Loading...
2001/02/15 City Council MinutesCITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES for: CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT STUDY SESSION ON THE FOLLOWING DRAFT ORDINANCES: DRAFT MOBILE HOME PARK CONVERSION ORDINANCE DRAFT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ORDINANCE JOINT STUDY SESSION MINUTES February 15, 2001 Thursday The Rohnert Park City Council and the Planning Commission met this date for a joint study session open to the public to discuss two draft ordinances, commencing at approximately 6:00 p.m. in the Senior Center, 6800 Hunter Drive, Rohnert Park, with Mayor Mackenzie presiding. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mackenzie called the joint study session to order at approximately 6:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: (5) Councilmembers Reilly, Spiro, and Vidak- Martinez; Vice Mayor Flores; Mayor Mackenzie Absent: ( 0 ) None Present: (1) Commissioner Militello Absent: (4) Commissioners Hardy, Mochel, Nordin, and Nilson Staff present for all or part of the meeting: City Attorney Strauss, Interim Assistant City Manager Stephens, and Community Development Director Kaufman. City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(2 ) UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES: [For public comment on items not listed on the agenda.] Mayor Mackenzie stated that in compliance with State law (The Brown Act), citizens wishing to make comments regarding the draft mobilehome park conversion ordinance may do so after the staff presentation. At this time, there were no citizens wishing to comment on items not listed on the agenda. DRAFT MOBILE HOME PARK CONVERSION ORDINANCE: Draft ordinance establishing requirements and procedures for the conversion of mobile home parks to community mobile home parks, mobile home park condominiums, and non - mobile home park uses, and for the cessation of a mobile home park use. 1. Staff Presentation: Planning and Community Director Kaufman noted that Planning Commissioners Nordin and Mochel would not be able to make the meeting this evening. She also noted that Planning Commissioners Nilson and Hardy were stuck at work. At this time, Director Kaufman directed the Councilmembers and Commissioner Militello to the 10 -page staff report, also available to the public. She gave a brief Power Point presentation, providing an overview of the Mobile Home Park Conversion Ordinance. During the presentation, she and City Attorney Strauss responded to various Council questions. Following the staff presentation, Director Kaufman indicated that she had already received some comments regarding the draft mobilehome park conversion ordinance. T he comments included the following suggestions / opinions: (1) The City should adopt an overlay district similar to American Canyon; (2) A one -year notice, rather than six months, for impact report per proposed ordinance section 17.47.060; (3) Impact report should include number of homes in the park older than 25 years; (4) Availability of rent control in the relocation spaces; *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(3 ) (5) In the alternative locations, substitute "Sonoma, Napa, and Marin Counties" with "local geographic area, but not farther than the areas of Sonoma, Napa, and Marin Counties." Councilmembers and Commissioner(s) continued to ask staff questions along the following lines: (1) The latitude the City has in terms of adopting the ordinance; (2) The necessity of setting up a clear process for applying for a change of use; (3) The authority of the Council to mitigate matters; (4) The definition of "reasonable" in terms of the cost of relocation; (5) Adding Lake County to the list of relocation Counties; (6) How to prevent a mobilehome park owner from going out of business; (7) Option to turn a mobilehome park into another rental use, such as condominiums; (8) The need to do more than just an overlay district to protect the residents and to provide them certain benefits should they have to move; (9) Protection from legal challenges in the proposed ordinance; (10) The process and costs of mitigation in the event of a park closure; (11) Negotiating a purchase price for a mobile home park; (12) A park owner's right to close down a mobile home park; (13) How can the City mitigate for a resident with an older mobilehome which cannot be moved; (14) Where is there an example of a park owner that had no success in relocating the residents, so he /she decided to close the park? At this time, Mayor Mackenzie called for public comments from the audience. He indicated that it would be acceptable for them to stand in their place, state their name, and proceed with their comments. 1. Heloie from Valley Village, was recognized and shared comments on the stress and strain of moving for very elderly residents. She noted that many elderly people living in mobilehome parks have chronic diseases and would be overly concerned with moving their older homes and the value of those older homes. *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(4 ) 2. John from Rancho Feliz, was recognized and commented on how distressing it is that people work their whole lives only to be pushed out of their residences. He suggested that park owners interested in building condos purchase some farm land. 3. Violet from Las Casitas, was recognized and commended the Council and Commission for working to protect the residents of mobilehome parks. She expressed her concerns with relocation in terms of quitting one's job or long commutes to get to work. 4. Marie, from Rancho Feliz, was recognized and discussed her concerns for the residents on fixed incomes and what they would do when rent subsidies ran out. She also discussed the difficulty of getting the true value of an older mobile home. She said that relocation should be within the same geographical area so residents can continue, in particular, seeing their doctors. She SUGGESTED that all notices relevant to a mobilehome park sale or conversion should be posted in the clubhouse where all residents are more likely to see them, and they should be posted a year in advance or accordingly. She closed by expressing her concerns that many residents in mobilehome parks would have a difficult time qualifying to rent another residence due to their fixed incomes. At this point, Councilmembers and Commissioner(s) reiterated their desire to look into increasing the areas of relocation, to a one -year timeline for park closures, to the use of registered receipt mail for notices, and to determine a fair way to appraise older homes. 