pad, provided the pad is flat and developable. · The second unit approved for Mr. Hull would not be utilized as a rental and it is appropriate in size and location. The unit is larger than such units found in the City because the lot is larger. The second unit approved for the Ceja project is unusual in that two very large homes were approved for development on over 12 acres where one of those homes will a primary dwelling and one a secondary dwelling. The parcel cannot be split so the question becomes whether it is inappropriate to have two large homes on 12 acres. The answer is "not really." The projects should be reviewed on an individual basis as to the reality for what they represent. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 May 10,2006 Vice Mayor Baldwin commented a lot of the buildable parcels will likely be located in the vicinity of Gibson Creek canyon, and inquired as to the potential impacts, including traffic should a significant number of developments be targeted at this West Standley location. Commissioner Whetzel inquired as to the number of parcels located up Gibson Creek and questioned whether it is a known fact that such developments will occur. Vice Mayor Baldwin replied that it is not a known fact. He noted that the Gibson Creek/West Standley Street locale is a historically known walking area. Commissioner Whetzel commented much of this area is privately owned where walking is likely prohibited and some of these areas cannot be developed due to topography constraints. Vice Mayor Baldwin stated the community should be aware that the Western Hills Constraints Analysis indicated that 66 units could potentially be built in the hillside and that the number of dwellings can double with an approved Use Permit for a secondary unit. The community needs to know the process for finding out what can or cannot occur in the hillside. Commissioner Whetzel stated the intent of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations is to adopt an ordinance for the entire hillside. It appears the focus is on an area where the number of units at buildout and the corresponding locations are not known. Also, it is not known whether homes can be built above the proposed 1,000-foot elevation demarcation line. Director Stump stated the intent is for the proposed lower hillside areas to begin in the hills above Highland Avenue and extend to the south to the hills above Helen Avenue where the areas at the 1,000-foot elevation or higher would be in the upper hillside. Commissioner Whetzel agreed that while the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are necessary, there are provisions/standards in place that could be applied to projects. For example, the Ceja project was shaped into a doable project by using the existing Hillside Zoning Regulations that were already in place, as well as portions of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations. The Ceja project is above the 1,000-foot level. He suggested modifying the existing Hillside Zoning Regulations to comply with what was done to shape the Ceja project. The process of modifying the document so that standards can be effectively applied to hillside projects has been very lengthy. Councilmember McCowen commented the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations contain information that has been the subject of discussion for at least four public hearings at the Planning Commission level, as well as the City Council. He acknowledged that the process has been lengthy and stated, in his opinion, the process is proceeding in a reasonable fashion. The process slowed down some because there are several new Planning Commissioners and Councilmembers that had to become familiar with the proposed Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations, including the Western Hills Constraints Analysis study. Questions/concerns were raised concerning the Western Hills Constraints Analysis study relative to potential maximum buildout, feasibility of second units in conjunction with the areas projected at buildout addressed in the study, division of upper and lower hillside, what should the geotechnical requirements be, should there be any limits on accessory structures and other issues that must be appropriately reviewed before the Draft Hillside Zoning MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 May 10, 2006 Regulations can be adopted as an ordinance. The Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations represent a reasonable framework from which to work. Councilmember McCowen stated the alternative language suggested for engineering geologic reports may be worthwhile to consider particularly if property owners would not have to be unduly burdened with unnecessary reports as compared to the engineering geologic report requirements in the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations that appear to be onerous. He supported proceeding with the alternative geotechnical requirements that include a third party review. Commissioner Whetzel commented it is likely there will always be varying opinions concerning geotechnical reports. Councilmember McCowen agreed with the above statement, and stated if alternative geotechnical requirements could potentially spare a property owner from having to spend a lot of money on studies that an engineering geotechnical professional says are unnecessary, it may be worthwhile to have the option of spending a little money for a third party review/opinion in this regard. Councilmember Rodin inquired regarding the practice for City Council remanding issues back to the Planning Commission for further review. Director Stump stated the City Council does not have to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation on a project, issue, and/or document. Moreover, if the City Council finds an issue that the Planning Commission has never discussed, it may want to remand the issue back to the Commission for review. The seven topics Council remanded to the Planning Commission were addressed by the Commission and they are prepared for further discussion of these topics if this is Council's desire. Councilmember Rodin recommended defining the goals concerning each of the seven topics the City Council remanded back to the Planning Commission and determine how to most effectively/efficiently attain these goals. She further recommended Council/Commission comment on the seven issues to decide how best to proceed. 