HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1995/12/13 (7)
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 12/13/95
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing:
a) PCA-96-04: Consideration of an amendment to Section 19.54.020
of the Municipal Code to allow Residential Care Facilities for
residents who are members of a protected class, as defined in
Federal Fair Housing Law - City Initiated
b) PCA-96-04: Consideration of an amendment to Section 19.04.197
of the Municipal Code to add the definition of Residential Care
Facility .
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCA-96-04
recommending that the City Council approve the Code
amendments in accordance with the attached draft City Council
Resolution and Ordinance and fmdings contained therein.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None
DISCUSSION:
In October 1995, the City Council passed an emergency ordinance to exempt Residential Care
Facilities for between seven and twelve residents from having to obtain a Conditional Use Permit
when those residents have been determined to belong to a protected class, as defmed in Federal
Fair Housing Law.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development of the US Government had alleged that the
City may have unknowingly violated the Federal Fair Housing Law. It was HUD's contention
that, by requiring a Conditional Use Permit be obtained for the establislunent of a Residential
Care Facility designed to accommodate individuals who are members of a protected class, as
defmed in Federal Fair Housing Law, the City was discriminating against people so classified,
in violation of Federal Fair Housing Law.
The City of Chula Vista had acknowledged that approval of such facilities for the
accommodation of six persons or less, regardless of presence or absence of disabilities, is
preempted by State law, and thus permitted as a matter of right. However, the City had
considered facilities for more than six residents equal to nursing homes, convalescent homes or
Page 2, Item 1
Meeting Date 12/13/95
homes for the aged. They were thus considered to be Unclassified Uses, requiring a Conditional
Use Permit, and thus subject to the scrutiny and approbation of neighbors.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has, in other jurisdictions, successfully
brought suit to remove the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit. There are also several
test cases pending, and, in a number of cases where the Conditional Use Permit requirement was
invoked and then the permit denied, HUD has sued the jurisdiction in question on behalf of the
applicant, in some cases incurring great financial expense to the jurisdiction.
The City may have the right to retain Conditional Use Permit authority over Residential Care
Facilities for residents belonging to a protected class. However, the ability to impose
meaningful conditions is essentially preempted by Federal law . Because of this preemption, staff
has concluded that retaining the process of obtaining a Conditional Use Permit by means of a
public hearing has the potential for invoking public controversy and increasing the potential for
liability, while providing the City with no measure of control over such facilities.
The City Attorney and Planning staff have observed firsthand the level of controversy that such
Conditional Use Permit applications can cause in a residential neighborhood. Staff concurs with
the Department of Housing and Urban Development that, since regulatory measures are already
in place, the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit is unnecessary and could subject the City
to liability.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this Code amendment, as a
procedural amendment, is exempt from environmental review and is not subject to CEQA.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development made clear to the City of Chula Vista that
it considered discretionary permits an invitation to neighboring residents to discriminate. In the
opinion of HUD, by allowing neighbors an opportunity and forum to express their prejudice,
the City may be seen to be condoning such statements.
The determination of which facilities are suitable to be licensed, and for what number of
residents, is made by the State. Their requirements include limitations on numbers of people
per sleeping room and minimum size of rooms to accomodate more than one resident. The State
also requires that the local Fire Marshal ascertain that the facility meets certain minimum life
safety standards.
Those standards necessary for licensing have the effect of limiting the number of residences
which could be converted into Residential Care Facilities for more than six individuals. The
Department of Housing and Urban Development, however, has agreed that providing for a
maximum number of twelve residents will still have the affect of providing what it considers
"reasonable accommodation", and thus is an acceptable limit.
Page 3, Item 1
Meeting Date 12/13/95
In order to ensure that no area receive an overconcentration of such facilities, the ordinance calls
for Residential Care Facilities to be located 1,000 feet distant from other similar facilities. The
Department of Housing and Urban Deve:opment believes that such facilities should not be
located in just one area, and therefore encourages their location throughout the residential
community. The 1,000 foot separation would serve that purpose, while more than providing for
the number of facilities that might be necessary in the City.
The City of Chula Vista has thus recognized that it is in the best interests of the City to allow
those facilities meeting the rather narrow definition delineated in this ordinance to be established.
By clearly defining Residential Care Facilities and removing the requirement for them to obtain
a Conditional Use Permit, that objective is achieved.