5. Dave, from Valley Village, was recognized and SUGGESTED that an independent appraiser be used to appraise older homes for their material worth. 6. Jean, a regional manager for G.S.M.O.L., was recognized and clarified the use of the term "condominium" as used in the draft ordinance and as opposed to the term "cooperative." She went on to elaborate on the purpose of an overlay district, and she indicated that the City should have a conversion ordinance in case there is a zone change. *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(5 ) 7. Richard, a student at Sonoma State University, was recognized and expressed his support for allowing mobilehome park residents as much time as possible to relocate within this area as it is very difficult. He raised the question to staff about Rohnert Park's level of responsibility for providing housing opportunities for those with less than adequate income, and staff explained about the State Housing and Community Development Department and ABAG numbers. 8. David Spangenberg Esa for Jim Goldstein, mobilehome park owner, was recognized and pointed out various inconsistencies in the draft ordinance with State law. He outlined a variety of scenarios when a park is closed and converted to no use, or closed to build a subdivision or for commercial use, and he insisted that there are several different sets of laws that apply depending upon what use the park will be converted to. He also referred to the Government Code for the limitations of relocation benefits, and he noted that there is another set of laws if the residents want to buy the park. He urged the Council to bring the ordinance into concert with what has happened in State law within the past 15 years and to have the ordinance address what the park owner is going to be doing with the property. Finally, he said he would be happy to work with the City Attorney to refer to the applicable code sections in an effort to break up the draft ordinance so that it adequately and legally addresses all of the possible scenarios depending upon what the park owner wants to do with the property. 9. Len Carlson from Rancho Grande, was recognized and expressed his support for the draft ordinance and the overlay district. He commented on the City's rent control ordinance and his desire to remain in the Rohnert Park area. He shared a few SUGGESTIONS for acquiring the mobilehome park property: (1) Approach a non - profit organization; (2) City could consider buying the park; (3) City could find some other piece of land. 10. Larry Esparza, from Rancho Verde, was recognized and expressed his support for an overlay district as a means to give some assurances to residents of being able to stay in the Rohnert Park area. He said that his personal experiences with the park owner of Rancho Verde have not been friendly and amicable, and he noted that the legalese and slick talk of the lawyers *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(6 ) has a lot of the elderly residents confused and concerned. He expressed a desire to work with the park owner towards a sale of the park to the residents if that were an option, and he reiterated that closing the park would put a great strain on the residents in terms of relocating within this new economy. 11. Eda, from Valley Village, was recognized and asked the City Attorney for clarity on eminent domain. At the request of Vice Mayor Flores, City Attorney Strauss also described "inverse condemnation." At the conclusion of the public comments, Mayor Mackenzie accommodated citizens who wished to add to their previous comments. Heloie, a previous speaker, touched on the roots in terms friends, job security, and home ownership that many of the older residents of the mobilehome parks have here in Rohnert Park. She said that after 30 -plus years in a job or a home, the possibility of relocation or the payment of back rent can be overwhelming to many. Larry, a previous speaker, discussed the business aspect of being a park owner, namely that a park owner has various assets to make money from. He also said that as a GSMOL President, he has received several comments from people about the tone and character of the treatment as well as the unfair tactics they have been subject to in dealing with the park owner of Rancho Verde. Mr. Spangenberg, attorney for that park owner, indicated that he didn't know if the owner was interested in selling Rancho Verde to the residents, but that the owner is currently negotiating with residents to purchase his park in Palm Springs and that the case has been in litigation for ten years. Les, from Valley Village, was recognized and asked if all aspects of the draft ordinance would apply to both the residents in a mobilehome park on long -term leases and those on month -to -month tenancy. He expressed concern for residents on long -term leases, noting that they may not want to go to court