HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 7416 N.C.S. 06/14/1976MLH mi
6-`l1=' 7.57415'Resolution N
-
N
n � I RESO� P w I M
q'
I. r.
LUTI,ON ADO TIhNG INTERIY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP �EN�.��
I I I
d N,
Uhl'S� S,TEN!
d t Ilu d i� �r �'� r i �� N 1 3 a d-Itp y01
fl p hb, 4 1I ? I d , i• -I h d i Y
M1 �f0 Y J... u
u f I
III ul
" a h ,�
D uw u1�'I
li
tit,�°, Berson.
' I I
CEDa BY CO P James L Har-
LT LTNCILMAN -_
SECOND
ED BY. CQiJNCILM?N -_ M Patri+cia-H.illgoss at'a:
&ajourrnedMeeting of the ;City Council of the
City of P,etaluma,.,on the 14th day of...........................=----- �7une 1976_.
WHEREAS,,- thii8- Council, desires to make,, a thorough
study of.,..,the, impact and effectiven'eyss of the, 'Re'sidenti;al Develop
ti r
u t Cont_ y for the ,past five, y,eraYrs; arid,;
I�
�1 �1I
_em much stu
...e
,I a '
Nr.
men,l ,.I d�r� ��HEREAS, is ry ,dy cannot be completed before th;e
� ' ,I f IY .. , �,u".•" I i� - , SII , A eb d v tr i
I �I presyent iesideti,ntiial De,velopmeri"t Contr1 1.ol Sys,teI.m'° exp -rens `b,y its
a
!terms, anfd'i,
� if I ,q I {, d d h '�„ d F I r p'� N J � I ,x I � I y �, d, , _' M �,. � • ry Yit I
�I N o ��
„� It �� a� WHERIAS,� fhis {Council 'finds, an`d d'eela�res .t�ha-t until
l -
N F
a Y �sucn,�stua:°I� �s�'
' ur N i
I �
• - com leted arida anal zed a � n
I '�N 4 y - - I lavaging
ryl Y i tl� od � �ul I I i Y ,.
I i
f I � � I s o'f m ,
p q
h
I
. d � n in�'
1 t erim me�anM^ .
res,clen�=•,al I�dervelorvment,'i��s� r..e uire'd;
u II N69,THEr
T,,-.,, RE "Ci'LPetaluma
' adopt an Interim. Residential Development Control ;System for the r
City in th,e form: attached herejto aril ,made apart. he,reb,,—f
it
� d h
� I I I a � )I I P tl I'� I ,' bu, r ld. PI ,� � I q �„ u• �, 6
h �„ yh� w
b i b d N qr
r ji
In I t.
't 1
7 ��Ia ”
MA
4.
under; The power and autlior'it y co�iiferred��rupon, this Council. by they Charter' o b 'Cit��
y f said
y.
I hereb certif th he�hfore oino, Resolution was duly an
_ y y at t g b, ` � y, -,� �d regularly introduced and�
adopted by the Couneil"of the City of Petaluma ori the - -:_ 14th ---:_ ----
daX' of June 19. 6 by °the following,'votes:
AYES. .councilmen' Ha-rbers;o.n, Hillill.go,s;s , MatTtei,J. an`d Mayor-. P-.u.tnam -
NOES: Council-men� Brunner Cavanagh, and Pert -y
t
ABSENT: ..None.
ATTEST,:
V _
ity Clerk. Q 7—F
%Q Mayor-
. FORM,.CA 2 7 /74' COUNCIL— @ FIL-JL$/off 77 E — -
INTERIM' .RESIDENTZ�AL SYST
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL _ _ EM'
'FOR THE CITY OF. P,ETALUMA
I..' PURPOSE OF THE INTERIM RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL.
SYSTEM.