Attachments
Minutes of October 17, 1995 City Council Meeting
Planning Commission Resolution PCA-96-04
Exhibit "A"
Exhibit "B"
Draft City Council Ordinance
M: \home\planning\ann \pca9604. rpt
MINUTES OF
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
OCTOBER 17, 1995
Minutes
October 17, 1995
Pase IS
to empty the parlcing lot. Curfew issues were going to be an important matter to him as Council needed to be
extremely sensitive in making the facility as DOD-intrusive as possible. He thaDked MCA, The Baldwin Company,
consultants, staff, and oil the residents for their input.
C. REPORT RESPONSES TO COUNCn.. QUESTIONS REGARDING THE MCA CHULA VISTA
AMPHITHEATER PROJECT FROM COUNCn.. MEETING OF OCTOBER 3.1995 - At the public bearing
on 10/3/95, Council directed staff to provide clarifying information on certain components of the project and
answers to a Dumber of specific questions. Additionally, business deal pcllits were to be ~ted for information
and review. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Community Development)
Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, stated the subject of the public hearing was the response
that Council had requested from staff on a Dumber of questions. The business deal was outlined in the responses
to Council and staff was in the process of finalizing the legol issues of the business deal and would be prepared to
bring it to Council in Closed Session on 10/24 or Iln. Staff welcomed Council input into those negotiations. The
performing arts fund proposed by the applicant at the last meeting. It would be a surcharge 011 tickets, going from
15c to 5OC, to be used for legitimate performing arts in the City of Chula Vista, Dot exclusively for use at the MCA
facility. Those revenues could be as much as $150,000 the first year and those revenues were Dot calculated in the
Statement of Revenues. It was staff's understanding that a sound test for the Nederlander project was tentatively
set for 11/2 which would oIlow staff to return to Council on IIn with the raw data from the study.
. . _ Council recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m. - · ·
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
.
. Cindy Binno, 940 Nolan Way, Chula Vista, CA, representing South Bay Pentecostal Church, informed Council
that they had invited the world's strongest man, Anthony Clark, to visit the church and various City scbools. Mr.
CI.-Ic:'s goal w,a~ to belp the kids of today to be the best they could be without drugs or other CNtches in their lives.
They were also sponsoring a "pizza pig-<>ut" on Thursday, 10/19 for oil youth. They would be holding their first
annual Kids PO'.ver Harvest Festival on 10/31 at the Memorial Bowl from 5:00 - 8:00 p.m. for the youth of the
community.
BOARD AND COMMlSSION Rt:COMMENDATIONS
None submitted.
I
A.{:TION ITEMS
21. ORDINANCE 2650 ADOPTING AS AN INTERIM AND EMERGENCY MEASURE FOR A PERIOD
OF 90 DAYS. AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.54.010 TO EXEMPT
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACn..ITIES FOR 7.11 RESIDENTS FROM OBTAINING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES. AND FROM THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 19.54 Iun!encv
ordinance) . The Planning Department is preparing amendments to the Zoning Code and will be preparing
implementing ordinances which will oIlow Residential Care Facilities for 7.12 residents which are protected by the
Federal Fair Housing Act to locate in residentiol zones as a matter of right. The purpose of the moratorium is to
avoid the risk of the City incurring monetary damages should its actions under the curreat mning standards conflict
with the rights of individuals protected by the Fair Housing Amendments Act. Staff recommends Council adopt
the urgency ordinance. (Director of Planning and City Attorney)
Counci1member Rindone questioned if the local land use decisions of a charter city could be usurped by the federal
government. He Doted there would be impacts on the rights of the Deighborhood and other residents and questioned
if the City had any options available.
Mr. Boogaard stated he could answer the question publicly, but if Council wanted to dwell on the legal aspects he
recomme."wl Count.J go into CI08ed Session. The Council did have an option of trywg to create a conditional use
permit system. All land uses the City tried to regulate fell within three categories, i.e. I) absolutely prohibited;
2) oIlowed as of rig!lt; and 3) conditionally permitted. The City had the legal authority to squeeze those types of
Minutes
October 17, 1995
Page 16
uses into the conditionally permitted use categories but the City could not pick a condition that in any way focused
on the fedenlly protected features of a group. In essence, the City became preemptive because if the City could
not focus on those leeally they could not regulate the use differently from a large family.
