Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 05-21-1996 • ! Regular Meeting May 21, 1996 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 21, 1996, in the Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. The meeting was called ta order at 7:30 by Commissioner Jennings. * ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Jennings, Johnson, Lockhart and Zika; Eddie Peabody, Community Development Director; Tasha Huston, Associate Planner, Ralph Kachadourian, Assistant Planner and Gaylene Burkett, Recording Secretary. Absent: Commissioner Geist • * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. Jennings led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. ' * ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA The minutes of the May 7, 1996, meeting were approved as submitted. * ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None * WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None * PUBLIC HEARING 8.1 PA 96-019 City of Dublin General Plan Amendment and Zoning Ordinance Amendment (Rental Availability Ordinance Repeal). The City's Rental - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting 44 May 21, 1996 [5-2lpcmi] ~ ~ ~ Availability Ordinance was adopted in 1991 to require that a minimum of 10% of the units in large multi-family projects be maintained as rental units for a period of five years. The City Council has determined that the City's objective regarding rental housing availability is being met by the housing market, and that the Rental Availability Ordinance is no longer necessary. The Ordinance is proposed to be repealed. The Housing Element of the Dublin General Plan will need to be amended to remove the reference to this Ordinance. Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report. Tasha Huston, Associate Planner gave the staff report. She gave a brief outline of the Rental Availability Ordinance. She gave some guidelines of how the Ordinance was adopted and what it referred to. On February 6, 1996, the subject of repealing the Ordinance was raised at the Joint Study Session meeting. ~ There was information presented at that meeting that the total rental units in the City was estimated at 35%. ~I She stated that additional data indicates rental availability was being met by owner responsibility and the regulations were no longer necessary. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Resolution recommending the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration, approval of a General Plan I Text Amendment and repeal of the Rental Availability Ordinance. Cm. Zika asked if we repeal the Ordinance would people be able to offer condominiums as rentals. What ' was the vacancy rate in Dublin? Ms. Huston stated staff did a rough survey and the vacancy rate was 1- 3% which is consistent with the ' State Department of Finance. The overall vacancy rate was low throughout the City. Cm. Zika asked what the City does with the in-lieu fees? Ms. Huston stated the City had not yet received any in-lieu fees. The theory to the Ordinance was that they would be used to subsidize rent. Cm. Zika was concerned about the low vacancy rates. The reason the original law was passed was because you couldn't find a place to rent in the City. . Cm. Johnson asked if the low vacancy rental rate was due to the monthly rental payments? Ms. Huston gave the current rental rates. Rental rates range from $600 to $900 a month for one bedroom, $700 to $930 a month for two bedrooms and $1175 to $1350 a month for three bedrooms. Cm. Zika asked if Dublin's vacancy rate was similar to Livermore and Pleasanton? Ms. Huston stated that Livermore had a 3.8% vacancy rate and Pleasanton had a 5% vacancy rate. Eddie Peabody, Community Development Director stated the major issue was there has not been any construction of multi family housing for quite a while. Cm. Zika asked if the Kaufman & Broad Donlan Canyon project would be rentals? Mr. Peabody stated they are townhomes and will be offered for sale. He stated that they could be bought by an investor and offered for rent. Cm. Johnson asked how the study was done? Do they use the ta7c bill address to determine whether it was rented. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting 45 May 21, 1996 [5-21 pcmi] ' ~ . • • Ms. Huston stated yes, and it would depend on where the taac bill was being sent. Cm. Jennings stated if there was an impound account, the t~ bill would go to the property owner for their records only and there is an "A" that appears on the tax records that states "absentee owner". Cm. Jennings stated the title company would do a more entailed check on absentee owners. Mr. Carrington may not have used that method. Cm. Zika asked if he owned a business in Pleasanton and had a tax bill for his house sent to the business address but lived in Dublin, how would that show on the tax bill? He questioned the methodology on the figures. Cm. Jennings responded that it would show a different address for the tax bill. It will show the person's address, who lives in the home and the mailing address for the tax bill. Ms. Huston stated the methodology was conducted by Mr. Carrington and she would look into it if the Planning Commission was not comfortable