HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/23/1990 - Adjourned City Council Meeting32
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF COSTA MESA
JANUARY 23, 1990
The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California,
met in adjourned regular session January 23, 1990, at
6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 77 Fair
Drive, Costa Mesa. The meeting was duly and regularly
ordered adjourned from the adjourned regular meeting of
January 17, 1990, and copies of the Notice of Adjourn-
ment were posted as required by law. The meeting was
called to order by the Mayor, followed by the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag,.and Invocation by Council Member
Genis.
ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Peter Buffa
Vice Mayor Mary Hornbuckle
Council Member Ory Amburgey
Council Member Sandra Genis
Council Member Ed Glasgow
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT:
OFFICIALS PRESENT:
Mayor Buffa left the meeting
at 8:25 p.m.
City Manager Allan Raeder
Assistant City Attorney
Eleanor Frey
Public Services Director
William Morris
City Clerk Eileen Phinney
Senior Planner Alice Angus
Intergovernmental Relations
Officer Cheryl Friedling
MINUTES In a memorandum dated January 23, 1990, the City Manager
January 10, 1990 made a correction to the minutes of January 10, 1990,
Page 2, concerning the motion made in closed session for
the Harry S. Green contract. He suggested adding at the
end of the motion: "and Council further clarified that,
as it pertains to the contract with Harry S. Green,
Incorporated, gratuities reported as all or a portion of
service fees shall not be considered part of gross
revenues".
MOTION On motion by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Council
Amended Minutes Member Genis, and carried 5-0, the minutes of the
Approved adjourned regular meeting of January 10, 1990, were
approved as amended.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no speakers under Oral Communications.
OLD BUSINESS Mayor Buffa announced that Old Business No. 1 would be
Relocation of SOS discussed prior to the public hearing for the General
Plan Update.
The Clerk presented a revised proposal to relocate Share
Our Selves (SOS) from Rea Community Center to the Orange
County Community Development Council (CDC) facility at
1695 West MacArthur Boulevard, Costa Mesa.
The City Manager reported that as directed by Council
at the meeting of January 15, 1990, staff has been
working with CDC in revising the sublease and terms
of the Memorandum of Understanding. (The revised docu-
ments were included with his memorandum of January 22,
1
1990.) He asked the City's Intergovernmental Relations
Officer to summarize the differences between previous
documents and those now being considered.
The Intergovernmental Relations Officer explained two
financing mechanisms detailed in the City Manager's
memorandum of January 22: Proposal No. 1 (long term),
Pages 3 and 4, and Proposal No. 2 (short term), Pages 4
and 5. She then outlined the Memorandum of Understand-
ing(MOU) between the City and CDC which stipulates
several provisions which would be incumbent upon all
three parties, the City, CDC, and SOS. She reported
that any version of the documents approved by Council
would be submitted to CDC for review at its January 24
board meeting.
Council Member Glasgow was concerned about the extent of
the City's involvement, specifically, on Page 3 of the
MOU, Section 3, which stipulates that the City shall
appoint a mediator to resolve rental increases and
utility payments;- Page 2, Subsection (c), concerning the
passbook account; and Page 1, Section C, regarding the
statement that no additional programs or operations will
be consolidated on the site without specific written
approval of the City and CDC.
Mayor Buffa commented that it may be difficult for SOS
to came up with a deposit of $35,000.00. The City
Manager suggested providing a letter of credit to CDC
in lieu of the deposit.
Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa, was
appalled at the way the City was treating SOS. He was
of the opinion that the terms of the agreement would be
detrimental to SOS.
Council Member Amburgey opposed any further City assist-
ance to SOS because of the amount of staff time already
spent on this project; SOS did not do its part to move
when the lease extension expired; and the City now must
spend taxpayers' money to go through legal proceedings
to evict SOS. Because the proposed site is not large
enough to provide for SOS's medical and dental clinics,
and because of the cost to the City, Council Member
Amburgey contended that neither SOS nor the City would
benefit from the agreement.
Council Member Genis suggested changing the second
sentence in Section C, Page 1 of the MOU, to read: "No
additional programs or operations will be consolidated
on this site without the specific written approval of
CDC and the granting of any applicable permits or other
required public approvals". She also agreed with
Council Member Glasgow's comments about the mediator.
MOTION A motion was made by Mayor Buffa, seconded by Council
Amended MOU Member Glasgow, that the Memorandum of Understanding
Approved between the City and CDC be approved and submitted to
the CDC board for review with the following changes:
Page 1, Section 3: Delete the second sentence.
Page 2, Subsection (c): Delete.
Delete any mention of the City's guaranteeing the
terms of the 2 -1/2 -year lease and replace it with the
City's providing a standard letter of credit.