Counci\member Rindone questioned if there were any regulations regulatine the size of the family. His concern
was that the density of any sinele family resicleoce not be excessive or neeatively impact a neigbborhood.
Mr. Booeaard stated the City did not try to regulate family size through the wnine code, it was regulated throueh
Health &. Safety codes and was based on people per square footaee volume of space. The problem was that the
federaIly protected uses fully qualified. There were three basic conditions that could be leea1ly imposed, i.e. 1)
parking constraints, but the City had to offer reasonable accommodation; 2) number of people per room constraint,
but they easily qualified under the current licensing standard; and 3) legally impose a separation requirement, which
staffwas proposing to do as a matter of rigbt. Council would be submitting themselves to a lot of aearavation when
Congress had basically preempted their rieht to regulate the use. Staff feU it was fedenlly preempted from any
sincere effort at regulation and that if the public had a concero they should focus their attention on fedenl
representatives not through the local City representatives. HUD and the Department of Iustice focused on 12 as
the dividing line as to what could constitute a large family and what constituted a commercial use. He did not
believe efforts by the City could withstand constitutional scrutiny and, therefore, he recommended that the Council
not even try.
ORDINANCE 2650 PLACED AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE BY COUNCll..MEMBER MOOT, reading
of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously.
22. ORDINANCE 2651 AMENDING CHAPTER 2.66 - PARK AND FACll..ITIES RULES (first :'e8dilU!) -
Chapter 2.66 of the Municipal Code, which goveros the rules and regulations for use of city parks and facilities,
has not been substantially changed since 1974. The Department has undertaken the task of reviewing this Chapter
and proposing various amendments to the wctions therein. The intent of the proposed amendments is an
administrative 'house cleaning' procedure to create rules which are more applicable to situations encountered in
the parks. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
Counci\member Moot stated be had been contacted by several constituents regarding their children playing in the
little league parks and problems with people drinking in the parking lots and fields. He referenced Section 2.66.230
dealing with air inflated astra-jumps and feU it was a potential revenue source to the City, was often requested by
the public, and that it could be regulated. He requested an info item on the cunent City policy for Council review.
Jerry Foncerrada, Deputy Director of Pam, responded that staff was lookine at pam that could be designated for
those uses on a rental basis to generate revenues for the City. Problems in the past resulted from noise complaints.
Councilmember Alevy referred to Section 2.66.043 regarding alcoholic beverage consumption and possession and
stated he had a problem in blanketly restricting alcohol consumption. He agreed with the prohibition against alcohol
consumption and possession after parle closure. He questioned if the signs would be posted at all parks or only those
parks that had a perceived or identified problem as identified by staff and ratified by Council.
Jess Valenzuela, Director of Pub &. Recreation, stated staff would approach the Council when there was a problem
at a specific part and request by resolution to post signs probibitine the consumption and possession of alcohol at
that particular part. In the past the Council had preferred to deal with part problems on a parle by part basis and
staff would deal with it as such.
Counci\member Rindone stated he shared the same concerns. He felt the cunent language could be interpreted that
there was an immediate ban on all parks at all times which was not the intent of staff or Council. He would support
the amendment as recom.....<lded.
Mr. Booeaard recommended that the last sentence of Subsection B, read 'any signs posted pursuant to this section
must be posted under the authority of a City Council resolution upon a finding by the Council that the part or a
portion thereof so posted bas experienced problems with the pt.blic's consumption of alcohol'.
c
ORDINANCE 2651, AS AMENDED, PLACED ON FlRSl' READING, reading of the text was waived, passed
and approved unanimously. Last sentence of Subsection B, to read "any signs posted pursuant to this section
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION PCA-96-04
RESOLUTION NO. PCA-96-04
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN
AMENDMENT TO SECTIONS 19.54.020 AND 19.94.197 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL CARE FACIUTIES.