with the methodology. Cm. Jennings asked about public policy with the State of California, requiring that a housing element of a City's General Plan make available an adequate supply of rental housing for all people of economic segments, does this whole chapter get removed? Will it make it appear that Dublin does not care about having rental units available for people of all economic segments? Ms. Huston replied we still have our General Plan which addresses all economic segments. Steve Hicks, Kaufman and Broad, was here on behalf of Matt Koart to urge the Planning Commission to recommend repeal of the Rental Availability Ordinance. Cm. Zika asked what the units would sell for. Mr. Hicks stated he did not have that information. Cm. Jennings closed the public hearing. Cm. Lockhart stated that if the Ordinance was no longer necessary, then why have it. On motion by Cm. Lockhart, seconded by Cm. Johnson, and with a vote of 4-0, with Cm. Geist absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 96- APPROVING PA 96-019 RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT AND REPEAL OF THE RENTAL AVAILABILITY ORDINANCE NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting 46 May 21, 1996 [5-21 pcmi] t • ~ ~ 10.1 Code Enforcement Report - A report given by Staff updating the Planning Commission on various code enforcement concerns and issues throughout the City. Eddie Peabody explained Mr. Kachadourian's program. Ralph Kachadourian, Assistant Planner, gave a presentation and explained the City's code enforcement program. In 1995, there was approximately 121 code enforcement cases, and as of this year there were approximately 34 cases. We now have a part time Zoning Enforcement Officer, Dean Johnson, helping with code enforcement. Mr. Kachadourian did a slide presentation showing the Planning Commission the various code enforcement items that we've encountered. He explained what types of calls we may received throughout the City. Citizens have'called the Planning Department with concerns regarding homes in their neighborhood that need some attention such as over grown weeds, miscellaneous trash, inoperative vehicles or illegally parked motor homes. Another area that the Planning Department has received complaints on are fence heights, home occupation type violations or businesses that do not comply with current regulations. He presented a slide showing a furniture store that displays its furniture on the outside of the building. He indicated that particular store had been contacted and they indicated they had storage problems. Dean Johnson, part time Zoning Enforcement Officer was working with the owner to remedy the situation. He showed some commercial trucks parked at the old Lucky's site, and indicated there was a commercial parking facility in Dublin on Houston Place that may be an option. Mr. Peabody stated staff would look into alternatives for the truck parking situation and pass it on to City Council. Cm. Johnson stated he did not know that parking was available at Houston Place. He stated that the City could notify the truck drivers by putting a flyer in their windows telling them that the parking was available. If he saw the trucks there, he would stop by and let them know. Mr. Kachadourian continued with the slide presentation. He showed slides of the Taco Bell site, regarding Conditional Use Permit compliance requirements on the Taco Bell drive through. He concluded his presentation. . Mr. Peabody stated he went to the City Council to ask their permission for a minor change in the Zoning Ordinance. If there is a revocation hearing and it's a very controversial item it shouldn't go to the Zoning Administrator, it should go straight to the Planning Commission. Cm. Zika asked about the outside sidewalk sale stores. Mr. Kachadourian stated that we had an Outdoor Sales Ordinance that covered that situation. The Ordinance allows six sidewalk sales events per year at four days per event. Cm. Zika stated some stores have things out there every weekend. Mr. Peabody stated that brings us back to our enforcement policy and how will we handle future cases. Unless we receive a complaint, we won't go out and enfarce it. We have a reactive enforcement policy, not a proactive policy. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regulaz Meeting 47 May 21, 1996 [5-2lpcmi] ~ M ~ Cm. Johnson felt most businesses did not know about most of the City's policies and Ordinances. The City may want to send a letter out to inform them. Mr. Peabody stated it was a policy issue. It should be enforced by the City Council or Chamber of Commerce. Enforcement in any community is what the decision makers want it to be. Cm. Zika stated City Council did not want to have a proactive enforcement policy. He stated he had tried to get the policy changed. Cm. Johnson stated maybe the City could have set days that businesses have a sidewalk sale, and have a policy that other than the designated days, nothing would be allowed. Mr. Kachadourian stated that any other comments and suggestions that the Commission may have regarding enforcement, he would be happy to hear them. Cm. Jennings asked how Dublin citizens were told that the only reason we ask for their name on