Early in 1971 the City .Counei.l, imposed a temporary ,mora-
torium on subd v s on, approval and zoning, -changes in the City of
Petaluma for'the .purpose of 'temporarily halting .residential de.
velopment while planning 'studies were being undertaken•._ Short-
ly thereafter a special Development'"•Policy Advisory Committee
was established and this committee in cooperation with Williams
& Moc
ne,ndependent planning consultants retained by the City,
T prepared a •Development Policy which, was 'reviewed' and re ended'
favorably Py„the `Planying Commission. The City. Council adopted
the Develo went Polio. in June,, 1971.
After extensive public hearings ,and full expression of
viewsCity, h adopted
EnvironmentalsDesignsPlan`shi.ncMarch,t1972 eestablished''by resolu-
y g_ y
tion the City's policy with, respect to residential construction
and. population growth- and reaffirmed, the cessation of the mora-,
p 1972, adopted,
and, ado ted the Hou'' P
trot S stem, in Au ust, 19•
g.
p sing Element of
ntia
torium in A ril,�the Reside eve o men on
the General Plan in ;S.eptember,
Sy
. l9.7'2`.,
These policies, plans., control system and elements, to-
gether with -the 1962 Petaluma General ,Plan, constitute the Peta-
luma Plan,, the validity and ,const--itutionality of which has. been
sustained by :the court ;i Construction Industry Association: of
b U. "S. Su'.. �tioii,
for Writ un Certiorari dePetaluma, (1975) 522 F2d 897 Pet
Sonoma Count., v Cit of
hied, y preme Court, Feb. 230,
19:76) . The 'Plan is in effect for a five year period ending in,
19'77, andprovides that residential development which is s;utiiect
to the Plan"shall be muted to about 500 residental'units.per
year, 'or a: total of `2•,5,00 for the five year period. Residential
develo merits of four g g' _ d cep,ted . from_ the
�dwelling, units or �ess are ex
;Plan; and � do , note 0. 't a ains't the state _' numer cal limit.
As • set forth in the. Residential 'Development Control
System the policy of the City, of Petaluma to, be effectuated by
4 y•: tion.
the Plan -is g establish control over the,. ua�
r � lit distribution,
and rade' of rowth of the City., in � the interest of .
g,.. J y ,of' -the community;
Preservn the,qualt
Protecting the green. open -,space frame of the City;
Insuring th_e°adequacy'of the City facilities and
servi,'s within acceptable allocation of City and
ce
school . tArk �f,unds,,
Insuring a b 1. alanc es'and values in
the Cite whish will accommodate a
e of housing typ
Y Variety of
families -including'.familes of moderate income
and older .families, on. `limited, fixed incomes;
and
Insuring thebalanced developmen
t of the City east,
r -
north, and`west of the central, core.
The stated purpose of the Residential.Development Con -
trot System is to impl°ement,'the policies of the City of Petaluma
d Environmental
ent°Policy Resolution, the General
as
nestablished onmentaleD6s� n;Plans" and the Housing Element of
P
g
the GeneraL Plan._ This purpose is, to, be accomplished by City
control of the rate., distribution,, quality, and economic level
of proposed development on a year -to year basis
In -order :to determine the effect of the Plan. upon the
developmentCity, during' ,the five.. year. period of the Plan
it ismperative that a comprehensive review and analysis there-
of be.houldet t eJCit,�with respectto residential
that should completed"
purpose
r osey f determiningthe future course
t
development. Such comP rehens..ve ,review ,and.analysis is now,
under, way but will not be completed in time to -accommodate resi-
t .for- the 19'77-78� construction year (May 1,
1977Apr
ial lopmenil 30, ''.197.'8-):.: Rather tFian imposing another moratorium
on residential development while such .comprehensive review and
analysis is being°°completed, which would not be beneficial or
aerve.the interest's- Of either -.the City of Petaluma. and its
essar and desirable and the Council;-hed
people,* anre-
eo le, those desiring all
developers,. it ialnece houyin in Petal-uma, or landowners, of.
by finds that, for call',of .the ,reasons and to accomplis
the purposes,,policies and objectives set forth in the. -Petaluma
Plan; that- an interim residents al development control stem.
incorporating the essential elements of the Residential Develop
meat Control System of the Petaluma Plan be established for the.