for legal recourse. City Attorney Strauss indicated that the draft ordinance does not divide the residents based on leases or month -to -month tenancy. *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(7 ) 2. Council /Commission discussion /direction to staff: Council questions to staff centered on how to value the mobile homes, and City Attorney Strauss indicated that she would need to do more research in that matter. Councilmembers and Commissioner(s) then shared their perspectives on this evening's process. At 8:06 p.m., Planning Commissioner Hardy ARRIVED. He declined an opportunity to comment at this point. Council discussion concluded with CONCURRENCE on two matters: (1) The need for clarity as far as statutory requirements and legal protections for the residents; (2) An ongoing responsiveness to the needs of the mobilehome park residents. At the direction of Director Kaufman, Council and Commissioners CONCURRED that staff would work toward completing a new draft for the April 12, 2001, Planning Commission meeting, at which time a public hearing would be held. RECESS: Mayor Mackenzie declared a recess at 8:08 p.m. RECONVENE: Mayor Mackenzie reconvened the Council at approximately 8:21 p.m. with all Councilmembers and Commissioners Militello and Hardy present. DRAFT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ORDINANCE: Draft ordinance establishing a Growth Management Program for the City consistent with the City's new General Plan and voter - approved Measure N, the Urban Growth Boundary Measure. 1. Staff Presentation: Mayor Mackenzie again noted that Planning Commissioners Nordin and Mochel would not be able to make the meeting this evening. He also noted that Planning Commissioner Nilson was stuck at work. *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(8 ) At this time, Director Kaufman directed the Councilmembers and Commissioners to the 5 -page staff report, also available to the public. She gave a brief Power Point presentation, providing an overview of the draft Growth Management Ordinance. Following the staff presentation, Director Kaufman indicated that she had already received some comments regarding the draft growth management ordinance. The comments included the following suggestions /opinions: (1) Page 6, Section 17.66.050 A, Item 6, refer to "substantially complete" rather than "final "draft "; (2) Page 6, Section 17.66.050 B, Item 2, refer to "not exceeding the allocated treatment capacity" which has to do with the listing of public utilities; (3) Page 6, Section 17.66.050 A, Item 3, the criteria for balancing non - residential and residential development within a project should not apply in areas where only residential land use has been designated, and that would be the Northeast Area where there is only residential land use; (4) How is a residential unit defined? Does it include assisted living units? (5) The 225 -units per year is based on too -low of an average household size; (6) Draft ordinance does not address the fifth bullet of Policy GM -3, which is the Growth Management Element will include a mechanism to take into account two or more years of no residential approvals. Director Kaufman shared questions that staff had in developing the draft ordinance as follows: (1) Should the trigger, and if applied, the cap, be based on discretionary approvals or building permits? (2) Does not having a cap, until it is triggered by a three -year average, address the fifth bullet of policy GM -3, because there is no limit initially, and that could result in an average annual growth of less than 225 units over the full 20 -year period? *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(9 ) (3) Considering that developers and /or property owners are currently inquiring about developing four major Specific Plan Areas, does the Council set priorities in terms of the areas to be developed first? Mayor Mackenzie briefly summed up the General Plan process to date. Councilmembers and Commissioners posed questions to staff, and Director Kaufman and City Attorney Strauss responded. Questions raised included the following issues/ suggestions: (1) How to prioritize projects based on the number of affordable units in a housing project; (2) The process of drafting up Specific Plan regulations, including those that would apply to developers; (3) The implications of changing from "final Development Agreement" to "substantially complete Development Agreement "; (4) The rationale for not exceeding the allocated treatment capacity; (5) How should the average persons per household be determined, and how should students be factored into the average; (6) A more mathematical approach that would focus on the 1% population growth rate; (7) Setting the baseline population based on the most recent census and other relative information; (8) The mechanism for the annual review with the Council of the population figures; (9) A manner to determine the number of students at Sonoma State University; (10) The implications of the possible annexation of Sonoma State University and /or Canon Manor for the City's 1% population growth figure. At this time, Mayor Mackenzie called for public comments from the audience. He indicated that it would be acceptable for them to stand in their place, state their name, and proceed with their comments. 