Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03092004 - D.4 DA THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 9, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Uilkema, Greenberg &Glover NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisors Gioia&DeSaulnier ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: HEARING ON COUNTY INITIATED ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ADD CHAPTER 84-769 FLOOD HAZARD COMBINING DISTRICT,TO THE COUNTY CODE, COUNTY FILE #ZT010003 (COUNTYWIDE) RELISTED to April 20, 2004 at 11:00 a.m. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. Attested: March 9, 2004 John Sweeten, Clerk of the Board Of Supervisors and County Adminisator By. Deputy Clerk T0: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS • to Contra FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AI CP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR � Costa County cou DATE: MARCH 9, 2004 1)tl SUBJECT: HEARING ON COUNTY INITIATED ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ADD CHAPTER 84-76, FLOOD HAZARD COMBINING DISTRICT, TO THE COUNTY CODE. COUNTY FILE #ZT010003. (COUNTYWIDE) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS A. FIND for purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act that the proposed text amendment is exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. B. FIND that the proposed ordinance text amendment adding Chapter 84-76 to the County Ordinance Code, as recommended, is consistent with the General Plan. C. ADOPT the findings contained in the County Planning Commission Resolution No. 31-2003 as the basis for the Board's action. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOPIMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE (S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT _� AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION AYES: NOES: TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN Contact: Will Nelson (925) 335-1208 ATTESTED Orig: Community Development Department JOHN SWEETEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD cc: County Counsel OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY County Administrator's Office ADMINISTRATOR Clerk of the Board BY DEPUTY March 9, 2004 Board of Supervisors County File#ZT010003 Page 2 D. INTRODUCE Ordinance, waive second reading, and set March 9, 2004 for adoption. E. DIRECT staff to post a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk. FISCAL IMPACT None. BACKGROUND/ REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS Various parts of the County are subject to flooding and are designated as Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). When building in SFHAs, compliance with the Floodplain Management Ordinance is required. In the most severely impacted areas of the County, compliance with the Floodplain Management Ordinance requires residents to raise the lowest habitable floor of their homes several feet above the ground. The County considers the open area between the building and the ground to be a story if it is more than six vertical feet from the grade to the top of the finished floor above and the grade is flat enough to reasonably be considered usable space. However, the Floodplain Management Ordinance prohibits that space from being developed as habitable area. Therefore, even though the Code allows residences that are up to 21/2 stories tall, the residents of the areas most severely impacted by flooding are limited to effectively developing only 11/2 stories of habitable area unless a variance to allow more stories is approved. The proposed ordinance text amendment would create a combining district that, where applied, would exempt the space between the ground and the first floor from being considered a story if provision of that space was required in order to comply with the Floodplain Management Ordinance. The result would be that those property owners in areas severely impacted by flooding would no longer have to gain approval of a variance before being able to develop the same number of habitable floors as those who do not live in such impacted areas. If the proposed ordinance text amendment is adopted, then the Community Development Department will seek Board approval shortly after the ordinance becomes effective to rezone the offshore portion of Bethel Island so that the combining district applies there. On November 18, 2003 the County Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the proposed ordinance text amendment and rezoning of Bethel Island. There were no speakers at the hearing. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Board adopt the proposed ordinance text amendment and approve the rezoning. RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 31-2003 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDATION ON THE COUNTY INITIATED TEXT AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 84-76 RELATING TO THE CREATION OF THE FLOOD HAZARD COMBINING DISTRICT, County File#ZT010003. WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa determined that in certain areas prone to flood hazards, enforcement of height limitations for residential buildings created an unnecessary hardship for property owners; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the proposed text amendment, better known as the Flood Hazard Combining District, is to regulate improvements to residential buildings located in Special Flood Hazard Areas; to streamline the permitting process for residential development in Special Flood Hazard Areas by exempting development that meets certain criteria from being considered a "story" for purposes of measuring building height; to allow productive use of the land beneath those residential buildings that are required to be elevated above ground level for purposes of compliance with Chapter 82-28 (Floodplain Management); and to protect the integrity of the levees by encouraging property owners to utilize the space under residential buildings rather than build illegal substandard buildings that negatively impact the stability of the levees; and WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa has set goals and policies in the Land Use Element of its General Plan to protect and improve the character and appearance of residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa has set goals and policies in the Safety Element of its General Plan to protect life and structures from the risks associated with flood hazards; and WHEREAS, after notice was lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, whereas all persons interested might appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, the County Planning Commission having fully reviewed, considered, and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and State and County CEQA guidelines, the project falls under the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), which states that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment,the activity is not subject to CEQA; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that County Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa recommends for adoption by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa the text amendment as described in the November 18, 2003 staff report and recommendations to the County Planning Commission, which will include County Code Chapter 84-76 relating to the creation of the Flood Hazard Combining District. BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED that County Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa finds that the proposed text amendment to create County Code Chapter 84-76 relating to the Flood Hazard Combining District, as described in November 18, 2003 staff report and recommendations to the County Planning Commission, is substantially consistent with the General Plan of Contra Costa County. The instructions by the County Planning Commission to prepare this resolution were given by motion of the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners- Clark, Wong, Mehlman, Terrell, Hanecak, Gaddis Battaglia NOES: Commissioners - None ABSENT: Commissioners - None ABSTAIN: Commissioners - None BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the County Planning Commission shall respectively sign and attest the certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors all in accordance with the Planning Laws of the State of California. Len Battaglia, Chair of the County Planning Commission, County of Contra Costa, State of California ATTEST: Dennis M. Barry, Secretary County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California PROPOSED ORDINANC E ORDINANCE NO. 2003 - DRAFT FLOOD HAZARD COMBINING DISTRICT The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance Code): SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance adds Chapter 84-76 to the Contra Costa County Code to establish the Flood Hazard (-FH) Combining District. The ordinance exempts certain areas beneath residences located in Special Flood Hazard Areas from being considered stories for purposes of measuring building height. SECTION II. Chapter 84-76 is added to the County Ordinance Code,to read: CHAPTER 84-76 FLOOD HAZARD (-FH) COMBINING DISTRICT Article 84-76.2 General 84-76.202 Flood Hazard (-FH) Combining District. All land within a zoning district combined with a flood hazard (-FH) combining district is subject to the additional regulations set forth in this chapter. (Ord. 2003- § 2.) 84-76.204 Purpose. The purpose of the flood hazard combining district is to regulate improvements to residential buildings located in Special Flood Hazard Areas; streamline the permitting process for residential development in Special Flood Hazard Areas by exempting development that meets certain criteria from being considered a "story"; allow productive use of the land beneath those residential buildings that are required to be elevated for purposes of compliance with Chapter 82-28 (Floodplain Management); and protect the integrity of the levees by encouraging property owners to utilize the space under residential buildings rather than build illegal substandard buildings that negatively impact the stability of the levees. (Ord. 2003- § 2.) 84-76.206 Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases have the following meanings: (a) "Base flood elevation"has the meaning set forth in Section 82-28.406. (b) "Special Flood Hazard Area(SFHA)"has the meaning set forth in Section 82-28.504. (c) "Finished floor"means the uppermost surface of any floor. (d) "Lowest habitable space" means the habitable space in a residential building that has the least vertical distance between its finished floor and the natural grade directly below, at every point within the building footprint. (e) "Under-level" refers to an undeveloped space between the natural grade and the lowest habitable space in those portions of a residential building that are located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, so long as that space is required to be greater than six feet in height in order to comply with the regulations of the Floodplain Management Ordinance. An under-level may be developed into non-habitable space so long as it is used only for storage,vehicle parking,building access and/or as a workshop. Article 84-76.4 Regulations 84.76.402 Applicability. The FH district may be combined with and may apply to any zoning district where residential uses are permitted or are permitted upon approval a land use permit and are located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. (Ord. 2003- § 2.) 