'1977-78 construction year.;:-.
ppPLICABIL
ITY OF THE. INTERIM RESIDENTIAL.
DEVELOPMENT,
CONTROL ;SYSTEM.
The Interim nt Control system shall,
Residential Developme
-2
0
ffect: 781sonsrthereofyear (May 1,: 1927
P,e rl 3,0 for the � 19 7 Z- '
p , 19,78) ana, the prow `� ' y �'` 'shall apply. to all
residential, develo ment ri the Cit of Petaluma, including
single family (which includes_ mobile homes`) and multi -family
housing except' developments of, -four residential units or less
g p is for elderly people ("congregate
and congregate housin ro ec
housing projects for elderly people",as used herein means resi-
dential debelopments.which- provide separate sleeping and living
accommodations but common kitchen and dining facilities, and
are. limited to occupancy :by persons: 6:2 years of age or older);.
No residential. development subject, to the provisions hereof :as
herein provided"Shall be undertaken, and.no, building permit .
shall be; issued,, in the�.City of Petaluma unless a development
allotment has ,been obtained therefor -'in ,accordance with the pro-
visions-hereof.
rovisions hereof.
III. DEVELOPMENT.ALLOTMENT APP
• �LICATI ON.
A. An. application for a development allotment shall
be made ;to -the Planning 'Department of the City of Petaluma on
orm
rovided by' the Cit Such, application yshall contain
thefollowingllowing information and be accompanied b the following
documents:
1... Site Utilization Map including:
a. Vicinity Map to show'the relationship
of the proposed' development to adja-
cent development,•the surrounding area,
and the -City;
b'. Site .Use ,Layout Map, Showing the • extent,
location and type of pr-.oposed.residen-
.tial use or.usesi; th& nature and extent.
of open space, and•the nature and extent
;.of any, other, 'uses: proposed..
.The Site Use Layout Map is of°:major importance;
the Vicinity Map maybe shown as a small inset
map -
2. Site Development Plan:;
Lot layout to preliminary subdivision map stan-„
t _ ; gnments
coordinationowithZCty!!stre'
dards,, street ali
showing
goo et system
existing d proposed'buildngs, trees,, land-
scaped areas;•open space,.bicycle•paths` eques-
trian • 'trails or pathways
-3-
I
3.
Preiiminary Architectural plans:
Typical architectural elevations,*types, And
numbers of „dwelling units:; ` proposed color of
'bu'ildings.
4.
Preliminary Landscape Plans:
General indications of planting.
5.
Housing Marketability and. Price Distribution:
p ' g ntal.amounts or sales
Exected ranes of�.re
prices- low and moderate income housing to
be provided, .if any.
G.
Residential Security::;
proposed locks'and security devices on doors
and windows.
7.
'Public Facilities'. -
Needed public facilities to be provided, if
any', such as. critical linkages in the major -
street s stem, school rooms, or other vital
y
pubic °facili�t"'ies,;:
8.
Development Schedule:-
Proposed s,cheduule of d'evel'opment - ncludin,g,
phasing, .if any, ;and aj applicable processes
such as environmental assessment, tentative.
and final, subdivision maps,, prezoning or re-
zoning, annexation, site design review,; and
'similar matters.
9.
Financial.Information3
Financial information; sufficient to enable,.
the C ty�to determine if the project,'has a
reasonable chance of being undertaken and com-
pleted -if a development allotment is awarded.
l-0.. Such ' other information as, may be require
the Planning Director.
B: Each application shall .be accompanied,•by a fee in
cat_on�unttofa$maxPmum of $100eSuchgfeelsYia the apple
16 ncluded in
,up1. ll not"be returnable
in the event that no development Allotment is awarded.