Page 3, Section 3: Delete reference to the City's
being a mediator.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle was concerned with the rapid
increase in costs for SOS stipulated in the agreement.
Council Member Amburgey opposed the motion because of
the City's liability if SOS were to move from the site
during the first year.
Dick Sherrick asked if the City had any surplus land
on which SOS could build a facility. Council Member
Genis responded that staff has already investigated
that possibility, and there is no suitable site.
The motion to approve the amended MOU carried 3-2,
Council Members Hornbuckle and Amburgey voting no.
PUBLIC HEARING The Mayor opened the public hearing, continued from the
GP -89-02 meeting of January 17, 1990, to discuss the General Plan
General Plan Review Program:
Review Program
General Plan Amendment GP -89-02:
Proposed goals, objectives, and policies.
Proposed land use building intensity standards.
Proposed land use element map amendments.
Amendments to the Master Plans of Highways and
Bikeways.
Final recommendations on remaining General Plan
topics.
The Senior Planner reported that staff's memorandum
dated January 23, 1990, addresses General Plan hearing
topics/procedures for Council's information. She then
summarized staff's memorandum dated January 22, 1990,
concerning the following subjects:
Relocating Objective III -B to Goal VIII (Preservation
and Enhancement) and renumbering it Objective VIII -A;
and changing the number of the accompanying policy
from 99 to 198A.
In regard to affordable housing, new State law now
addresses low and very low income, and requires that
greater incentives be provided to developers. The
new law must be addressed in the General Plan where
applicable, and the City is required to adopt an
ordinance detailing the incentives that the City will
provide to a developer of affordable housing. (A copy
of Density Bonus Provisions pursuant to Government
Code Sections 65913.4, 65915, and 65917, effective
January 1, 1990, is included with the memorandum.)
As requested by Council, staff drafted Policy 217A and
Program X -A (A) to encourage construction of afford-
able single-family homes.
MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by
Objective VIII -A Council Member Genis, to take the following action:
and Policy 198A
Adopted Adopt Objective VIII -A (formerly III -B): "Establish
policies, standards, and procedures to minimize
blighting influences and maintain the integrity of
stable neighborhoods".
1
y 315
,.J.. r
Adopt Steering Committee Policy 198A (formerly 99):
"Develop standards and/or guidelines for new develop-
ment with emphasis on site (including minimum site
security lighting) and building design to minimize
vulnerability to criminal activity".
Council Member Amburgey opposed the reference to
"security lighting" because it would impose a burden
on an owner by requiring him to provide more than
standard outdoor lighting.
Council Member Glasgow also objected to the inclusion
of "security lighting" because he preferred giving the
property owner the option to provide an alarm system
in lieu of security lights.
The motion carried 3-2, Council Members Amburgey and
Glasgow voting no.
Mayor Buffa opened discussion for Programs VIII -A,
Zoning Enforcement; VIII -B, Development Review; VIII -C,
Public Nuisance Abatement; VIII -D, Housing Rehabilita-
tion;.and VIII -E, Mobile Home Rehabilitation.
Scott Williams, 3465 Santa Clara Circle, Costa Mesa,
Steering Committee member, addressed the committee's
recommendations for Program VIII -D.
Council Member Glasgow asked if Program VIII A, Zoning
Enforcement, would be the appropriate section to place
Council's recent comments on Conditional Use Permit,
violations. The City Manager responded that staff
has been discussing enforcement of these violations
and it could be added to this section.
Council Member Genis wanted a policy included which
would encourage conversion of nonconforming uses to
conforming uses.
As a point of clarification, the City Manager mentioned
that -where it states "Department/Division budgets" as
funding sources, these budgets are not taxing resources
but simply the place where funds are budgeted.
Council Member Genis suggested that references to time
periods be appropriately updated before the document is
brought back to Council for final approval.
Council Member Genis asked if there were anything in the
document which prohibits encroachment of commercial uses
into residential areas. The Senior Planner responded
that it is not addressed in that specific language.
MOTION On motion by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by Council
Program VIII -A Member Genis, and carried 5-0, Program VIII A, Zoning
Adopted Enforcement, was adopted as presented.
MOTION A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by
Program VIII -B Council Member Amburgey, to adopt Program VIII -B,
Adopted and Staff Development Review, and directing staff to provide word -
Directed to Provide ing regarding incompatible uses for Council considera-
Additional Wording tion. The motion carried 5-0.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Vice
Program VIII -C Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 5-0, Program VIII -C,
Adopted Public Nuisance Abatement, was adopted with the
provision that it be updated to reflect current dates
and situations.
Mayor Buffa invited public comment on Goal IX, Preserv-
ing Affordability, and Policies 209 through 216B.
