Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/14/2017 PC MinutesMINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 14, 2017 Chair/Mahlke called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the Windmill Conference Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Farago led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Naila Barlas, Frank Farago, Ken Mok, Vice Chair Raymond Wolfe and Chair Jennifer Mahlke Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Mayuko Nakajima, Associate Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: Cynthia Smith asked how the Planning Department works with regard to understanding the particular CC&Rs for her neighborhood. Recently, she was surprised to learn that the Planning Department does not have the original neighborhood CC&Rs on record. She was asking how people would reconcile differences for planned projects in their neighborhood and how would they monitor whether or not the projects were adhering to the General Plan and Zoning. For example, her CC&Rs do not allow subdivision of lots. CDD/Gubman responded to the speaker that the CC&Rs are a private contract that is between and enforceable among the members of a Homeowners Association. The City is not a party to those CC&Rs so if a project is proposed within an area that is governed by CC&Rs, the City will review the proposed project with respect to the City's General Plan and Municipal Code regulations in effect. This does not relieve the property owner or developer from complying with any contractual obligations that are "Civilly" enforceable such as CC&Rs. There is language in the City's Development Code that states that "any land use approval does not repeal or annul any private easement, covenant or deed restriction that is imposed upon the subject property." So, it is the property owner's obligation to not only meet the City's land use regulations, but also to abide by any contractual covenants and restrictions that may be imposed on that property and that they have committed to through joining that entity that governs the CC&Rs such as the Homeowner's Association. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented FEBRUARY 14, 2017 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 10, 2017: VC/Wolfe moved, C/Farago seconded to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 10, 2017, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: N NOES: ABSENT: 5. OLD BUSINESS 14 tl NEW BUSINESS COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: None None PUBLIC HEARING(S): Barlas, Farago, Mok, VC/Wolfe Chair/Mahlke None None 7.1 Tentative Parcel Map No. PL2016-01 — The applicant requested City approval ,to subdivide an existing 183,203 square foot (4.2 gross acre) property with three residential lots. The subject property is currently developed with a single family residence and accessory structure. The proposed subdivision will result in the existing development occupying one of the lots and the creation of two vacant parcels to accommodate the future construction of single family homes. The property is zoned Rural Residential (RR), and the underlying General Plan land use designation is also Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER: 22702 Timbertop Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 USA Rongchen Development Inc. 21614 Fairwind Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Tritech Engineering Associates 135 N. San Gabriel Boulevard San Gabriel. CA 91775 AP/Nakajima presented staff's report and recommended that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. PL2016-01 with an amendment to Standard Conditions A.1. on Page 8 to read: "In accordance with Government Code § 664774.9 (b)(1) the applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless, the City and its officers, agents and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void or annul FEBRUARY 14, 2017 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. PL2016-01 brought within the time period provided by Government Code §66499.37 or, any claim, action or proceeding alleging subdivision of the property is prohibited by contract, CC&Rs or similar instruments." Chair/Mahlke opened the public hearing. John Wang, Civil Engineer on the project for the subdivision, has been working closely with staff on technical issues and historical matters for more than a year and they have been very helpful. Everything has been done to comply with the City's Subdivision Code. Theresa Lee, 22379 Kicking Horse Drive, Board of Director, The Diamond Bar Country Estates Association, voiced her opposition to Item 7.1., referring to copies of letters that find the project clearly in contradiction with the 2005 CC&Rs, including a letter from the HOA attorney addressed to the property owner and letter from the General Manager notifying the City of the denial in which he documented the Association's governing document as the basis of the disapproval. In the face of this evidence which is part of staff's report, the property owner is bound by the CC&Rs and bylaws of the DBEA; however, the determination by staff that City Council can exercise its independent judgment to decide whether the Tentative Map can be approved is unfounded and the staff is leading the City to a possible litigation and liability by asking the City Council to approve something that cannot be approved. Meanwhile, the City is misleading the property owner to spend a great deal of money in anticipation of getting their lot divided from one into three lots. This subdivision is not going to be obtainable, and this raises the questions of how would the property owner