-4-
N
i
r
IV. PLANNING, DIRECTOR EVALUATIOR
-The `Planning Director shall review each ,app=lica=tion and
determine whether or not the 'proposed development conforms to, the
after EDPGeneral,,pl_an N and the Environmental ^Design Plans (here-
If the Planning Director determines that,.a proposed
ev p t conform to the General Plan or the EDP, the
a plication "shal
1°b The applicant shall be given a
oes no
notice of such reJ in ten (10) days after the; submzs;-
e rejected.
lection.with"
sion of his application. Such not ice: shall.be.given by the
Planning Director by mailing a copy -of the .notice to the applicant
at his address as shown ,in, the application,.
Within, ten (1,0') ' days: after 'such .notice " is mailed, the
applican=t may appeal the decision -of the Planning Director to the.
City'Council,by filing a. written notice of appeal with the City
lar Council'mee;tin The. City Council a next agenda for a regu
place the matter on th
s
g all consider the appeal
Clerk, who shall a sh
at such regular m1.eeting and, shall ei=ther affirm the 'decisi'on .of
the Planning' Director to reject the application on, the basis- of
non -conformity with,s:aid -plans, reverse. said decision by finding
'that. the proposed development. is n conformity with -said plans, or
into conformPt .I lsTheodec sldevelopment to bring it
. p P^
permit the a licant to modi, h
y with said plans.' 'on 'of :the Council shall
,.
be:final and conclusive.
V. DEVELOPMEN=T.. ALLOTMENT EVALUATION;.
Proposed developments found by the Planning Director or
City" Council to conform'to the General Plan And..the Environmental
Design Plans shall be:evaluated by the Planning Commission (here=
after PC) and awarded points as hereinafter set forth.
A. Each proposed deve=lopment ' ;shall- ; be examined- for its
relation to and impact upon local public.+facilities and services.
The appropriate. City department or outside public,
agencies ;shall provide recommendations to the PC and the. PC; shall
-rate each" development by assigning from G. to 2, points {'°on -each of
the following':
1. The ,ability and capacity of the water systetq m.l
At without system beds sionz beyondsthosevelop-
provide for then ro "
which the develo er'wi1.1 consent to
extensions
p _ provide.
CComments from the' Petaluma City Engineer)
Z. Thelability, abi lit , an'd.
- � - y� capacity � o`f ' the' sanitary
sewers to dispose of the wastes: of the
ssd development without system exten
s on
beyond' those which the developer will
consent to provided (Comments ',from _the
Petaluma :City Engineer)
3. The ability, and capacity i of the drainage
facilities., to adequately dispose or., the:
surface runoff of the,proposed develop
meat without„ system extensions .beyond those
hick, the udeVelopek, ,wi'll consent to rovi.de.
P
which tats from the Sonoma.. County ,Water' Agency):,
y '- Fire' Department of the City
o the _
4 . ofePetahuma
to provide' .fire,: p , ord
rotecton acc
ng to the established response standards of
the City without the necessity of '-establishing
• q g tion of major
equipment to an exi',uirgnstation. (Comments
a new stat -ion or re _
stip
from the Petaluma Pike ,Department):
S. The capacity of 'the . appropriate s,ehool to ,ab-
sorb the. childrenexpected to linhabit a pro'
posed:development without neces'sitating.or
.
ad_di,
n g to doublese'ssio ns or other unusual..
s'chedul'ing or classroom' overcrowding. (Com-
meets from;the appropriate school districts)
6. The ability and- ca04plty'of major street link
,age to provide toor the needs,.of the proposed'
development without. subs tantially.altering exist-
ng traffic patterns or overloading the existing
public' facilities and the -.alai°lability of other
• - street.s st ,
p "li�ties ° (°such as� parks , playgrounds ,
etc.;) to 'meet 'the addtiona_ l :demands -for vital.