complaints was so that we could contact them on the status of their complaint and that it was not public information. Mr. Kachadourian explained how the complaint policy worked and the Government Code states that the City must keep the confidentiality of complainant names for protection purposes. When we receive the citizens name and address, it makes the complaint legitimate. Mr. Peabody stated our policy was to get back to the complainant within 48 hours, and let them know the status of the situation and what action we were taking. Cm. Jennings asked about anonymous complaints and that they may not warrant further action unless the Community Development Director or City Manager states otherwise. What if it is anonymous and it does warrant further action? Mr. Kachadourian stated we would pursue the issue and contact the owner directly. Cm. Jennings asked how often a zoning violation went to court and the accuser had to go to court. Mr. Kachadourian stated it had only happened once. The person with the zoning violation wanted to know who his accuser was and the judge told him that information was confidential. Cm. Johnson asked about the property maintenance situation in Danville which appeared in the newspaper. What would happen if a reporter went around and took ugly pictures and did an article on it. There was no response to Cm. Johnson's question. Mr. Peabody stated most complaints were in residential areas. Cm. Johnson would like to see property maintenance problems cleaned up, but was not sure how to do it. • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting 48 May 21, 1996 [5-2lpcmi] . . ~ ~ Cm. Zika asked if he paved his driveway to the side, could he park a boat or a recreational vehicle. Mr. Kachadourian replied yes. However there was some limitation to parking in side yards. Mr. Peabody stated the Planning Commission could always call us and complain and it would be a legitimate complaint. Mr. Kachadourian stated our success rate with complaints from citizens has been very good. Cm. Jennings stated Pleasanton had something on their books about having a recreational vehicle behind a fence. Mr. Kachadourian stated our Ordinance stated that a motor home was allowed to be parked in the rear yard and screened by a six foot fence. He stated he had received a lot of calls about RV parking. Mr. Peabody stated we would be working on a New Zoning Ordinance this year and the important issues would be discussed at a study session to determine the regulations for those issues. Cm. Jennings asked what would happen next, what was the procedure? Mr. Peabody stated he would take the request and talk to the City Manager, prepare something and have a public hearing and go forward to the City Council. He stated when we were working on the Zoning Ordinance we could arrange a discussion and then it wbuld be appropriate to make the recommendations for changes at that time. Cm. Zika asked about accessory structures, what was that? Mr. Kachadourian stated that sheds are considered accessory structures and the Zoning Ordinance also considers swimming pools as accessory structures. Mr. Kachadourian concluded his pr.esentation on code enforcement. Cm. Lockhart asked about the commercial aspect, and how can we become more proactive in enforcing no use of A-frame signs and violations. Mr. Peabody stated that there would need to be a discussion that takes place between the City Council and the Planning Commission in arder to change the policy. Cm. Johnson stated the courteous solution would be for someone from staff to take a portion of the sign ordinance to the violators and let them know they are in violation. Mr. Peabody stated that would be a policy issue. Cm. Lockhart stated that driving down the street, he wouldn't know if someone was operating without a permit. Mr. Peabody stated the City would know. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regulaz Meeting 49 May 21, 1996 [5-2lpcmi] ~ Y ~ ~ Cm. Jennings stated that they should cover two issues for the joint study session meetings, sign regulations and code enforcement. Mr. Peabocl,y asked the Planning Commission if he could bring back Mr. Kachadourian a couple of times per year for an update. Cm. Jennings asked for a before and after update. Mr. Peabody stated we could try, however, some of the slides shown tonight were not documented complaints. Cm. Jennings gave direction for staff to discuss this further. She thanked Mr. Kachadourian for his presentation. Mr. Peabody stated June 15 was still the field trip for the Planning Commission and staff. Cm. Zika asked if we have anything around here that promotes old style, garages in back and alley ways?. Mr. Peabody stated there were a number of projects with garages in back, but has no seen an ally ways in a long time. ~ Cm. Zika stated he like that concept. It promoted neighbors getting to know each other. Cm. Zika stated another concept was a zero lot line with a driveway down the other side of the house. Mr. Peabody replied yes. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ lanning Comm sion Chairpers n ATTEST: G~lN~- l Community Development Dire or - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting 50 May 21, 1996 [5-21 pcmi]