WHEREAS, the term 'Residential Care Facility' is not defmed in the Municipal code,
and
WHEREAS, such facilities have been considered to be nursing homes, an Unclassified
Use, and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Code requires that a Conditional Use Permit be obtained to
establish a nursing home or other Unclassified Use, and
WHEREAS, the Federal Government has maintained that, when such facilities are for
the accomodation of members of a protected class as defmed in Federal Fair Housing Law, it
is a violation of such law to subject the facilities to closer scrutiny than other residential uses
would receive, and
WHEREAS, the City has initiated a request to amend the Municipal Code to define
Residential Care Facilities and to permit them as a matter of right in residential zones, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said
amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least ten days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
December 13, 1995, at 7;00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the proposal, as a procedural amendment, is
exempt from environmental review and is not subject to CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT FROM THE FACTS PRESENTED
AT THE HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council enact
an ordinance amending Section 19.54.020 and adding Section 19.04.197 of the Municipal Code
based on the findings contained therein and as shown in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B".
That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
Page 2
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
William Tuchscher, Chainnan
ATTEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
M:\home\planning\ann\pca9604p .res
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
EXHIBIT "A"
EXIllBIT A
U';m!;~1.........i.............i............................~......~iii!!P~;F.)I.....~. ... y....
... .... ."".............---------------.............
m:\home\pl~\a1Jn\pca9604.txl
EXHIBIT "B"
EXIllBIT B
19.54.020
Designated - Limitations and standards.
The following uses may be considered for location in any zone, subject to the provisions set forth herein,
and additional conditions set forth in Chapter 19.58 (references indicated for uses):
A. Borrow pits and q=.ies for rock, sand and gravel;
B. Campgrouods: See Section 19.58.040;
C. Cemeteries: See Section 19.58.080;
D. Colleges, universities, private schools, elementary and secondary public schools;
E. Columbariums, crematoriums and mausoleums, provided that these uses are specifically excluded from all
R zones unless inside a cemetary: See Section 19.58.080;
F. Churches: See Sections 19.58.110;
G. Dumps, public or private;
H. Hospitals, included, but not limited to emergency, general, convalescent, ~AAi~9!ii~!!i;1 rest homes,
nursing homes (fer tile age~, sFiflfllea, memallyretafEleasfallages).fl5yeBiatti6~. "etc'.":' See Section
19..58. .~.~?'~~~Y~~!....~~R~~~~.f1;}It~W$}f;....iW4....,*!m!!!iW...~~Wii~~f...~t..fl$P~%~.i;#!i!9~m!#t...~.
f#Si!ili~~W~!!i~~~!~t\11191:YWgS9j@i\i9~; ... .. . .. ... .. ........ ... .... ........... .
L . The Residential Care Facility is fudheacctiiIiodatiQltW j:hose fridMd1.iiil$ w~o are cnnsidered to
be lnembm<>f aprolec1ed cl1iJ;s.asdeji~jn F<idetilIF~Housl"8.Law.~F1i1t:a~Ji!g
Arne""! Act of i98.8) lil\d as may beilineiJ.ded ~ tiiiieto tiJriej. JiJ\d. . ... ... .
2. . Thenwnberofieside.nts doeS Iio!=eed. tWelVe. and
3. .. The Resideridal Care p;tcility is lticaiedilt l~one thQusaj@ feet: dlslI$t fr~ .iUj<)thci: iesithmtial
CjU'e facility meetinj! tIieseernena: .. . .. ..... ... . .. . .. . .
4. ... ~ Jaqlitiesare IOC1lte<l jfi iliIy Rzone<:'f residenua1ly~\IS~p~.
PaRker that RfJflreval skaJJ Bet Be graatea WltiI tHe f8116V.~:eg findings SaB Be made €kames fer meatally
rewasa ehilarea):
1, The size sf tile pareel t8 Be \ISBa shall pFedfle aEleEfl:l8te light aB8 air ia })fep8fti8B t8 the Bl:HB~er
af resiEleats,
2, The 18sa~sB sf -;;'iBae1"')S 8.mI efJeB play areas ~"~11 be 88 sitHatea as ts Bet 8.EWeFSely HHfJ8.6t
aajeiniag 1<0...
3, ~paeiag betv;eeB tkese fasi1i~es slNHl be Stiea that tke ~1.1~reter sf tke BeigkbsfB88a is baet
affeetea bJ' Hie gfs1If)iBg af Hiess Ji8Bles.
m:\boJne\p1.aIming\ami\pca9604.lxt
DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING SECTION 19.54.020 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
CODE AND ADDING SECTION 19.04.197 IN ORDER TO MODIFY THE
UNCLASSIFIED USES REGULATIONS TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL CARE
FACILITIES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES AS A MATTER OF RIGHT.