P
ension-Of, services
beyond_ those Cprovid dubyethe developer,, (Com-
ments from,the appropriate department heads;)
B. Quality of Design and -Extent of Contribution. to Public
Welfare and Amenities,.,
The P'
' CC shall exposed"deve
amine each proaol
Pment and
shall rate each development by the assignment of no. more than
p f the following:
,, number of o nts allowable on„,
the maximum on,,, -,each ,
. eac
1. Architectural”
d`es• rn quality a
g s indicated 'bg
the architectural elevations of the proposed
buildings judged in terms of; architectural
style, size:,i °and height. (15, points).
2•
qual1ity as Y 'indica lot'Tay-
out.e ore ntat_ion of units! on the lots., and
similar site design considerations. (15
points,) .
" 3.
Site and architectural. design quality as in-
dicated by the :amount and character of land-
s.aping.and'screening and color of buildings..
(l'O: points)'
4.'
Site and architectural design,qu_ality-'as in -.j
i.-
dicated by the arrangement. of the - site for
efficiency of circu'lation', on and off-site
traffic safety. 'and privacy. (20 points)
5.
Site;- and, architectural' de`'
. � . srgn quality as i:n-
_ y the amount of
dicated b p _ mate safety and
security provided; in the design of* the indi--'
vidual Structures;.,,i (15 ;points)
6.
.
The provision opublic ubli_c and/. or private usable
::open space and, where applicable, the green-..
belts provided for ,in" the .,Environmental Design
Plan's. (15 points)
7.
Provision of foot or bicycle paths,,, equestrian
r�. i p � � � ord'ances,
trails, or, athwa-rs "` accadopted
plans o,f,the City. (-,;points)
8.
The, extent .to which the, 'proposed, development
,,.
accom lishes. an; orderly, and 'contiguous exten-
P
'
g. p.,
s . of ex" I develo meet ,,rather than "'leap
frog" development, by -being either within the
resent City limits or contiguous t ba
P o urban de-
.
velopment within'the,City limits. (15 rots)
9.
acilities_'Such
The .provision of.needed;'pub"lic fas,,itical
-n the m�'or street Sys-,
'linkas
temCrscY ool roomsgeor`lo�ther
• tal public facl-
lities., (;15 points•)
14.:,'
Toli provi son of; units to mee'a a City's
„
p cy goal of 8$ to. 121 low. moderate in-
come .dwelling units ,:annually. (15 points)
VI. NUMBER OF ALLOTMENTS 'FOR 1977-78,,6 ONSTRUCTION YEAR.
The, allotments' for the 1977;;=78 construction, year shall
'be limit,ed,to 500 residential units equally divided between the
east ("everything east of U. S.. 101) and the west (everything
west of U. S. 10'1) sides of the City;, plus such additional num-
ber of allotments forsuch year as the'City Council in the
exercise of its sound discretion may by'resolution authorize;
provided that the number of such additional allotments shall
not exceed the number of,residential units for which allotments
were not made during the five-year period of the Petaluma Plan
plus the number of units .for which_.,ailotments were rescinded
and not reallocated during such period (such number is 1180 units).
The additional allotments shall be, divided between the east and west
sides of the City as,de,termined by the City Council at the time that
it authorizes.such. additional allotments,. The division of allotments
between singlef ami,ly residential units and multi -family residential
units shall be established by the City Council prior to the time
that allotments are made.
VII. AWARD OF ALLOTMENTS.
A. The PC shall notify e'ach.a-pplicant of his allotment
evaluation. -Such notice shall be; given in writing within seven
(7) days after the allotment evaluation has been made by'mailing
a copy of such notice to the applicant at his address as shown in
his application..
B. Proposed developments which have not been assigned
a minimum of 9 points under- Section V-A or a minimum of 85 points
under Section V -B shall not be given a development allotment.
Any applicant whose proposed development has not been given the
required number of points may appeal the matter of allotment
evaluation to the City Council as hereinafter provided. No allot-
ment awards for the 1977-78 construction year shall be made until
said appeal or appeals,have been decided where the contested units
would increase the total number of units' to be allotted above the
numerical limits established by the 'Council.
