RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY – S. LOUPE, ASSISTANT  DIRECTOR - PUBLIC WORKS

(To be heard at 9:00 AM or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard) Receive an appeal of the Planning Commission’s February 16, 2022, denial of County Planning file PLN210043, a proposal to install three temporary mobile homes for agricultural workers at 1740 Santa Ana Road (Prater Way) per San Benito County Code §25.25.003(E)(2), and adopt a Board Resolution regarding the appeal.  (Continuation from meeting of April 26, 2022.)

SBC FILE NUMBER: 790.1

RESOLUTION NO: 2022-48

On April 26, 2022, the Board of Supervisors heard an appeal of the February 16, 2022, Planning Commission (PC) denial of County Planning file PLN210043, for a temporary use permit to install three temporary mobile homes per San Benito County Code §25.25.003(E)(2).  This appeal was submitted as County Planning file PLN220007.  Board deliberation on April 26 resulted in a motion to continue this item to the date certain of May 10, 2022.  The motion further directed that the Board be presented with options, based on discussion with the project applicant and with neighboring parties, of allowing one temporary mobile home and of allowing two temporary mobile homes, each case to involve a three-year minimum term with potential for renewal up to a cumulative nine-year maximum according to the aforementioned code section.  In addition, the motion directed that, separately, the project applicant and other Prater Way owners hold a discussion on improvement of the Prater Way road condition and property addressing, with results of that discussion to be presented to the Board.

Options for addressing the road condition of Prater Way include:

1) the owners of properties with access from Prater Way agree on the improvements needed, maintenance schedule, and cost and cost-sharing formula based on the number of dwelling units on each parcel and other appropriate factors, if any, and incorporate the result in a road maintenance agreement. The county can provide a form of road maintenance agreement to use as a starting point;

2) Establish a County Service Area for properties with access from Prater Way, and establish an assessment to pay for road improvements and maintenance, subject to a Proposition 218 election for approval by a majority of the property owners;

3) Accept Prater Way into the County maintained road network and pay for road improvements to county road standards and regular maintenance from general fund or road fees - Measure G or SB 1;

4) Leave the current situation as it is;

5) Impose the entire cost of upgrading Prater Way to County road standards on one property owner at the end of the road as a condition of a temporary use permit—which violates constitutional proportionality of exactions limitations under Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. Tigard.  Staff does not recommend options 3 or 5.

Two draft resolutions are attached for the option of the Board of Supervisors to replace the PC decision with approval of either one or two temporary mobile homes.  Each resolution makes findings on the appellant’s assertions and gives reasons for agreement with these assertions.

On February 16, 2022, the Planning Commission (PC) denied a temporary use permit, County Planning file PLN210043, for a temporary use permit for installing three temporary mobile homes per San Benito County Code §25.25.003(E)(2).  Subsequently, a timely appeal was filed by the project proponents, the subject property’s owners.  The appeal, submitted as County Planning file PLN220007, asserted that the project complied with County ordinances and policies, that the applicant agreed to conditions of approval, that the PC gave no reason for the project’s denial, and the PC’s questions and conditions modifications were confusing.  The applicant cites these factors as bases for claiming error by the PC in its project decision.

In addition, the draft resolution presented for the PC’s review cited extensive supporting policy in favor of housing for employees and diverse income groups, encouragement of agriculture, and positive environmental practices.  The resolution also cited County Code §25.25.003, which allows use of temporary mobile homes for specified purposes under a temporary use permit.  One of these purposes is for housing a bona fide, full-time agricultural worker employed by the property owner, as proposed in this case.  Planning staff recommended that the PC adopt the resolution and approve the project based on these policies and regulations.

Included in the resolution’s draft conditions of approval were requirements for the applicant to seek permit renewal after three years, remove the temporary residences completely after nine years, be prohibited from renewal beyond the nine-year presence, maintain adequate site access, and limit occupancy to agricultural employees.  These conditions and the availability of existing regulations and programs such as code enforcement would have addressed many concerns verbally expressed by public gathered at the February 16 PC hearing.

Further discussion of prior County action on the project can be found in the Board of Supervisors meeting agenda of April 26, 2022, and in the Planning Commission meeting agenda of February 16, 2022.

N/A.