84-76.404 Under-level exemption. In an —FH district, a space meeting the definition of an under-level, whether developed or undeveloped, shall not be considered a story for purposes of measuring building height. 84-76.406 Submittal requirements. In addition to all other required information, plans submitted with an application for a residential building permit in an—FH district must indicate, in relation to sea level, the elevation of natural grade, the base flood elevation, the elevation of required freeboard and the elevation of the lowest habitable space wherever the development is to be located. The plans must be detailed enough to allow a determination to be made as to whether an under-level exists. 84-76.408 Priority. Where there is any conflict between the regulations of this chapter and the regulations of Chapter 82-28 (Floodplain Management), the requirements of Chapter 82-28 shall govern. where there is any conflict between the regulations of this chapter and those of the underlying zoning district,the requirements of this chapter shall govern. (Ord. 2003- § 2.) SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days after passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for or against in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper published in this county. PASSED on, ,by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: JOHN SWEETEN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair And County Administrator By: [SEAL] Deputy 2 PERTINENT STAFF REPORTS Agenda Item# Community Development Contra Costa County COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 18, 2003 I. INTRODUCTION FLOOD HAZARD COMBINING DISTRICT COUNTY FILES #ZT010003 & #RZ013108: A County initiated proposal to add Chapter 84-76 to the County Ordinance Code, which creates the Flood Hazard (—FH) Combining District. The combining zoning district would exempt specific developed and undeveloped areas situated under residential buildings from being considered stories for the purpose of measuring building height, so long as the residences were located in Special Flood Hazard Areas and certain other criteria pertaining to the size and use of those areas were met. This proposal also includes rezoning some of Bethel Island (offshore portion only) so that this combining district would apply to that area. II. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission adopt a motion recommending that the Board of Supervisors adopt zoning text amendment file #ZT010003 that adds Chapter 84-76, Flood Hazard (—FH) Combining District to the County Code and rezoning file#RZ013108 that applies the—FH district in the Bethel Island area as described below. III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The area of the proposed rezoning includes various General Plan land use designations including Agricultural Lands (AL), Commercial (CO), Commercial Recreation (CR), Open Space (OS), Multiple-Family Low (ML), Single-Family High (SH), Single-Family Low(SL),Mobile Home(MO) and Parks and Recreation(PR). B. Zoning: The combining district could be applied to those zoning districts that allow for the establishment of residential uses. This means that it can be applied to all districts except the Limited Office District (O-1), Administrative Office District (A- O), Community Business District (C-B) or Controlled Heavy Industrial District (W- 3). The area of the proposed rezoning includes the following zoning districts: A-2, A- 3, R-6, R-40, M-12,F-1, P-1,T-1, F-R and R-B. C. CEQA: The proposed zoning text amendment and rezoning are exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is S-2 County Planning Commission November 18,2003 County Files#ZT010003,&#RZ013108 no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment,the activity is not subject to CEQA. D. Flood Zone: The vast majority of the project area lies within a Special Flood Hazard Area (Flood Zone A). Only two very small portions of the offshore part of Bethel Island are outside of Flood Zone A. IV. AGENCY COMMENTS A. Public Works: Stated that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the Floodplain Management Ordinance. B. Bethel Island Fire District: The district had no objections. Early in the process of developing this ordinance the County considered a 5-foot increase in the building height limit, which would have allowed building heights up to 40 feet. Staff met with representatives of the fire district to discuss the implications that such a height increase would have on fire fighting capabilities. The fire district's ability to effectively fight fire is limited by the height of the ladders it currently carries on its trucks, which allow access to points up to 30 feet in height. Therefore, for reasons of public safety it was deemed inappropriate to allow additional building height. VI. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The motivation to create the proposed combining district grew out of a combined effort by the County and the Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District (BIMID) to streamline the permitting process for certain residential development in floodplains and to increase the integrity of the levee system in the Bethel Island area. Most of Bethel Island is within a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). In order to comply with the Floodplain Management Ordinance, residents are required to raise the lowest habitable floor of their homes to a height of at least two feet above the base flood elevation. In many cases this yields a building that is over 6 feet above the ground and is supported by stilts. The County considers that space between the building and the ground to be a story if it is greater than six feet in height from grade to the top of the finished floor above. However, the Floodplain Management Ordinance does not allow that space to be developed as habitable area. Thus, some residents are required to add an entire extra story to their homes but are then prohibited from using it as habitable area. Therefore, even though the Code allows residences that are up to 21/2 stories tall, the residents of the most severely impacted areas of Bethel Island end up being able to develop only 11/2 stories of habitable area unless a variance to allow more stories is approved. A review of variance applications processed on Bethel Island since 1980 showed that 76 applications were received. Thirty-nine of the applications (51%) requested approval for three story residences. Of those 39 applications, approval was given to 36 (92%), two were withdrawn and no information could be found on the outcome of the remaining S-3 County Planning Commission November 18,2003 County Files#ZT010003,&#RZ013108 application. Because requests for three stories were the most common variance applications, and because those applications appear to always be approved due to the unique site conditions that allow the necessary findings to be made, staff deemed it appropriate to create and apply a combining district that eliminates the need for some of those variance applications. Around Bethel Island some residents have constructed a variety of structures that are actually set into the levees. BIMID is actively encouraging property owners to remove "substandard" structures from the levees for the purpose of improving the levees' integrity and performance. BIMID expects that property owners will be more likely to remodel their homes and remove those structures if they can utilize the area below the home and still have two habitable floors without having to obtain approval of a variance. When the combining district was first conceived consideration was given to allowing three-story residential buildings. The reason for taking a different route and defining under-levels and exempting them from being considered stories is that this method is more flexible. If the underlying zoning districts are ever amended to change their height limitations, then this section will not conflict because it does not set height limits of its own. VII. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION The proposed combining district could be applied to most zoning districts countywide. However, it would only benefit properties located in SFHAs. The area proposed for rezoning includes the offshore portion of Bethel Island. Nearly the entire project area is designated as a SFHA. The project area includes 9 general plan land use districts and 10 zoning districts. The vast majority of the area is designated Agricultural Lands (AL). Significant strips of Single-Family Residential High Density (SH) exist along waterways and pockets of Commercial (CO), Commercial Recreation (CR) and Mobile Home (MO) are scattered throughout the area. The project area has slight slopes but is generally considered to be flat and is occupied mostly by agricultural uses and single-family residences. Bethel Island is surrounded by a protective levee. VII. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposal is to create a new combining district (see attached) that gives relief to property owners severely affected by flood hazards and to rezone the offshore portion of Bethel Island so that the district applies there. VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION A. Proposed Changes to Ordinance Regulations: Chapter 84-76, Flood Hazard (—FH) Combining District would be added to the Ordinance Code. The purpose of the combining district is twofold. First, it is to assist those residents of the County who are most severely impacted by flood hazards by not counting the space beneath their S-4 County Planning Commission November 18,2003 County Files#ZT010003,&#RZ013108 homes as a story when the Floodplain Management Ordinance requires that space to be provided. Second, it is to safeguard the integrity of the protective levees by encouraging property owners to utilize the space under residential buildings rather than build illegal substandard buildings that negatively impact the stability of the levees. The key components of this combining district are the definition of an "under-level" and an exemption for under-levels from being considered stories for purposes of measuring building height. These components are proposed in the text of the combining district as follows: 84-76.206 Definitions (e) "Under-level" refers to an undeveloped space between the natural grade and the lowest habitable area of those portions of a residential building that are located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, so long as that space is required to be greater than six feet in height in order to comply with the regulations of the Floodplain Management Ordinance. An under-level may be developed into non-habitable space so long as it is used only for storage, vehicle parking, building access and/or as a workshop. 