Council Member Genis asked why the Steering Committee
recommended deleting "tentative tract maps" in Policy
209. None of the committee members in attendance knew
the reason for the deletion.
Scott Williams, Steering Committee member, stated that
the committee opposed density bonuses, one reason being
that it does not ensure affordable housing.
At the request of Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, the Senior
Planner briefly explained the new State law regarding
density bonuses/financial incentives.
Mayor Buffa commented that it has been his experience
that there is very little support from Council and
Planning Commission for density bonuses. He stated
that this is a State -mandated program which does not
allow much flexibility.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, stated that it
was her understanding from a conversation she overheard
in the Development Services Department, that if a
developer meets the guidelines for a density bonus, it
is not necessary to be approved by Council. She urged
Council to offer other incentives in place of density
bonuses since the latter does not ensure affordable
housing. Ms. Luymes explained the committee's reasons
for recommending Policies 216A and 216B.
1
316
MOTION
A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded by
Amended Program
Council Member Genis, to adopt amended Steering Commit -
VIII -D Adopted
tee Program VIII -D, which shall include the following
amendments:
Under "Program/Action Description", amend the fourth
line to read: ". . . through low interest loans, or
potential loans or grants to owner .". ("Poten-
tial was added; "all" was deleted.)
Under "Funding Sources", add "provided a new loan
program is adopted" at the end of the paragraph.
Under "Implementation Schedule", second line, add
"possible" before "creation of the program . ."
Discussion ensued regarding the use of Community Devel-
opment Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the Shalimar Drive
improvements, and potential loans or grants to owner -
occupants of residential properties who would exceed
CDBG income guidelines to rehabilitate their units.
Jan Luymes, 592 Park Drive, Costa Mesa, Steering Commit-
tee member, reported that based on citizen input, the
committee determined there was a need for a loan/grant
program to improve ovmer-occupied residential units for
those households that exceed the CDBG income guidelines.
The motion to approve amended Program VIII -D carried
3-2, Council Members Amburgey and Glasgow voting no.
MOTION
A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by
Amended Program
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt amended Program VIII -E
VIII -E Adopted
with the following amendment: Under "Program/Action
Description", delete "all"; and staff was directed to
provide an updated table. The motion carried 3-2,
Council Members Glasgow and Amburgey voting no.
Mayor Buffa invited public comment on Goal IX, Preserv-
ing Affordability, and Policies 209 through 216B.
Council Member Genis asked why the Steering Committee
recommended deleting "tentative tract maps" in Policy
209. None of the committee members in attendance knew
the reason for the deletion.
Scott Williams, Steering Committee member, stated that
the committee opposed density bonuses, one reason being
that it does not ensure affordable housing.
At the request of Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, the Senior
Planner briefly explained the new State law regarding
density bonuses/financial incentives.
Mayor Buffa commented that it has been his experience
that there is very little support from Council and
Planning Commission for density bonuses. He stated
that this is a State -mandated program which does not
allow much flexibility.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, stated that it
was her understanding from a conversation she overheard
in the Development Services Department, that if a
developer meets the guidelines for a density bonus, it
is not necessary to be approved by Council. She urged
Council to offer other incentives in place of density
bonuses since the latter does not ensure affordable
housing. Ms. Luymes explained the committee's reasons
for recommending Policies 216A and 216B.
1
.�, a
17
Scott Williams, Steering Committee member, commented
that since density bonus provisions are State -mandated,
it may not be necessary to reference them in the General
Plan.
Council Member Amburgey stated that because of the new
State law, it appears that it would be to the City's
benefit to address density bonuses in the General Plan.
RECESS The Mayor declared a recess at 8:25 p.m., and the meet-
ing reconvened at 8:35 p.m.
Mayor Buffa Left Mayor Buffa left at 8:25 p.m., and Vice Mayor Hornbuckle
chaired the remainder of the meeting.
MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded
Coal IX Adopted by Council Member Glasgow, to adopt Goal IX: "It is the
goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide its citizens
with reasonably priced housing opportunities within the
financial capacity of all social and economic segments
of the community. Further, the City of Costa Mesa shall
make every effort to reduce the costs of hone ownership
or rent for all existing and future dwelling units
constructed within its jurisdiction".
Council Member Genis supported the general concept of
the goal; however, she emphasized that she does not
advocate rent control.
The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Policy 209 Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Policy 209 was
Adopted adopted: "Allow and encourage developers to 'piggyback'
or file concurrent applications (i.e., rezones, tenta-
tive tract maps, conditional use permits, variance
requests, etc.) if multiple approvals are required, and
if consistent with applicable processing requirements".