recover from their loss. The Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX indicated the basis of staff's recommendation is described under DBMC Section 21.20 which only pertains to subdivisions. However, for the Planning Commission, there are many more codes to follow. The City of Diamond Bar consists of many Planned Developments and Planned Developments are discussed under the City's Municipal Code Section 22.32 that promotes high-quality development performed beyond those expected under "conventional" development and encourages well- planned projects as well as, Section 22.04. The rules open to interpretation also indicated that in the event of any conflict between the requirements of the Development Code and Standards adopted as part of any development agreement which means that back in 1969 the agreement between the County of LA and Transamerica that the agreement or the specific plan shall control. She understands that Diamond Bar inherited a lot of agreements from the County of Los Angeles but as the successor of the County, the City has the obligation to carry those CC&Rs which are governing many of the communities in the City. She strongly urged the Commissioners to deny the project as presented by the Planning Department. FEBRUARY 14, 2017 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Paul Akin, 225505 Lazy Meadow Drive said this is certainly an unneeded subdivision. It's all about the money. Diamond Bar is a very unique City. His home was built in 1976 and since 1979 they have lived in it. At that time there were about 200 homes and about 500 vacant lots. The beauty of Diamond Bar and The Country Estates are the wide open spaces, parks, greenbelts, hiking and walking trails — open spaces — rural living, as the property is zoned Rural Residential. Unique to The Country are one -acre or larger sites, no street lights, white fences on most properties which provide a unifying element, large open spaces between homes and a 132 acre natural park. His friends Don and Margaret Horn lived on Timbertop for more than 20 years and he has visited this home many, many times. There are 29 foot high windows that offer a spectacular view of Los Angeles and the surrounding four acres is open land which their horses roamed. The home was called the Bicentennial Home because it consisted of 1776 square feet. Fifteen years ago the owners tried to subdivide the property and as Board President he stopped it. Five years later it was again tried and stopped. Since then the property has changed hands several times. He understands that times change. The Association now allows lot splitting, removal of the white fences and multi -family occupancy. He also understands that he is only one person to oppose the subdivision. The Association now has about 900 home sites and maybe 48 more in the works and he wondered if every piece of ground had to have a building on it. He is happy to see Theresa representing the nuts and bolts and facts that the Planning Commission needs to be aware of before helping the property owners enter into a lawsuit. He has no problem with the homeowner and if the homeowner decides to redo that home it would break his heart but the owner has a right to do so. But to chop it up and put two more small lots, two more houses are not needed. One of the reasons Diamond Bar became a City is because of the open spaces. He is not against development but to have development just for the sake of having it, the only reason this project has come up is money which is very sad to him. He asked the City to please stop Diamond Bar from being chopped up any further. May Liu, Architectural Committee Chair, said that The Country Estates is a private community and according to the rules and regulations, any formal submittal to the City requires approval by the Architectural Committee first and the guidelines allow only one single lot split into two and never three. Part of the requirement for getting this approval is consensus from all adjacent neighbors. She urged the Commission to consider splitting to two lots only. Also, the front footage is required to be a 100 feet minimum. John Wang responded to the association, that they sent a response letter on June 2, 2016. With respect to the issue of three parcels, the lot has enough frontage, lot width and lot depth (over 100 feet). The project engineer's worked with their attorney to study the City's Subdivision and Municipal Code and found no code that adopted The Country Estates R40 subdivision that allows subdividing into only two lots. After responding to the Association, neither he nor FEBRUARY 14, 2017 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION his firm received any further communication. The Country Estates Homeowners Association is the Architectural Review Board and there is no application for buildings at this point. This item seeks a subdivision only and once the subdivision is approved it will have to move through Public Works and final recordation. When there is a submission for building on the lots, they will have to go through the planning and design review with the City and with The Country Estates Architectural Review. Theresa Lee reiterated what the CC&Rs say about subdivision of residential lots. The property owner should be fully aware of the CC&Rs because they were provided a copy. The City should have a copy of the CC&Rs and if not, she will provide a copy. John Wang stated that according to his calculations, the frontage for the lot in question is 138 feet. Chair/Mahlke closed the public hearing. Chair/Mahlke restated her understanding that the property owner is absolutely bound