Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.01 Draft CC 02-20-2007 Min DRAFT M.INUTES OF THE cITY COUNCIL OF THE cITY OF DUBLIN SPECIAL MEETING - FEBRUARY 20. 2007 A special meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, February 20, Z007, in the Regional Meeting Room of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m., by Mayor Lockhart. .. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hildenbrand, Oravetz, Sbranti and Scholz, and Mayor Lockhart. Housing Committee Members A vanzino, DeDiemar, Garren, Kaehuaea, Locke, Murdock, and Parkman and Planning Commission Liaison Biddle ABSENT: None ..... UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE 6:00 p.m. (440-10) Mayor Lockhart welcomed all in attendance and stated that the City Council would hold a Study Session with the Housing Committee to consider elements of a draft Universal Design Ordinance. Senior Building Official Gregory Shreeve presented the Staff Report and advised that the City of Dublin adopted the Housing Element of the General Plan in 2003. The Housing Element was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development, and contained a number of policies aimed at promoting equal housing opportunities for Dublin residents. Program E.Z.1 of the Housing Element stated that "the City will evaluate the feasibility of a Universal Design Ordinance that provides for greater adaptability and accessibility of housing for persons with disabilities." In an effort to implement this program of the DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING February 20, 2007 PAGE 42 CI DRAFT Housing Element, the City Council listed as a high priority goal in the Z006-Z007 Goals & Objectives, the preparation of a Universal Design Ordinance for adoption as an amendment to the California Building Code requirements. Staff asked for direction from the Committee and Council regarding: . Whether Staff should continue work on Ordinance Option A which would make it mandatory for developers to offer items on the State Model Ordinance checklist, or Ordinance Option B which would make it mandatory for developers to offer and install items on the checklist, once selected by the buyer; . Should the Universal Design Ordinance apply to 100% of, or some percentage thereof, all development or be limited to subdivisions of 20 units or greater; and . Should projects with existing and approved master plan checks be exempt from the Ordinance. Current City policy was that a project was built under all ordinances and laws in effective at the time the developer actually obtained their permits, not when they received approval of their plans. The Committee, Council and Staff discussed Ordinance Options A and B, as well as the State required checklist of universal accessibility features in the Model Ordinance. The Ordinance would apply to all single-family, duplex, or triplex unit developments. With Ordinance Option A, buyers would be able to select the items from the checklist that they wanted in their homes. With Ordinance Option B, some items would be mandatory for installation by the developer and others would have to be offered and installed by the developer if requested by the buyer. Committee member A vanzino asked if Staff knew how many developments or units would be exempt from this Ordinance, if adopted. Senior Building Official Shreeve advised that, of those developments that had permits or plan checks already, there were approximately 100 units at Schaefer Ranch that had not submitted for plan check at this time, but they could get approval before this item was approved. This would mean approximately 305 units could get an exemption. In the eastern portion of the City there were 70-90 units that did not have approval at this time. Council and Staff discussed Ordinance Option B and the possibility of allowing the buyer of a unit to request not to have certain Universal Ordinance items placed in their DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING February 20, 2007 PAGE 43 DRAFT unit, or the buyer could choose to change the required item(s) once they had purchased the home. It was noted that some of the items in Ordinance Option B were already installed in new developments because they were aesthetically pleasing and easy to acquIre. Mayor Lockhart asked if the zero step entry requirement could apply to a secondary entrance as opposed to the primary entrance. It might be less cumbersome for a buyer that did not need it now, but it could be beneficial for a future owner. Senior Building Official Shreeve advised that under the draft ordinance, it was a requirement for the primary entrance unless there was a site impracticality that did not allow for it. Mayor Lockhart remarked that it was cheaper to have some of these requirements put in during the construction of the home, and they could benefit future residents' needs. Public Comment: Rebecca Cox, Dublin resident, commented she would like to see Dublin be forward thinking and require this of developers. Aretha Green, Hayward resident, indicated that she was in favor of Dublin adopting an ordinance regarding Universal Design. Matt Jensen, Oakley resident, stated he was pleased the City was discussing Universal Design and that the associated bill did not read all or nothing; there could be a designated percentage of complying homes. J. Michael Galvan, Tri-Valley Coordinator for Community Resources for Independent Living, stated that most of the questions raised were style items. It was more expensive to redesign entrances to homes and bathrooms after the fact. The City needed to prepare for the future. Jessica Lehman, Community Resources for Independent Living, remarked that this issue dealt with designing homes in a way that worked for everyone. These items made accessibility easy for all ages. Developers estimated that the Universal Design items cost between Z-4 percent of total cost to install. Fresno and Murrieta were two cities that had adopted Universal Design Ordinances. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING February 20, 2007 PAGE 44 DRAFT Mayor Lockhart asked the Housing Committee members and Council for their input as to their preference of either Ordinance Option A or B. Committee member Biddle stated he was interested in going forward with Ordinance Option B. Committee member Parkman stated she preferred Ordinance Option B. Committee member A vanzino stated she preferred Ordinance Option B. Committee member DeDiemar stated he preferred Ordinance Option B. Committee member Garren stated that complying with entry requirements in Ordinance Option B would be tough and problematic for developers, but noted the benefit of both options. Committee member Locke stated she preferred Ordinance Option B. Committee member Kaehuaea stated she preferred Ordinance Option B. Cm. Sbranti stated his support for Ordinance Option B, and also concurred with the possibility of the complying entrance being a secondary entrance. Vm. Hildenbrand supported Ordinance Option B, and also agreed with: the option of a secondary entrance to meet requirements; giving exceptions to the projects that have already been approved; and, deciding on a percentage for number of units. She stated her concern for marketability of a completely Universal Ordinance home and buyers not wanting all options. Cm. Oravetz stated he preferred Ordinance Option B, and urged Staff to meet with developers to discuss the Ordinance. Cm. Scholz stated she also preferred Ordinance Option B. Mayor Lockhart stated it was important to send the right message to the residents and building community that the City understood that Universal Design was important. Having some of the basics of the Ordinance built into the house would be great, but she would not want the City to burden developers or citizens that had already been through plan checks. The Ordinance should be limited to projects of ZO units or more. She DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING February 20, 2007 PAGE 45 DRAFT would like to see more single story homes and/or homes with first floor master bedrooms in developments because these were in demand. Mayor Lockhart asked that, when Staff came back with a sample ordinance, they have studied and included options using different percentages of required units. Committee member Kaehuaea asked if incentives for developers could be built into the Ordinance as was done in the City of Livermore. City Manager Ambrose responded that since the City of Dublin did not have the same restrictions in number of units built a year, as did Livermore, that kind of incentive was not necessary. Committee member Parkman asked if the City could at least require blocking in the bath walls to allow for installation of handrails by owners later on. City Manager Ambrose stated that this would be a legal question because the City had development agreements with all the builders so Staff would have to review each agreement to see if they were or were not subject to new fees or requirements. Mayor Lockhart stated that the City could at least discuss that option with the developer. Vm. Hildenbrand reiterated her concern for the marketability of new homes if the requirements were included before they were purchased. Mayor Lockhart agreed that Staff should also study this concern. . ADJOURNMENT . 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 7:03 p.m. to the next regular Council meeting of February ZO, Z007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Mayor ATTEST: DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING February 20, 2007 PAGE 46 DRAFT City Clerk .~~ , DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING February 20, 2007 PAGE 47