1. Second Residential Units Councilmember Rodin commented that second units should be reviewed on a case-by- case basis to determine whether or not there should be any second unit allowed for a development in the hillside. A maximum size should be established. Commissioner Pruden commented that all second units in the hillside must have a Use Permit. She does not agree with the size limit because there have been enough exceptions to demonstrate that 750 square feet is an "artificial cap" for large acreage. Homelessness will not be eliminated with second unit developments in the hillside. Planning Commission Chair Mulheren supports allowing for second units on hillside properties and does not support requiring a 750 square foot maximum size limit. Each second unit project should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. He agrees that each second unit requires discretionary review via a Use Permit. Vice Mayor Baldwin stated it is important to note that the City spent between $20,000 and $30,000 on the Western Hills Constraints Analysis, which very clearly states that second unit MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May 10, 2006 Page 9 developments should be avoided if at all possible in the hillside because the more population, the more fire danger is intensified. Also, the City Planning Department originally recommended that second unit developments be avoided for the same reason. He disagrees with Commissioner Pruden that there are a sufficient number of exceptions to demonstrate that second unit development is "no big deal" since construction of these units has not been completed so it is not known what impact these units will have on the aesthetics of the hillside and/or the potential traffic impacts on West Standley Street. He supports not allowing for second unit developments in the hillside. The State allows local jurisdictions based on health, safety, and general welfare reasons to set-a-side certain sections of the City where second unit developments are not acceptable. However, if a compromise is necessary, it would make sense to allow one small accessory structure/second unit less than 1,000 square feet rather than allowing for an unlimited number of accessory structures as currently drafted. Councilmember McCowen agrees that second unit dwellings should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis with a Use Permit where the matter of the square footage would be subject to the Use Permit. Commissioner Anderson inquired whether the matter of accessory units and second units are two separate matters. Councilmember McCowen stated "they can be." Commissioner Anderson stated the general intent for the State Legislature passing new laws in 2002 encouraging second units and limiting local jurisdictions' ability to regulate them is to allow for more infill developments and discourage urban spread/sprawl. Urban sprawl includes hills not just farm land. He does not support development above the 1,000- foot elevation level. Commissioner Whetzel supports the review of second unit developments on a case-by- case basis. Commissioner Jennings does not support restricting a property owner from the development of a second unit. He does agree that a Use Permit should be required for development of a second unit. He supports review of second unit developments on a case- by-case basis and cited the Ceja project as an example of allowing for two very large homes on 12 acres, He inquired whether second unit developments occurring in the upper level would differ from the lower level. It would likely be more expensive to develop a second unit in the upper level than the lower level. There are areas in the hillside such as the Helen Avenue hillside areas that can not be seen from any vantage point in town so it seems reasonable to allow for larger homes "tucked" into the hillside. He supports the concept of allowing for second units with approval of a Use Permit. He also supports the concept of providing for size restrictions for second units. 2. Day care homes and the State preemption Councilmember McCowen stated a Major Use Permit should be necessary for day care homes or residential care homes to the extent that the City can regulate such facilities. Commissioner Anderson supports allowing small care homes with six or fewer persons whether they operate as a 24-hour care facility or regular day care without securing a Use Permit. Large day care facilities, as defined above, would require Use Permit approval. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May 10, 2006 Page ]0 Commissioner Whetzel concurred with Commissioner Anderson in this regard. Commissioner Jennings stated the number of day trips would likely be fewer for residential day care facilities with six or less persons in a permanent location than those operating Small Family Day Care Homes where 'drop offs and pick ups" can occur throughout the day, and this could be problematic. He supported the concept of requiring a Use Permit. Councilmember McCowen supports the concept of restricting both day care and residential care facilities in the hillside because of the safety issue. Councilmember Rodin supports the concept of requiring a Major Use Permit for Large Family Day Care Homes and for all residential care homes regardless of whether the facility cares for six or fewer persons or six to twelve persons in the hillside. Commissioner Pruden expressed concern about the safety factor, and stated a Use Permit finding must be made that residential care homes would not harm the health, safety, and welfare of the community. She is not supportive of allowing day care even if such facilities are state regulatory in the upper portion of the hillside. She further expressed concern about evacuation of persons in these facilities in conjunction with constrained driveways and corresponding emergency response time where the Use Permits should be conditioned accordingly. Vice Mayor Baldwin agreed with Commissioner Jennings in that the more care facilities there are, the more traffic. Considering the value of the land, care home facilities would not likely be a concern at this time. Commissioner Jennings advised State CDF and Fire Protection may require compliance with safety regulations relative to egress/ingress from driveways in hillside locations so the issue concerning the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations may be moot. 3. Architecture/design elements Commissioner Jennings commented the design element that require developments to be earth-tone is too vague and recommended modification of the language to reflect that the color scheme blend well with the site. Commissioner Whetzel supported the concept that architecture and design elements be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, as there are a wide range of earth-tone colors. Commissioner Anderson does not have sufficient knowledge to state what visually works or does not work in terms of colors in the hillside. He favors the concept of requiring that residential color schemes be less conspicuous for hillside homes. Councilmember McCowen agreed that the color scheme of requiring earth-tone color be reviewed on a case-by-case basis so that homes appear less conspicuous. Vice Mayor Baldwin had no comment. Planning Commission Chair Mulheren commented there are other architecture/design element considerations in addition to color schemes that have to be reviewed in order for a residential unit to blend well with the environment. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May 10, 2006 Page 11 Commissioner Pruden commented the Hull/Piffero subdivision developments have set the standards for residential development. The homes are single-story and any potential massing appropriately mitigated to blend well with the environment. The key component from a visual perspective is to require that new developments blend effectively with the environment without being viewed as a predominate feature and/or focal point. "All buildings must be secondary to the beauty of the hillside." Councilmember Rodin reiterated that the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations state that developments must "blend" with the environment. There are homes in the hillside that can be seen and do not blend in with the environment so the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations may need to more specific when it comes to requiring that buildings in the hillside blend well. The dwellings do not necessarily have to be single-story provided they mix well with the surrounding terrain. Also, the cream-colored home in the HulI-Piffero subdivision does not blend well with the existing surroundings. 4. The number of allowed accessory buildings City Council Baldwin stated a public member at the March 29, 2006, Western Hills workshop indicated that second units and accessory buildings are a similar topic because accessory buildings can be converted to defacto second units. Councilmember Rodin did not have a specific recommendation, as she is generally opposed to more buildings/structures in the hillside. She inquired regarding the definition of accessory buildings. She favored the concept of having a "balance" with regard to accessory buildings, since property owners have the right to have sheds or other similar accessory buildings. The matter of accessory buildings should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Commissioner Pruden commented that accessory buildings should serve a function to the property. She recommended setting standards for a building envelope that includes accessory buildings and favors allowing for appropriate "clustering" of buildings/accessory units that complements the site. People can have swimming pools and a nexus such as an outdoor eating area/patio provided they comply with the development standards for a particular building envelope. She further recommended the building envelope compared to the number of acres be proportional by percentage along with an acceptable rationale and a plan for proper clustering of buildings to ensure property compatibility. Planning Commission Chair Mulheren agreed with Commissioner Pruden that second units and number of accessible buildings allowed should be reviewed according to the building envelope in conjunction with the number of acres on a case-by-case basis. Vice Mayor Baldwin recommended restricting the number of accessory buildings to one and/or a second unit on each parcel. As pointed out by Victoria Golden at the March 2006, hillside workshop, the conversion of guest houses, garages, and barns to second units is a major problem in Sonoma County. He acknowledged the State has mandated/required local governments to allow second units as a means of providing for affordable housing units where the original concept was granny units. Second units in the hillside do not correspond with the State mandate because these units are not constructed for affordable housing reasons. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12 May 10, 2006 Councilmember McCowen stated the concern raised is that people will construct an unlimited number of accessory units, and in his opinion, this is not likely to occur because such units are limited partly by site constraints and/or cost factors. People building homes in the hillside would not want to clutter up their properties with sheds and miscellaneous structures where the appearance would be aesthetically displeasing. He addressed the matter of people building guest rooms and later converting them to second units, and recommended possibly limiting a property owner to one accessory structure up to a maximum of 500 square feet by right and beyond this a Minor Use Permit would be required. Commissioner Anderson agreed generally with Councilmember McCowen concerning accessory units. However, it may not be realistic to guess whether a person may or may not desire to clutter a parcel with a second unit and numerous accessory buildings so some restrictions would likely be necessary. Commissioner Wetzel agreed with Commissioners Mulheren and Pruden that accessory buildings should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Accessory units would probably be self-restricting in that people would not want to "clutter-up" their property with numerous accessory buildings. Commissioner Jennings stated while people would probably not want to clutter up their properties, it should be regulated. Unrestricted application of secondary units and accessory units would not be representative of good planning. He agreed with Councilmember McCowen that one accessory building would be acceptable by right and a Use Permit would be required for any additional units. 5. Required Soils/.qeotechnical information Councilmember Rodin agrees that a third party review would be beneficial and accepts the alternative language for engineering geologic reports as proposed. Commissioner Pruden stated no one would want an inflexible geotechnical standard. However, no such document would be too comprehensive for the Western Hills. The new standards proposed would be appropriate for the lower portions of the hillside. She favors allowing for third party review. Planning Commission Chair Mulheren has no opinion on this topic. Vice Mayor Baldwin agrees with Councilmember Rodin and Commissioner Pruden relevant to this topic. Councilmember McCowen supports the proposed alternative language for engineering geologic reports and to allow for third party review. Commissioner Anderson concurred with Councilmember McCowen. Commissioner Whetzel stated the third party review would be cost prohibitive for some people, since there are competent and incompetent persons in all professions and who is to say that the third party could be the "incompetent" professional. He recommended that geotechnical report review be on a parcel-by-parcel basis as the projects come forward for discretionary review by the Planning Commission or City Council. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 13 May 10, 2006 Commissioner Jennings inquired as to who is burdened with the cost of third party review. It was noted the applicant must bear the cost. Commissioner Jennings does not favor a third party review. 6. Proposed upper and lower hillside areas Commissioner Jennings had no comment. Commissioner Whetzel favors the concept of providing for a demarcation of the hillside. He requested more information be made available concerning potential demarcation lines. Commissioner Anderson favors the 1,000-foot elevation as the demarcation line between the upper and lower hillside because the element of visibility is the primary factor as one gets higher into the hills. Commissioner McCowen stated the 1,000-foot elevation demarcation line tends to be arbitrary as there are higher parcels that are less visible and lower parcels that are more visible. He is not supportive of the 1,000-foot elevation concept as the demarcation line without understanding of other options. Vice Mayor Baldwin stated the 1,000-foot elevation demarcation line is a possibility. He referred to page 9 of the staff report that shows the Kilkenny residence at the 1,000-foot elevation and questioned this information. It is important that the community understand the locations of areas with higher density locations in correlation with the 1,000-foot elevation line. Planning Commission Chair Mulheren had no comment. Commissioner Pruden commented there seems to be some community consensus that the 1,000-foot elevation line may be a reasonable mark. She recommended taking the proposed 1,000-foot elevation line and incorporating a 10 percent buffer to allow for topography variations, which would allow flexibility for the elevation line to be moved to 1,100 feet or so. She indicated that Robert Werra recommends an elevation demarcation line at 1,100 feet. She favors having a division between upper and lower portions of the hillside. Councilmember Rodin thanked staff for taking the photographs that are included in the staff report for informational purposes, as this was very helpful. She favors the concept of allowing for a 1,000-foot elevation demarcation line, as well as Commissioner Pruden's recommendation to allow for a 10 percent buffer either way to provide for topography variations. 