C. Subject to the limitations°hereinafter set forth in
this paragraph and paragraph VI,I-D,,proposed developments which
have received a minimum of nine (9')'points under Section V-A and
a minimum of eight -five,, ($15) points under Section V-BPwill be
awarded an 'allotment for the 1977=78 (Ma 1, 197.7 April 30, 1978)
construction year,., Where the number of residential units, .in pro-
posed developments.wh°ich have, received the required number of
points for a development, allotment ,(;either by, PC determination or
by City,Council determination on, appeal') exceed the numerical.
limits established by the City Council (by housing -type category
o�
i
I .
and sI
ection of :City.), development allotments.�for which the
Council -established numerical limit has thus been exeeded,
starting with those proposed de elopme6 s x ce po'nnttheemo ted,
shal•1 be� awarded on, the basis of the ;numb, I ' � �
s reeeiv g
evaluation, °points for-. • the affected housing -type category in
rCity-and•p down
the affected'_- Y
' the list until ttion. of
roclshed b the Council:
sectione
numertihcalli.mt � e'stablee ng in or der
,has.. been reached.. Where, allotments are made on the basis of
p tandng on the list., any applicant who, re
comparative s ma
P
q P crit allo not Y
high,,' enough on the list b receive•a develo m amen
ce ved the re wired m-nimuminumber of points re-
but is
areal the matter of allotment evaluation, to the City.Co t�
g g
uncill as
herei.nafter, p , acid: no allotmentsnarts eor the 19`7,7-
7;8
reardfor ected how . g yp category in"
construction.y the.aff
the affected section of the City shall :be made `until said appeal
or appeals have been decided,
The PC shall no
D, t,awat,d a development allotment.
velo merit than
llan aeSlacant, desires , pp g un -i
P in a single residential
for more th
retial units
'in
alyunPP�s
in a single 'Ires'dentPial°develo went in excessoofrl0.0:aehelma apply
to the City Council' for such approval. The City, Council may give
limited r units is not economicthat the proposed' se ect he
such app ova s demonstrated
Y _:
1 i it 1
•;to' 100 P all fgasible because°
require,is re wired andl other f the
of
torsbeoff-site or other m rovemen. ac
and p . hall, be
ect ,to t
y the developer's he units in excess ofSl00.shall I
control; such a rova
subl� `- the, eondz:'tion that t
not, be .built during"' the 1977-78'° construction year and shall 'not
be.counted as•part,o,f the number of' residential units authorized.
th'e :� Council may ;reasonably m,,Y other 'conditions' as, •
. be constructed durin suchpose and such
VIII. APPEALSTO CITY.. COUNCIL.
PPlI• a1 to the° City ,Council pur
An a scant may a e' scant
,,. Y PP
to VII -1B or .VII' -C hereof by filing -a ,written. --notice ..of appeal
with the City Clerk; within' :ten (10) days; after the notice: of'',
allotment evaluation
been mailed. Taere'tlarlcoinca 111 et
hasryl y
j place the , matter. on, the .next , agenda" for , - gu � � me.
Ing.. The City Obuncil shall, consider the appeal at such regular'
meeting„ . at°'wh',ch time the Council will ,,hear the applicant or his
representative ,and such °'other ;person or persons As"'•,may be able
to ass%st the Council'in the determination of the.matter.on ap
peal The Council may affirm or modify the :allotment evaluation
and,, its• '�Ildecisi.on shall ' be finals -and :conclus1ve .
X. REVIEW OF PROGRESS.
The :Planning Directreview,, on a n
Y basis,
each Pro osed.develo meet which received a development
allot-
merit to, determine whether satisfactory, progress is being made
with .thei process ng :of :the. appropriate.' pland'' withthe Planning
Department. Should a• developer fail to 'c ' "ly with'" the devel'I
P p. op-