MOTION On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Policy 210 Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, Policy 210 was
Adopted adopted: "Maintain consistency between all applicable
general and specific plans, zoning ordinances, and other
development guidelines relating to the development,
maintenance, and conversion of new or existing dwelling
units in order to reduce unnecessary overlapping regula-
tions to expedite the processing of residential develop-
ments".
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Amended Policy
Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Planning Commission
211 Adopted
Policy 211, as reworded in staff's memorandum of January
22, 1990, in order to comply with new State law, was
adopted: "Provide incentives (i.e., density bonus
units, fee reductions, exemptions from development or
processing fees, fast -tracking, etc.) to developers of
residential projects who agree to provide the specified
percentage of units mandated by State law at a cost
affordable to low- and/or very low-income households.
Density bonus units will be provided when the bonus
units do not allow the project's resulting density to
exceed the General Plan designation density limit".
(Addition is underlined.)
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Policy 211A
Member Genis, and carried 4-0, Planning Commission
Adopted
Policy 211A was adopted: "Provide financial incentives
in lieu of density bonus units if the proposed density
i
exceeds that allowed by the General Plan designation of
the property. Require the review of such projects by
Planning Commission and City Council".
Policy 211B Council referred Steering Committee Policy 211B to staff
Referred to Staff for more information.
Former Mayor Vice Mayor Hornbuckle recognized former Costa Mesa Mayor
Recognized Arlene Schafer.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Policy 212 Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Policy 212 was adopted:
Adopted "Provide opportunities and develop incentives to encour-
age developers to employ innovative or alternative
construction methods to reduce housing costs and
increase housing supply".
Motion to Adopt A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by
Policy 213 Council Member Genis, to adopt Policy 213.
Withdrawn
Discussion followed concerning the meaning of the policy,
and thereafter, Council Member Glasgow withdrew his
motion.
MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by
Amended Policy Council Member Genis, to adopt amended Policy 213:
213 Adopted "Exert City influence to the maximum extent possible to
facilitate (deleted "reduce land, construction, and
financial costs associated with the) development of new
residential units". (Addition is underlined.) The
motion carried 3-1, Council Member Amburgey voting no.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Policy 214 and Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, the following action
Amended Policy was taken:
215 Adopted
Adopted Policy 214: "Continue to allocate a majority
of the City's Community Development Block Grant funds
to direct housing -related programs".
Adopted amended Policy 215: "Support the continuation
and expansion of Federal housing assistance programs
for very low-, low-, and moderate -income households".
(Addition is underlined.)
Council Member Genis brought up the potential program
of using a portion of the City's CDBG funds in conjunc-
tion with other cities in the County to provide housing,
not as part of the General Plan, but as a program to
pursue in the future.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Amended Policy Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, amended Policy 216 was
216 Adopted adopted: "Continue membership in the Orange County
Housing Authority to provide housing assistance to very
low-, low-, and moderate -income households". (Addition
is underlined.)
Motion to Adopt A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by
Policy 216A Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt amended Steering Commit -
Failed to Carry tee Policy 216A: "Require all new rental projects over
20 units to provide 10 percent of the total units to
meet specialized housing needs", (deleted '[handicapped,
elderly, minorities, female -headed households and large
families]'). The motion failed to carry 2-2, Council
Members Amburgey and Glasgow voting no.
f1
Z319
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council`' -
Policy 216B Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Steering Committee
Adopted Policy 216B was adopted: "Support legislation to modify
the provisions of California Government Code Section
65852.2 to prohibit the ability of a property owner to
add an accessory apartment on land with a low density
designation".
Council Member Genis made a motion to adopt two new
policies; however, she withdrew the motion and stated
she would submit her recommendations to staff for
Council consideration at a future General Plan meeting.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle invited comments on Program IX A,
Incentive for Affordable Housing, and pointed out that
staff has amended the "Program/Action Description"
portion in the memorandum dated January 22, 1990, to
conform with new State law.
Scott Williams, Steering Committee member, reported
that most citizens who provided input were opposed to
density bonuses, and it was his opinion that density
bonuses should not be in the General Plan since they are
State -mandated.
Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, spoke at
length about which staff members are qualified to answer
questions regarding State law.
MO'T'ION On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Program IX A Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, amended Planning
Adopted Commission Program IX -A was adopted with the "Program/
Action Description" modified to incorporate wording
contained in staff's aforementioned memorandum:
"Provide incentives (i.e., density bonuses, fee reduc-
tions, etc.) to developers who agree to construct
(deleted 125 percent low- and moderate -income units')
20 percent low-income units, 10 percent very low-income
units, or 50 percent senior citizen affordable units".
(Addition is underlined.)
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Program IX -B Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Program IX -B, Manufac-
Adopted tured Housing, was adopted.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Program IX -C Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Program IX -C,
Adopted Granny Flats, was adopted.