7. Helen Avenue Parcels Councilmember Rodin had no comment. Commissioner Pruden disagrees that the Helen Avenue property owners have not had sufficient time to comment on this issue. This topic was brought up at least two years ago and there has been numerous public testimony concerning this subject so time is not the issue. It may that more understanding is needed. Helen Avenue is located at the bottom of a very steep terrain. She supports that the parcels in the hills behind Helen Avenue be MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION May 10, 2006 Page 14 included as part of the Hillside Zoning District where compliance with the development standards/slope and other such criteria is required once the revised Hillside Zoning Regulations are adopted as an ordinance. Planning Commissioner Chair Mulheren originally questioned whether the Helen Avenue parcels should be included as part of the Residential Hillside Zoning District. He is unsure how they should be treated as to whether they should be included in the Residential Hillside Zoning District or if they are really visible. It may not be an issue if a particular height level is established separating the upper from the lower levels of the hillside. Vice Mayor Baldwin stated the issue of whether or not to include the Helen Avenue parcels in the Hillside Zoning District should not delay adoption of the revised, more improved and progressive Hillside Zoning Regulations Ordinance. He recommended if the issue causes delay in adoption of an ordinance that the parcels be exempt for the time being where the initial Hillside Zoning Regulations Ordinance would apply. Director Stump clarified that currently the Helen Avenue parcels are not located within the Residential Hillside Zoning District and, therefore, are not subject to the initial Hillside Zoning Regulations. It was noted by staff that the Helen Avenue residents were notified of tonight's meeting. Councilmember McCowen stated the process of adopting the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations is moving forward. There will be other public hearings on this matter. This will provide the opportunity for more people to address issues/concerns and provide input. Visibility is not the only criteria concerning the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations and stated other criteria are meant to be addressed by the document. Therefore, it makes sense that the Helen Avenue parcels be included in the Residential Hillside Zoning District where they would be subject to the revised Hillside Zoning Regulations when these regulations are adopted as an ordinance. Commissioner Anderson supports that the Helen Avenue parcels be included as part of the Residential Hillside Zoning District. Commissioner Whetzel stated the parcels in the hills behind Helen Avenue are located in the lower levels of the hillside. Commissioner Jennings agreed that these parcels are located in the lower portions of the hillside. There will likely be additional public input in this regard when the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are again before the Planning Commission for review. He inquired how to treat a parcel that is split between the upper and lower hillside levels, and noted it is likely that the distinguishing factor would be where the majority of the property lies. Director Stump stated the distinguishing factor may be the location of the proposed development in terms of elevation. The Councilmembers and Commissions agreed it was beneficial for the two bodies to dialogue and that the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are moving closer toward becoming an official document. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 May 10,2006 Commissioner Anderson recommended a different seating arrangement for future meetings so that Councilmembers and Commissioners can face one another. Councilmember McCowen commented the "required site area" is an issue that has not been addressed concerning the upper and lower hillside areas where the average cross slope is the determining factor. There may be other ways to factor in the required site area for the two hillside divisions other than the averaging of the cross slope, which, in his opinion, is "an artificial formula." Essentially, the land does not conform to such a formula. Commissioner Pruden stated the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations is a complex document and ordinance amendments would likely occur as exceptions or new issues rise for review and consideration. Councilmember Rodin addressed the pedestrian facilities portion of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations, and noted section 3 of the document states that "public pedestrian right-of-ways or walkways may be required along private streets in new subdivisions provided the City Council adopts a public trails plan that includes the subject property and a feasible walkway route and that the appropriate legal findings can be made to support the requirement." The City does not currently have a public trails plan in place and recommended that such a plan be developed with the goal of working toward establishing public right-of-ways through the hills wherever these may be. Director Stump noted it appears there is consensus that the revision of the Hillside Zoning Regulations will move forward and that the document will go back to the Planning Commission for further review and consideration in light of the recent hillside discussions. 6. ADJOURNMENT q~,~/_being no fu~her busine~ss, the meeting adjourned at 6:27 p.m. C~thy F:~(awadl~-~ecording~reta~ MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16 May 10,2006