by the CC&Rs but the City is not. The City evaluates each project based solely on whether the findings are within the City's guidelines. ACA/Eggart said that Chair/Mahlke is basically correct. The City does not enforce CC&Rs pursuant to Development Code provision which states that the City shall not enforce any private Covenant, Restriction or Agreement unless it is a party thereto. It is not City staff's typical practice to have CC&Rs for properties on file or to request them and review them. They are legal documents. They are contracts and staff does not interpret legal documents. However, approval of a development application or subdivision map in no way abrogates or annuls private covenants and agreements that have been agreed to through CC&Rs or otherwise and he recommended that if the Planning Commission is inclined to approve the project, that a condition be added specifying that "the approval does, in fact, not annul, abrogate or repeal any easement, covenant or deed restriction imposed on the subject property." Chair/Mahlke explained that to the Commission it feels as if the public is asking that it override something but the Commission cannot override a private contract and that is not what the Commission is doing in this instance. VC/Wolfe asked ACA/Eggart if the CC&Rs as described this evening really only allow subdivision to occur on a parcel to subdivide it into two parcels, how can the Commission make that stipulation knowing that to be the case because the next step that would occur is that the City would take the Tentative Map assuming Council approval, and would move forward to make this change because it is in accordance with City rules. ACA/Eggart said his recommendation for adding the FEBRUARY 14, 2017 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION stipulation was because one of the speakers indicated that the City could be subject to suit from the applicant on the basis that the City somehow misled the applicant into believing that the City's approval would supersede those CC&Rs and that the HOA would not be able to go into court and prevent them from building should the City approve this. And he wanted to make clear that irrespective of the City's approval of any development application on this property, if in fact the CC&Rs do prohibit it, the HOA and all of the property owners who are members of that HOA, would have a right to go to court to enforce that contract. And the City's approval, should it happen, would not impact the Court's analysis of whether the CC&Rs prohibit it or not. VC/Wolfe asked the proposed Tentative Parcel Map be placed in view and asked staff if, in recognizing that the City and therefore the Planning Commission are not obligated to follow the CC&Rs, whether the CC&Rs require that each parcel have 100 feet of road frontage. It is pretty clear to him that it is likely parcels two and three have that based on the width provided in the information provided to the Commission. However, Parcel 1 does not appear to him to have anywhere near 100 feet of road frontage. AP/Nakjima said that the Exhibit Map shows the minimum 100 foot frontage (104 feet). C/Farago moved, C/Barlas seconded, to recommend City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. PL2016-01 subject to the Conditions of approval with amendments suggested by staff. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barlas, Farago, Mok NOES: COMMISSIONERS: VCM/olfe, Chair/Mahlke ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None CDD/Gubman explained that the next step in the process is that this matter goes to the City Council for final decision with the Planning Commission recommendation to approve by a vote of 3-2. CDD/Gubman further explained that the applicant, after receiving the denial from the "The Country Estates" HOA still directed staff to continue processing the application and staff is thereby obligated to continue processing the application. The applicant knows the risks they are potentially facing by going contrary to the HOA so any statement that staff has "misled" the applicant and that the outcome of the land use decision would override the HOA is untrue. To say that staff "misled" the applicant is impugning the character of staff. Staff never made any such statement to the applicant and again, staff is obligated to continue processing at the applicant's direction which is why this matter continued to be brought forth. 8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None FEBRUARY 14, 2017 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION 9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future proiects. CDD/Gubman stated that the next Planning Commission meeting will take place on February 28 for which two items are scheduled: 1) A single -story addition to a single story residence on Rising Star which is a neighborhood off of Fountain Springs just north of the Super H -Mart anchored shopping Center and 2) a Conditional Use Permit for a retail store/kids play/party facility at the shopping center at the corner of Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road (Market World anchored shopping center). The following Wednesday, March 1 is the first day of the 3 -day Planning Commissioners Academy in Los Angeles. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As noted in the agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission Chair/Mahlke adjourned the regular meeting at 7:51 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 28th day of February, 2017. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, GregGubma� Community Development Director ) Jnifer MahlA, Chairperson