After additional Council comment, Gonzales made a motion to receive and file the report, but City Attorney Karl Berger noted that there was public comment.Attorney Nancy Shriner told the Council that the preparation of an urgency ordinance - the staff report noted such an action to temporarily prohibit developments on any R-4 zoned parcel - did not meet legal guidelines. “The city is walking on thin ice,” as the Plaza Amistad property is the only such R-4 parcel that is vacant.The update of the Housing Element would be the proper time to address such issues, and Shriner noted that “potential for discrimination aside,” affordable housing also benefits seniors and the handicapped. She added that violating the federal Civil Rights statute could be costly to the city, as well as to individual Council members.“Is the Council protected?” asked Luna. “She just mentioned that there could be damages.... Who protects the Council for doing their job?”Berger said that the agenda item under discussion concerned R-4 property in general, and not Plaza Amistad.“She threatened to sue the Council,” said Luna.Councilman Dr. Gabino Aguirre said he was misled by Fernandez’s September 4 motion to bring the issue to the Council. “I would like to see all the options for that property; that was the motion I approved,” he noted.After more discussion, Aguirre said it “would behoove the Council to wait” before rezoning any R-4 parcels. “I myself am feeling vulnerable... at our last meeting it was stated that we were going to target this project. It’s on video, it’s on tape, and I’m not feeling very good about that.” And, Aguirre added, “I cannot support what is going on here.”
S.P. City Council told they risk legal action if they spot-zone R-4 property
October 05, 2007
Santa Paula City Council
Zoning regulations, specifically R4 property zoning was the subject of a long Council discussion at the September 17 meeting, where Council members were told that they risk legal action if they proceed with an emergency ordinance that could be interpreted as spot zoning.
By Peggy KellySanta Paula TimesZoning regulations, specifically R4 property zoning was the subject of a long Council discussion at the September 17 meeting, where Council members were told that they risk legal action if they proceed with an emergency ordinance that could be interpreted as spot zoning. R-4 zoning is described as high-density, allowing 22-29 units for very low-, low- and moderate-income housing.The issue surfaced when Councilman Ralph Fernandez asked at the September 4 meeting that the zoning of the parcel that had been proposed for the 150-unit Plaza Amistad be brought to the Council as an agenda item.At the September 17 meeting, City Manager Wally Bobkiewicz said areas of the city were previously identified as suitable for R-4 development that would help the city meet housing creation mandated by the state. In 2002, the Council “believed at that time” that such high-density projects were the only option to meet requirements for low-, very low- and affordable housing.The city presently has 14 R-4 zoned parcels, including the only vacant one, an approximately six-acre parcel that Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation (CEDC) had sought to develop as Plaza Amistad. The Council denied the application in August by a 3-2 margin. Bobkiewicz noted that the city must have an updated Housing Element completed by June 2008, and that “this might be a good time to reexamine” parcel zoning.“To me, if there is only one vacant parcel” and if the owner of the parcel was singled out for zone changes, that “would give the appearance of being discriminatory,” said Vice Mayor John Procter. He added that the staff report presented did not address Fernandez’s specific request, which targeted the Plaza Amistad property. “I have a real concern that looking at R-4 in general is a Trojan horse masked as a global look at how we do things,” and the intent to target one parcel owner, said Procter.Mayor Ray Luna said his feeling is that Fernandez and Councilman Bob Gonzales ran on a platform “knocking you and I and the previous Council” on higher density projects that were approved. Procter repeated that the parcel was being targeted.“I think this came about by my being concerned about a lot of things,” said Fernandez, such as projects built that brought complaints from the community. “This is not the only parcel we have concerns with. Yes, we want to look at the ordinance and the options... we don’t want to get into a situation where we continue down this path.”