Motion to Adopt A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded
Program IX -D by Vice -Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt Program IX -D,
Withdrawn Accessory Apartments.
Council Member Amburgey asked.if the City would be in
violation of State law if this program were deleted.
The Assitant City Attorney replied that she could not
recall anything in the General Plan guidelines that
requires the City to incorporate this provision into
the General Plan. The Senior Planner agreed with the
attorney's statement, and added that a reason for
including the program in the Housing Element is to take
an accounting of those units towards meeting the City's
regional housing need.
-Council Member Glasgow withdrew his motion to adopt
Program IX -D.
In response to a question from Jay Humphrey, 1620
Sandalwood Street, Costa Mesa, the Senior Planner
explained that State law does not mandate that the
program regarding accessory apartments be included in
the General Plan.
Motion to Adopt A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded
Program IX -D by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt Program IX -D,
Failed to Carry Accessory Apartments. The motion failed to carry 2-2,
Council Members Genis and Glasgow voting no.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle suggested bringing back those
items which failed to carry because of a tie vote.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle announced that public comment
would be received for Programs IX -E, Federal/State
Housing Programs; IX -F, Housing Assistance; IX -G,
Shared Housing; and IX -H, Incentives for Low-income
Housing.
Scott Williams, Steering Committee member, wanted to
know if these were pre-existing programs. The Senior
Planner responded affirmatively.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, referenced
Program IX -H, asking if the wording for this program
should include State -mandated "very low-income". The
Senior Planner replied that this is a City program;
therefore, it is for Council to decide on the wording.
Ms. Luymes stated that even though the Steering Commit-
tee was opposed to incentives relating to density
bonuses to provide affordable housing, she was not sure
whether there was any opposition to providing fee
reductions to developers who agree to construct low-
income units.
Brief discussion ensued regarding Department Budgets/
General Fund, and Vice Mayor Hornbuckle requested staff
to clarify the wording when the General Plan document
is brought back to Council.
Sid Soffer spoke about Program IX -G, under "Program/
Action Description", which refers to the Golden Timers
Senior Center assisting people, predominantly senior
citizens, to find roommates to help reduce individual
housing costs. He wanted to know if this activity by
the Center would affect the surrounding neighborhood.
He did not feel it was the City's obligation to find
roommates.
MOTION
Adopted Programs
On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
IX -E through IX -G,
Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Programs IX -E
Amended Where
through IX -G were adopted with the stipulation that
Appropriate
"very low-income" be added where appropriate.
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Amended Program
Council Member Genis, and carried 4-0, Program IX -H
IX -H Adopted
was adopted with the "Program/Action Description" modi-
fied to read: "Provide incentives (deleted "fee reduc-
tions") to developers who agree to construct very low -
and low-income units"; and to include "very low-"
wherever appropriate.
Referencing the "Implementation Schedule" of 1988-89 for
Program IX -H, Vice Mayor Hornbuckle requested staff to
make the appropriate adjustment.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle invited public comment for Coal X,
Provision of Adequate Sites, and Policies 217 through
228.
321
Scott Williams, Steering Committee member, advised that
the information regarding the ratio of apartments (57.4
percent) to single-family family units (36.6 percent)
was obtained from the City's Community Report. Mr.
Williams made brief statements regarding the committee's
recommendations for Goal X and some of the policies
listed thereunder.
Council Member Genis ccmmented that Steering Committee
Policy 219A was very similar to proposed Policy 220,
and wanted clarification. Jan Luymes, Steering Commit-
tee member, recalled that the committee intended to add
a new Policy 219A.
Jan Luymes addressed new Program X -A (A) contained in
staff's memorandum of January 22, 1990, asking whether
the third line should read "single-family detached"
instead of "attached". The Senior Planner responded
that the correct word is "detached".
Sid Soffer was of the opinion that the document favors
residential uses and does not adequately address the
need for commercial developments. Vice Mayor Hornbuckle
commented that there are references to economic stabil-
ity under "Land Use" on Page -205 and other sections of
the document.
Frank Cole, 2482 Fairview Way, Costa Mesa, spoke about
attached owner -occupied housing and multiple -unit hous-
ing. He strongly disagreed with comments made earlier
that those who live in attached housing contribute
greatly to increased crime.
Council Member Genis pointed out that Goal VII is very
similar, if not identical to Goal X, and suggested
deleting the first sentence of the latter goal. The
Senior Planner agreed that the deletion would be
appropriate.
Council Member Amburgey opposed the amendment suggested
by Council Member Genis and felt the first portion of
Goal X should remain for clarification purposes.
