A blog about News.
|
Sound Off for Oct. 19, 2008 Sound Off for Oct. 12, 2008 Sound Off for Oct. 5, 2008 Sound Off for Sept. 28, 2008 Sound Off for Sept. 21, 2008 Sound Off for Sept. 14, 2008 Sound off for Sept. 7, 2008 Sound off for Aug. 31, 2008 Sound off for Aug. 24, 2008 Sound off for Aug. 17, 2008 June 06 July 06 August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 November 08 December 08 January 09 February 09 March 09 April 09 May 09 June 09 July 09 August 09 September 09 October 09 November 09 May 06 April 06 March 06 December 05 November 05 October 05 September 05 August 05 July 05 June 05 May 05 April 05 Blog RollAsk The Californian Editorials Entertainment Eye of Bakersfield Faith Forum Fired Up! Inside Sports Neighbors Right Thinking Sound Off Talk of the Town 
RSS 2.0    Share!
|
|
|
Column isn't a complete record of planning commission meeting
Reader: I am writing in response to Robert Price's column concerning the proposed revision to the Hillside Ordinance.
It was represented by Mr. Price that both the BIA and the Nickell family were in support of this proposed Hillside Ordinance, along with the Sierra Club. I wonder whether Mr. Price watched the public hearing because, in actuality, both the BIA and Nickell representatives criticized significant portions of the ordinance and requested that revisions be made. Dave Dmohowski, a member of the BIA's Board, cited numerous problems in the proposed language of the Hillside Ordinance. Mr. Dmohowski was also concerned about this ordinance's effect on private property, stating, "We strongly support the principle that private property restricted for open space or recreational use deserves compensation at full market value or compensation through a good faith negotiated development process." Mr. Dmohowski added, "It might be time for the city to consider some sort of open space bond, and if the voters in their wisdom cannot support the acquisition by the public of priority landforms and priority preservation areas, then I think these folks (the landowners) ought to be given their permits." Speaking on behalf of the Nickell family, Jamie Nickell focused on one of the most significant problems with the Hillside Ordinance, the "slope protection" requirement, and asked that it be revised. Mr. Nickell stated, "Minor slopes in areas not visible from major public roadways should not be included in slope protection areas. We fail to see the public benefit of protecting nonvisible slopes if the public benefit is defined as visibility from major public roadways." Mr. Price also inaccurately represented my clients' position with respect to this ordinance. None of my clients have a problem with the concept of a fair and reasonable Hillside Ordinance designed to protect the health and safety of the citizens of Bakersfield, as well as to preserve the aesthetics of the bluffs along Alfred Harrell Highway. My clients' problem with this proposed ordinance is that it goes far beyond those objectives. Certain provisions of this ordinance designate a significant amount of my clients' property as "no build" zones, rendering that property valueless. Yet, the city has provided no legitimate basis for its proposed action. The city has not undertaken health and safety studies to support the viewshed or slope protection designations. Furthermore, the effected "no build" areas that are of most concern to my clients do not involve the bluffs, but rather relatively flat foothill property with topography no different than much of the northeast. Finally, contrary to Mr. Price's claim, there was no evidence presented that this proposed ordinance would be among "the most builder friendly development policies around." In fact, the city did not present a single similar ordinance where a city or county designated relatively flat foothill type property as a "no build" zone. How can anything be stricter than a government regulation that prevents a landowner from building anything on his property and refuses to pay the landowner for taking his rights away? -- Scott D. Howry, partner at the Law Offices of Young Wooldridge Attorney for DKS Investments LLC, John and Joseph Tarabino, General Holding, and Canyons LLC Assistant Managing Editor Lois Henry: Price's column was not intended as a blow-by-blow of the Planning Commission meeting, at which the proposed hillside ordinance was debated and ultimately set aside for more debate. His column was a larger look at whether there is any common ground on the overall issue of development in the hills east of town. Turns out that, yes, there is common ground among some of the major development players -- who Price interviewed. Both Nickell and Dmohowski told Price that while the proposed ordinance could use some tweaking and clarification, they supported it overall. Contacted after the column ran, both Nickell and Dmohowski said his take on their positions was accurate. Dmohowski even praised Price for fairly and accurately helping to distill a complex issue. He added that most of the larger developers coming to the area don't have any problems with requirements such as those in the proposed ordinance. They deal with similar requirements, and more, all the time. By the way, Nickell and Dmohowski both spoke during the portion of the hearing reserved for those in support of the ordinance. As for whether the proposed ordinance is more "builder friendly" than other cities, if the county of Los Angeles' hillside development rules were applied to The Canyons project, your clients' 1,200 lots would be reduced to 443. The city of Santa Clarita's hillside rules could reduce the lots to 248. Both were looked at and rejected by Bakersfield planners as too restrictive. In comparison, The Canyons' engineers said Bakersfield's proposed ordinance would shave only 100 lots off the plans. That sounds a whole lot friendlier to me. Sorry, I don't see any problems with Price's column. 1 comments from 1 users
1
posted by
nelsong
on Aug 7, 2008 at 04:24 PM
1
 Loading Stories
Advertisement |