84-76.404 Under-level exemption. In an FH district, a space meeting the definition of an under-level, whether developed or left undeveloped, shall not be considered a story for purposes of measuring building height. The definition of an under-level is rather simple. Basically, if compliance with the Floodplain Management Ordinance requires the provision a space greater than six feet in height (measured from the natural grade to the finished floor directly above) beneath a residential building, then that space is an under-level and can be developed with non-habitable uses. Spaces that are six feet tall or less would not meet the Code's definition of a story. The property owner would still have to raise the residence but would not be so severely affected by being in a SFHA that a story of habitable area was sacrificed by the raising. Spaces that are greater than six feet tall but are not required by the Code to be that tall are not considered under-levels. In that case, the property owner has elected to sacrifice habitable area by building an entire story at ground level and therefore should not benefit from the provisions of the —FH District. The —FH District is meant to help those who do not have a choice and are required by the Code to sacrifice habitable area by building an extra story at ground level. The table below explains the various scenarios when the space beneath the residence would, or would not,be considered an under-level. S-5 County Planning Commission November 18,2003 County Files#ZT010003,&#RZ013108 Is the space beneath the building Scenario considered an under-level? es/No Building located outside of floodplain boundary (height of space between No finished floor and ground is irrelevant). Building located inside of floodplain boundary and height of space between No finished floor and ground is 6 feet or less. Building located inside of floodplain boundary and height of space between finished floor and ground is greater than 6 No feet, but the Floodplain Management Ordinance does not require the space to be that tall. Building located inside of floodplain boundary and height of space between finished floor and ground is greater than 6 Yes feet, as required by the Floodplain Management Ordinance. Once a space has been determined to be an under-level, then it would be exempt from being considered a story for purposes of measuring building height. The result would be that those spaces greater than six feet tall beneath residences could now be developed and two stories of habitable area could still be developed above. The County and BIMID hope that this will encourage property owners to utilize those spaces instead of building accessory structures around their properties and particularly within the levee. This would improve both the integrity of the levees and the aesthetics of the neighborhoods. B. Proposed Rezoning: The proposal is to rezone the offshore portion of Bethel Island (the island itself) so that the existing zoning is combined with the—FH District. All of the zoning districts on the island would be compatible with the —FH District. This portion of the County was selected for rezoning because it is where the flood hazard is the most severe and creates the most adversity for residents. The proposed rezoning would not alter the uses or design standards in any of the overlaid zoning districts. S-6 County Planning Commission November 18,2003 County Files#ZT010003,&#RZ013108 C. General Plan Compliance: The proposed combining district would not affect the density or use in any land use district. The general plan contains 13 policies pertaining to flood hazards, although only three could be viewed as relevant to this proposal. Relevant General Plan Policies 10-38 Flood proofing of structures shall be required in any area subject to flooding; this shall occur both adjacent to watercourses as well as in the Delta or along the waterfront. 10-41 Buildings in urban development near the shoreline and in flood-prone areas shall be protected from flood dangers, including consideration of rising sea levels caused by the greenhouse effect. 10-42 Habitable areas of structures near the shore line and in flood-prone areas shall be sited above the highest water level expected during the life of the project, or shall be protected for the expected life of the project by levees of an adequate design. This proposal is consistent with these general plan policies because the combining district is written such that the Floodplain Management Ordinance takes precedent if there is ever a conflict between the two. The reason for this is that the Floodplain Management Ordinance was specifically written to safeguard the health and safety of the public and this purpose should not be interfered with. The —FH District is concerned with improving the integrity of the levees, which would contribute to health and safety. However, it is also concerned with permit streamlining and aesthetics, which are not as important. Therefore, the FH District defers to the Floodplain Management Ordinance to ensure that the health and safety of the public protected. IX. CONCLUSION The proposed combining district will improve neighborhood aesthetics and will quicken permitting for some residential construction in the area proposed for rezoning. It is also the hope of the County and the Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District that by making it easier for residents to utilize the spaces beneath their homes, substandard structures will be removed from (or never built into) the protective levees, thereby improving their performance. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission adopt a motion recommending that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed zoning text amendment and rezoning.