02-26-1991 CC MINUTES - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITY OF RIVERSIDE COUNCILMEMBERS , i.utes ofReg.lar Meeti.g of the City Cou. cil · Date of HeeC~: ~eS~a~ 26t Z99Z Place of Meeting: Council Ch~r, City Hall WARDS Roll Call: Present ~X~X',X~X~X~X~X~ ~OSED SESSION The ~yor announced that the City Council would recess to a closed session to meet ~=h its designated representative regardi~ labor relations matters purs~nt to ~vernment Code Section 54957.6. ~e ~yor also announced a closed session pursuant to Gove~ent Code Section 54956.9(a) to co~er ~th its attorney regarding pendi~ litigation which has ~en iMtiated fomlly and to ~ich the City is a party--the titles of the litiga- tion being ~bert Mendoza v. City of Riverside, et al., ~verside Superior Court Case No. 209701; and T & S Development, Inc., etc., v. City of ~verside, etal., Riverside County Superior Court Case No. 197998; as well as a closed session to confer ~th its at- torney regarding pending litigation pursuant to Gove~ent Code Section 54956.9(c) to de- cide whether to initiate litigation. The Mayor and Mebers of the City Council recessed to the Conference Room adjoining the Council Ch~ber. The ~yor and Members of the City Council returned to the Council Ch~r. PUBLIC HE~INGS BEFO~ M CI~ CO~CIL AT 3 P.M. F~R [~ING - SEISMIC ~OFIT OF ~OUS ~I~ORCED ~SO~Y BUILDINGS - O~I- N~CE I~ODU~D 3 P.M.--Further hearing was called to consider adoption of a proposed ordi~nce for the seis~c retrofit of ~zardous ~rei~orced ~son~ buildings. ~e ordt~nce includes standards, plan preparation and constmction time periods as well as appeal procedures. The purpose of tMs ordi~nce is to comply ~th state law that mandates the upgrading or demolition of unreinforc~ msonry ~ildings, as netessay, to ~nimize the risk of death or inJu~ from earthq~kes. ~e heari~ ~d been continued from June 5, 1990, when the ~tter was referred to City staff to e~lore possible policy options for engi- neeri~ analysis, fi~nci~ incentives, City fee waivers, demolition procedures, and zon- ing requirements, and report its reco~enda=ions to the City Co~cil, through the City Council Utility Services/Land Use/Energy Develop~nt Committee. ~e heari~ was also continued from time to time at the request of the Land Use Cogtree and the Seismic Re- trofit Advisory C~ittee. A written report was presented from the City Manager and the Planni~ Director, concurred in by the Development Director, the City Attorney and the Assistant City Manager-Development, and approved by the Land Use Committee, reco~ending t~t the City Council (1) concur ~th the recommendation of the Enviro~ental Protection Cornlesion that the Seis~c Strengthe~ng Ordi~nce, together ~th suggested mitigation measures, would not ~ve a significant effect on the enviroment and adopt a Negative Declaration; (2) concur ~th the rec~endation of the Seis~c Retrofit Advtso~ Comit- tee and approve the draft ordi~nce attached to the report; (3) introduce the appropri- ate ordi~nce a~ request the Legal Depart~nt ~o codify the draft ordi~nce for fomal City Council adoption in 45 days; (4) direct the Planning Department to review staffing assig~ents and Job specifications in the building/plan inspection checking area and rec- omend changes as appropriate to support implementation of the ordi~nce; (5) accept the attached report on "Economic Incentives for Retrofitti~ Unreinforced Mason~ Buildi~s in Riverside" and direct the staffs of the Planning and Development Departments to prepare, ~thin 60 days, implementation plans for the report's three key rec~enda- tions, including (a) the possibility of waiving certain plan check and ~ilding pemit fees which are directly related to the execution of seis~c retrofit projects at the identified U[ properties. These fees could ~ offset by a 1992-93 (or later) C~u~ty Development Block Grant or ~ other sources, (b) that the City continue to explore the possibility of developing partnerships with local banks, in confomance ~th their Co~u- nity Reinvest~nt Act obligations, to provide loans ~o assist property o~ers in the retrofitring of their ~s, and (c) additional study and, if ~rranted, a resolution de- clari~ the City Council's intent to initiate the creation of a volunta~ assessment dis- trict as a means of funding the seismic retrofit of large n~rs of the identified U[ properties; (6) request t~t the Land Use Comittee keep in place the U[ Seis~c Retro- fit AdvisoU Co~ttee until December 31, 1991, when the fill recommendations regarding fi~ncial incentives are to be made to the City Council; and (7) a~nd the draft ordi- nance to include that the c~pliance req~rements shall e~ire on Decemir 31, 1991, un- less teenacted by the City Council on or before December 31, 1991. Questions from the City Council and the audience were answered by the Deputy Planning Director, the Chief Assistant City Attorney and the representatives of the Developmnt Depart~nt. Mr. Rufus Barkley, Vice-Chaiman of the Seismic Retrofit Adviso~ Committee, presented concerns of the Comittee. Mr. William Gardner, representi~ the Riverside Cemetery Association, 76-315