1. Van Logan was recognized and commended the draft ordinance. He commented on the three -to -four year period of zero growth, noting that it began last August of 2000. Referring to Section 17.66.040, Item D, he SUGGESTED that an adjustment be made to the General Plan to limit the number of building permits issued within the four -year period *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(10) to a number of permits which reflects the 225 units per year, such as 900 units, and then start the trigger cap mechanism in the fifth year and only allow the 225 units per year. He ASKED Director Kaufman to read the Growth Management fifth bullet to show that the General Plan would allow for this. 2. Ceci.ly Talbert, on behalf of developers for the University District, was recognize and touched on the tension between two matters in the General Plan: The initiative which binds the City for 20 years to certain policies unless the voters change them, and the two places in the General Plan which talk about for any three -year period development agreements to 225 units. She SUGGESTED that language be added to clarify that in any consecutive three -year period the cumulative number of units built not exceed the average approximate one - percent growth rate. She also discussed the possibility of financial problems arising should developers have to build several hundred units in order to finance the infrastructure. She again encouraged the City to allow for cumulative growth. Next, she discussed the problems that may arise in relation to Development Agreements if the City tries to predict the population on a year -to -year basis. She SUGGESTED more flexibility in terms of population predictions, such as looking at overall numbers. Finally, she asked where in the General Plan it says what the trigger cap actually is, and she SUGGESTED ways to apply whatever trigger cap is put in place, notably looking back on the trigger cap, and then applying it forward. Staff responded to Council inquiries regarding the comments shared by Ms. Talbert. 3. Eric was recognized and shared very specific comments TT otrl. aspects of file draft or U.l nalllJe HC first STIJGGESTEL adding language to the General Plan to give it more flexibility in order to achieve the voter - enacted average annual one - percent growth rate. He added that using the most recent census would be helpful in that process. Secondly, he commented on Item A from Section 17.66.020, and he noted that there might be elements in this policy that could work to discourage affordable housing and mixed -use projects. Mixed -use projects could lag based upon the unavailability of the residential component, and that could be contrary to the City's interest. In the same section, he also *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(11) commented on project appeals that were not related to the number of units. In Section 17.66.040, he referenced the chart, and for Example 4 he offered a variety of suggestions, such as considering the five -year average to get some flexibility. In Section 17.66.050, Item A, he SUGGESTED establishing priority development categories or areas. In regard to affordable housing, he encouraged staff to look for opportunities that would allow for the mixing of housing prices to get mixed neighborhoods. Finally he encouraged the staff to build discretion and flexibility into the process of determining the number of housing units and its tie with the population. At the suggestion of Mayor Mackenzie, Eric AGREED to submit to staff his detailed comments in written form in a timely manner. Van Logan ASKED the staff to qualify the language balancing non - residential and residential where there is no non - residential within a specific plan area. 4. Mr. Harrington was recognized and SUGGESTED that staff take the one - percent population growth per year average and convert that to a number of units. He also commented on the trigger cap as having the opposite effect due to its rigid language and as creating a spike- stop- spike -stop pattern. 5. Richard Schultz, a student, was recognized and touched on the various local and economic contributions of students to the Rohnert Park community. He discussed the limited amount of housing available at Sonoma State University and the extraordinary lengths most students go through to find local and nonlocal housing. He urged staff to count student numbers when making judgments as to the construction of dwelling units and the future development of the Rohnert Park community. 6. Shawn Kilat was recognized and noted that the balancing of non - residential and residential was to apply citywide and not by Specific Plan area. She encouraged staff to make sure language is in place to avoid an imbalance between jobs and housing. She asked them to keep in mind that there should be some balance or correlation between the number of jobs that would be generated by a new development and the housing that would be available or would become available. *City Council /Planning Commission City of Rohnert Park *CONCURRENT MEETINGS MINUTES February 15, 2001 Study Session Page(12) 2. Council /Commission discussion /direction to staff: Councilmembers and Commissioners CONCURRED on several matters as follows: (1) To conduct another study session at the time staff comes back with the revised draft ordinance; (2) To continue to meet in workshops and /or study sessions to discuss the draft ordinance as deemed necessary; (3) To keep the focus on defining and discussing the voter - enacted one - percent average annual growth rate; (4) To use plain English as much as possible to help everyone understand the contents and status of the draft ordinance. Commissioner Hardy SUGGESTED moving towards a formula and determining reliable sources that would help set objective parameters and factors that might come into play when determining the population and /or population targets. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Mayor Mackenzie ADJOURNED the joint work session at approximately 10:02 p.m. Katy Leonard, - -�� Certified Shorthand Reporter CSR No. 11599 ake Mackenzie, Mayor lty of Rohnert Park *City Council /Planning Commission