Motion Made to Council Member Amburgey made a motion, seconded by
Adopt Goal X Council Member Glasgow, to adopt Goal X as proposed.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION A substitute motion was made by Council Member Genis,
Amended Goal X seconded by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt amended
Adopted Goal X: (deleted "It is the goal of the City of Costa
Mesa to provide a balanced community of residential,
commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses to
meet the competing demands for alternative developments
within each land use classification".); "It is the goal
of the City of Costa Mesa to provide adequate, suitable
sites for residential use and development of a range of
housing that varies sufficiently in terms of cost,
design, size, location, and tenure to meet the housing
needs of all segments of the.community at a level no
greater than that which can be supported by the infra-
structure". The motion carried 3-1, Council Member
Amburgey voting no. (Addition is underlined.)
MOTION On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Policy 217 Member Amburgey, and carried 5-0, Policy 217 was
Adopted adopted: Establish regulatory policies and controls
which will encourage well designed planned residential
developments and provide adequate open space, recrea-
tional facilities, off-street parking, circulation, and
322
envirormental amenities within housing project areas -
without comprcmising the affordability of newly
constructed residential units".
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Vice
Policy 217A Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 4-0, Policy 217A, as
Adopted recommended in staff's memorandum of January 22, was
adopted: "Establish regulatory policies and controls
which will encourage the development of single-family
detached housing types (i.e., small lot or zero -lot
line subdivisions) which are affordable to first-time
home buyers".
Policies 218, 219, Vice Mayor Hornbuckle requested staff to reevaluate
219A, and 220 Policies 218, 219, 219A, and 220, and to report back
Referred to Staff to Council.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Policy 221 Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Policy 221 was
Adopted adopted: "Provide opportunities for development of well
planned and designed projects which, through vertical
or horizontal integration, provide for development of
compatible residential, commercial, industrial, insti-
tutional, or public uses within a single project or
neighborhood".
Motion Made to A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded
Adopt Policies by Council Member Amburgey, to adopt Policies 222 and
222 and 223 223.
AMENDED MOTION Council Member Genis suggested a minor change in Policy
Amended Policy 222, and thereafter Council Member Glasgow amended his
222 and Policy motion to adopt amended Policy 222 and proposed Policy
223 Adopted 223:
Amended Policy 222: "Cooperate with large employers,
the Chamber of Commerce, and major commercial and
industrial developers to identify and implement pro-
grams to balance employment growth (deleted 'and the
subsequent demand for') with the ability to provide
housing opportunities affordable to the incomes of the
newly created job opportunities". (Addition is under-
lined.)
Policy 223: "Continue to allocate portions of the
City's Community Development Block Grant funds for
acquisition and write-down of land costs to increase
the supply of low- and moderate -income housing oppor-
tunities".
1
The amended motion was seconded by Council Member
Amburgey, and carried 4-0,
MOTION
A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by
Policy 224
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to delete Policy 224.
Deleted
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle commented that the latter portion
of the policy would be acceptable to her.
Council Member Amburgey preferred to delete the policy.
Substitute Motion
A substitute motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle,
to Adopt Amended
seconded by Council Member Genis, to adopt amended
Policy 224 With-
Policy 224: (deleted 'Review existing residential
drawn
neighborhoods or districts to identify those areas which
are suitable for recycling or conversion to make intense
or') "Ensure that higher density residential development
consistent with infrastructure and street capacities
1
323
as well as existing or future social, economic, and
environmental constraints".. (Addition is underlined.)
After brief discussion, Vice Mayor Hornbuckle withdrew
her substitute motion.
The motion to delete Policy 224 carried 4-0.
MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded
Eblicy 224A by Council Member Glasgow, to delete Steering Committee
Deleted Policy -224A: "Discourage upzoning which is not compati-
ble with adjoining residential properties".
Council Member Genis supported the policy; however, she
did not believe it was located under the proper goal.
Staff Directed to Vice Mayor Hornbuckle asked staff to research the goals
Research Similar to determine whether a similar policy exists, and if
Policy not, Council would then decide if they want to include
such a policy in the appropriate location.
`Ihe motion to delete Policy 224A carried 3=1, Vice Mayor
Hornbuckle voting no.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Policy 225 Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Policy 225 was
Adopted adopted: "Consider the effects of new employment,
particularly in relation to housing demands, when new
commercial or industrial development is proposed".
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Amended Policy Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, amended Policy 226 was
226 Adopted adopted: "Consider the potential impact on housing
opportunities and existing residential neighborhoods
when reviewing rezone petitions affecting residential
properties". (Addition is underlined.)
MOTION On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Policies 227 Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, the following action
and 228 Adopted was taken:
Policy 227 Adopted: "Continue to allocate portions of
the City's CDBG funds to subrecipients who provide
shelter for the homeless".
Policy 228 Adopted: "Identify potential sites for
residential development and emergency shelters for
the homeless."
