Check out item number two from the weekly permit update from the City of Riverside. And they tell us they can’t issue a moratorium in spite of violating their own zoning ordinances. WTF?

https://z8.zimbrahostedemail.com/service/home/~/?auth=co&loc=en_US&id=28838&part=2

From Letitia Pepper:

Here’s a question: if the applicant claims in the application that the three rooms created from one room are for a den, a bedroom and an office — and instead all three rooms thus created are then used as bedrooms — will the City do anything about that?

Will it sue the owner? I think the answer is obvious: no, it won’t.
Here’s something else. The City Attorney says that the City MUST issue these permits (which we all know are to add bedrooms) under the State Building Code.

However, the City didn’t adopt ALL the State Building Code, and it also amended some of what it did adopt. (See Riverside Municipal Code section 16.08.0404.)

This section, 16.08.0404, provides that “2. A permit may be withheld or denied if the Building Official finds there are existing on site violations of the provisions of Chapter 16.04 through 16.20 or of any other ordinance of the City, including any and all provisions of this code and including without limitation the provisions of the zoning regulations.” (Emphasis added.)
The City’s permitted land uses provide, in section 19.150.020 (a), Article V, “Permitted Uses Table,” that “Student Housing, Including Fraternities, Sororities and Dormitories,” are NOT permitted uses in R-1, and that they can’t even be permitted with a conditional use permit. Article V also provides that “boardinghouses,” places that rent rooms to five or more unrelated people, are also not permitted, even with a conditional use permit, in R-1.
Patricia, I don’t think we can expect the City to sue these folks, because I think this is all part of the City and UCR’s long range plan to turn our single family residential area into more dense, multi-storey dwellings to benefit UCR, which brings money into the pockets of the people who run the City from behind the scenes.
If I remember correctly, in the past, one or more of the two-storey homes on Glenhill became “frat houses” — they even had a frat sign on display outside. One of them had, in the trash when they all left, street signs they’d stolen and then abandoned.
I think that the agenda at the next UNA meeting should include a discussion of taking group action, as the UNA, to send warning letters to property owners who’ve been pulling these permits, and about the possibility of taking legal action against such owners if they are violating existing laws.
And now a word about the stupid room rental permit ordinance from Mike Gardner: do people realize that there is nothing to stop the City from giving people permits to rent more than four rooms in our area? The ordinance contains no limits, and if it did, it can easily be amended. Our area doesn’t allow boarding houses — but if the City gives a landlord a permit to rent to more than four people, it can essentially by-pass the “no boarding house” zoning law and we couldn’t do anything about it.
Right now, the existing law says that no more than four unrelated people can share a house. That law, IF IT WERE BEING ENFORCED, would deal with density and parking problems. The noise and criminal laws, IF THEY WERE BEING ENFORCED, would take care of the parties, drunk driving, public indecency, etc. about which we’ve complained.
So why is it that the City Council now wants to “help” us with a new room rental permit ordinance? (It’s probably unconstitutional, too: why is it okay for a non-occupying owner to rent an entire house to four unrelated people without getting a permit, but it’s not okay for an occupying property owner to rent three rooms in a house without getting a permit?) When something doesn’t make sense, it’s usually a sign that there’s a hidden agenda at work. So what’s the “hidden” agenda here?
I think there are several. First, it will let the City make money. Second, it will let the City claim that it is keeping track of housing demands (by permit requests), which it can then use to justify changing our area’s zoning to allow for more dense housing. And that will allow it to convert our single family residential area into one of its trendy “mixed use” zones and into a “hip” suburb of the future (like that Dos Lagos developer guy was trying to push by funding some program at UCR about the suburbs of the future).

As a part of its Business Ready Riverside Initiative, the City of Riverside has enhanced its customer services even more with the implementation of a new online system for submitting plans to the City and completing the plan review process. As a ‘Business Ready’ City, Riverside understands the challenges of today’s business and home owners and as such, strives to deliver programs that increase efficiencies and save money for the City’s customers.

The first of several components of Business Ready Riverside is the implementation of electronic plan review software, ePlan Review. It is designed to save businesses and homeowners valuable time and money during the plan check process and enables more streamlined routing and more expeditious processing of plans.  There is no need to buy any software, ePlan Review accepts over 250 file types. (Read more…)