WHEREAS, the tenn 'Residential Care Facility' is not defined in the Municipal code,
and
WHEREAS, such facilities have been considered to be nursing homes, an Unclassified
Use, and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Code requires that a Conditional Use Pennit be obtained to
establish a nursing home or other Unclassified Use, and
WHEREAS, the Federal Government has maintained that, when such facilities are for
the accommodation of members of a protected class as defined in Federal Fair Housing Law,
it is a violation of such law to subject the facilities to closer scrutiny than other residential uses
would receive, and
WHEREAS, the City has initiated a request to amend the Municipal Code to define
Residential Care Facilities and to pennit them as a matter of right in residential zones, and
WHEREAS, on the Planning Commission voted to adopt
Resolution No. PCA-96-04 and thereby recommend that the City Council enact the proposed
amendments to the Municipal code, and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said application and
notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the city at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
_ in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing
was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby fmd,
detennine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION I:
That the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning
practice justified the amendment and that the amendment is consistent
with the City of Chula Vista General Plan.
SECTION II: That Section 19.54.020 is amended to read as follows:
19.54.020
Designated - Limitations and standards.
The following uses may be considered for location in any zone, subject
to the provisions set forth herein, and additional conditions set forth in
Chapter 19.58 (references indicated for uses):
A. Borrow pits and quarries for rock, sand and gravel;
B. Campgrounds: See Section 19.58.040;
C. Cemeteries: See Section 19.58.080;
D. Colleges, universities, private schools, elementary and secondary
public schools;
E. Columbariums, crematoriums and mausoleums, provided that these
uses are specifically excluded from all R zones unless inside a
cemetery: See Section 19.58.080;
F. Churches: See Sections 19.58.110;
G. Dumps, public or private;
H. Hospitals, included, but not limited to emergency, general,
convalescent, p~y9l!!~tQ9;~tP;; rest homes, nursing homes (fer tlIe
aged, eripf!led,ffieRiftJiYl'etftl'ded ef all &ge~, ete.), psyehiatrie,
.~t~.:.:.. .S~~~7~ti~~19..:8..}10.~gl~~~~~~9!~~~~YJ~~;~i
1:1!!~~tq~~~~~tB~ti~I;~f#rt~~~#Pt~&i!j!~SJ!~H~~'i~~S9
!P1~~~~9!~R}Yimls.ngp!!! .
1; ..............lIf~llli~~I~~~~IL~Blllil<<IRI~~~11
q~{ql#i!~n!1~j}t*l~~iH9H~mg[ll~!. ....... .... .. . . ..........
#;......... ......I.mlmQ~t.Q'tt~~iip~~.qi~P9tl!iiiQ.ti!~j~m
i!i~p.1?~\lj~!U~~!;\B1a~~$~p~~ngfPptp!~.mm!
~~PAQ~lIr
41 .....................1I1~1ill~I*~9iY!i!.P;\.~I~i4~giiSi~~9!i~!~~t
Further tfiat 8f)f)f0va] shall Het he gfamed HatH the feIle~;/iBg
fifldiHgS eaR 13e made (homes fer meRtally retarded ehildFeR):
1. THe size of tile pareel te ee I:wea sHall previae aaeqHlHe
light and air in 13fef)0FtisB t8 the Bl:HBger af Fesiaeftts.
2. The leeatieB Bf 71iHElev/s aOO 8fJea fJIBJ areas shall lJe sa
situated as t8 Bet adversely imfJaet adjaining "lises.
3. Spaeing eet-:leeB these faeilities shall he SHea that the
eharaeter af ilia aeighBerheea is Bet affeetea BY the
gre1:lf'iag af iliese Rames.
SECTION III: That Section 19.04.197 is added as follows:
t$!1Q4;t~!tZ......I. .I........I.........~~~~ij.9;g~!!!1!!IWi!mY
."....~~!~~i~I...!0!r~R~9M!~y~!}.:~.............1m........ y....~.HnfI.J~...............9r. P.!~.9...~........}v.........~. P.......~~
m~1B~!pl~p~9P!:ir~~~~PFBY~~~~!Big~99_.!B~~j~.
(lll~fi[_IIII~~~~IIIIIIWI'ill~~I_11
SECTION IV: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the
thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
m: \home\planning\ann\pca9604. ord