RECESS Vice Mayor Hornbuckle declared a recess at 10:20 p.m.,
and the meeting reconvened at 10:35 p.m.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle invited public comment on Programs
X -A; X -A (A) contained in staff's memorandum dated
January 22; X -B; and X-C.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, addressed new
Program X -A (A), and stated that even though this Pro-
gram was not in existence when the Steering Committee
met, she could not imagine any opposition to single-
family housing. Ms. Luymes advised that the committee
opposed Program X-C because they were not in favor of
vertical integration for mixed use and citizens were
opposed to mixed uses altogether. She felt it would
be more appropriate to provide an adequate buffer
between commercial and residential uses.
MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded
Program X -A by Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, adopting
Adopted Program X -A, Zoning Ordinance Review.
324
During discussion, the City Manager confirmed that all
dates contained in the document will be updated, and
funding sources will be clarified prior to Council's
final review of the General Plan.
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Amended Program
Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, amended Policy
X -A (A) Adopted
X A (A), Opportunities for First Time Home Buyers, was
adopted: "Program/Action Description" was modified to
read: "Develop residential zoning districts and devel-
opment standards which encourage development of single-
family (deleted 'detached') housing products (i.e.,
small lot or zero -lot line subdivisions) which are
affordable to first-time home buyers".
MOTION
A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey, seconded
Amended Program
by Council Member Glasgow, to adopt amended Program X -B,
X -B Adopted
Land Acquisition, stipulating that staff add "very
low-income" where applicable.
Council Member Genis opposed Program X -B as written
because it appeared to her that the City would be taking
an active role in acquiring land against the wishes of
Motion to Adopt
the property owner.
Amended Program
The motion to adopt amended Program X -B carried 3-1,
X -E Failed to Carry
Council Member Genis voting no.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Program X-C Council Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Program X-C,
Adopted Mixed Use Developments, was adopted.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle invited public comment on Programs
X -D, X -E, and X -F.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, spoke about the
recommendations made by the Steering Committee for
Programs X -D and X -E.
Frank Cole commented on the State requirement for a
balance of housing and jobs, and recommended that the
State contribute the Fairgrounds property so the City
could provide the needed housing.
MOTION
A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by
Amended Program
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt amended Steering Commit -
X -D Adopted
tee Program X -D, Housing Supply Impact Assessment:
Using "Objectives/ Anticipated Results" recommended by
the Steering Committee, but amended as follows: "Deter-
mine potential impact of major employment -generating
developments on the local housing market prior to
approval of proposed development, while limiting new
permanent employment -generating land uses (deleted '[by
reducing building intensities or reducing the total
amount of land devoted to these uses] until housing
opportunities and employment are in balance Citywide
based on recent employee per household information')
where housing impacts are determined to be unaccept-
able". (Addition is underlined.) The motion carried
3-1, Council Member Glasgow voting no.
Motion to Adopt
A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by
Amended Program
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, to adopt Steering Committee
X -E Failed to Carry
Program X -E, Rezone Review, amended by deleting the word
"detached" where mentioned. The motion failed to carry
2-2, Council Members Amburgey and Glasgow voting no.
1
MOTION On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Program X -E Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, proposed Program X -E
Adopted was adopted.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Amburgey, seconded by
Program X -F Council Member Genis, and carried 4-0, Program X -F,
Adopted Development Monitoring Program, was adopted.
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle announced that Programs X -G, X -H,
X -I, and X -J would be discussed, and asked for public
input.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, stated that 79
percent of citizen input to the committee opposed
single-family homes being replaced by multi -family
projects, and pointed out that the committee opposed
Program X -G.
Frank Cole, spoke about the City of Santa Ana's ordi-
nance which down -zones a number of its apartment
inf ills .
Motion to Adopt A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey to adopt
Program X -G Died Program X -G, Apartment Infill. The motion died for
for Lack of a Second lack of a second.
MOTION A motion was made by Council Member Genis, seconded by
Program X -G Council Member Glasgow, to delete Program X -G. The
Deleted motion carried 3-1, Council Member Amburgey voting no.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Program X -H Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Program X -H, CDBG
Adopted Funding for Homeless Shelter, was adopted.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Program X -I Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, Program X -I, Adequate
Adopted Sites, was adopted.
MOTION On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Amended Program Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, amended Program X -J,
X -J Adopted Homeless Shelter Ordinance, was adopted: The "Program/
Action Description" was changed to read, "Amend the
Municipal Code to specifically allow homeless shelters
in appropriate areas subject to standard conditions".
(Addition is underlined.)
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle invited public comment on Goal XI
and Policies 229 through 231B.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, addressed the
ccxmnittee's reccmnendations for the policies contained
under Goal XI, Accessibility.
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Glasgow, seconded by Council
Amended Goal XI
Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, amended Goal XI was
Adopted
adopted: "It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to
ensure that all existing and future housing opportunities
are open and available to all social and economic seg-
ments of the community without discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin
or ancestry, marital status, age, household composition
or size, or any other arbitrary factors". (Addition
is underlined.)
MOTION
A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded
Policy 229
by Council Member Amburgey, and carried 4-0, adopting
Adopted
Policy 229: "Support the intent and spirit of equal
housing opportunities as expressed in the Civil Rights
�...� 25
Act of 1886, Title VII of the 1968 Civil Rights Act,
California Rumford Fair Housing Act, and the California
Unruh Civil Rights Act".
Policy 230 After brief discussion regarding Policy 230 and its
Tabled reference to the Fair Housing Council of Orange County,
Council agreed to table this item.
Motion to Adopt
A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey to adopt
Policy 231 Died for
Policy 231. The motion died for lack of a second.
Lack of a Second
Commission Policy 231A: "Provide financial incentives
A motion was made by Council Member Glasgow, seconded
MOTION
by Council Member Genis, to adopt amended Planning
Amended Policy
Commission Policy 231: "Provide density bonuses or
231 Adopted
other incentives (exemption from development or process-
ing fees, participation in costs of off-site improve-
ments and/or land acquisition, or exemption from certain
development standards) to developers of residential
projects which provide a specified percentage of the
MOTION
units for (deleted 'handicapped or disabled persons')
Amended Policy
specialized housing needs. Density bonuses (deleted
231B Adopted
'will') may be provided when the bonus units do not
allow the project's resulting density to exceed the
General Plan designation density limit". (Additions are
Program XI -A
underlined.) The motion carried 3-1, Council Member
Referred to
Amburgey voting no.
Motion to Delete
A motion was made by Council Member Amburgey to delete
Policy 231A Died for
Planning Commission Policy 231A. The motion died for
Lack of a Second
lack of a second.
The Senior Planner explained that this is a City -
generated policy, not a State requirement.
Jan Luymes, Steering Committee member, stated that her
interpretation of the Planning Commission's intention
was that in lieu of a density bonus where the General
Plan designation has been exceeded, financial incentives
should be provided.
MOTION
A motion was made by Vice Mayor Hornbuckle, seconded
Amended Policy
by Council Member Glasgow, to adopt amended Planning
231A Adopted
Commission Policy 231A: "Provide financial incentives
in lieu of density bonus units in residential projects
containing units for (deleted 'handicapped or disabled
persons') specialized housing needs if the proposed
density exceeds that allowed by the General Plan desig-
nation of the property. Require the review of such
projects by Planning Commission and City Council".
(Addition is underlined.) The motion carried 3-1,
Council Member Genis voting no.
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Council
Amended Policy
Member Glasgow, and carried 4-0, amended Steering
231B Adopted
Committee Policy 231B was adopted: (deleted 'By January
1, 1991) "Develop programs and policies to address the
housing needs of senior citizens".
Program XI -A
Vice Mayor Hornbuckle announced that Program XI -A, Fair
Referred to
Housing Council of Orange County, is being referred to
Staff
staff for reevaluation.
MOTION
On motion by Council Member Genis, seconded by Vice
Amended Program
Mayor Hornbuckle, and carried 4-0, amended Program
XI -B Adopted
XI -B, Incentives for Handicapped Housing, was adopted:
Change "handicapped or disabled persons" to "specialized
housing needs" where applicable.
Deficient Dick Sherrick, 3146 Country Club Drive, Costa Mesa,
Intersections asked when staff would be providing the information he
requested about the specific developments which are
causing nine intersections to operate below acceptable
levels.
The City Manager suggested addressing Mr. Sherrick's
request at the General Plan meeting scheduled for Febru-
ary 7, 1990, so that the.City's consultant could be
present to answer questions. He also suggested that
staff prepare an interim memorandum prior to that date.
Jan Luymes suggested addressing the intersections when
the land use map amendments are discussed.
COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Amburgey referred to the City Manager's
COMMENTS memorandum dated January 25, 1990, concerning the Irvine
Business Complex Urban Village Proposal. He was very
Irvine Business concerned about the intensity of the project, possibly
Complex as high as 100 units to the acre, and its significant
impact on Costa Mesa.
The City Manager stated that he would report on this
item at the meeting of January 29, 1990.
ADJOURNMENT At 11:45 p.m., the Vice Mayor adjourned the meeting to
Monday, January 29, 1990, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, to
continue the public hearing on the General Plan Review
Program.
Mayor of the City VUosta Mesa
ATTEST:
ity Clerk.of the CiEy of Costa M a
327