HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/27/2008MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
HOUSING ELEMENT WORKSHOP OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 27, 2008
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, CA 91765.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, and
Vice Chairman Tony Torng.
Absent: Commissioner Jack Shah and Chairman Steve Nelson
were excused.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Greg
Gubman, Planning Manager; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; David Alvarez,
Planning Technician; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer; Greg Gregg
Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney; Anthony Santos, Management Analyst; and
Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
A DRAFT 2008 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (continued from May 13, 2008):
John Douglas, Planning Consultant, summarized the May 13, 2008, presentation.
CDD/Fong responded to VC/Torng that Diamond Bar has no homeless shelter or
center, and the most recent LA County inventory of homeless indicated no evidence
of homeless individuals in the City. However, the City must provide for facilities to
house the homeless in its land use regulations even if there is no determined need.
Mr. Douglas explained to C/Nolan that every two years a "point in time"
homelessness survey is required under federal law. In LA County the Los Angeles
Homeless Services Authority conducts the surveys. The most recent survey was
conducted in January 2007 by sending teams into the field on two or three
consecutive nights to areas where it was expected homeless individuals would be
found. In addition, individuals in shelters were counted. It is very difficult to count
people living in parks and riverbeds, etc. Almost 95 percent of Diamond Bar is
zoned residential and residential zoning includes group homes by right which means
that the entire City may be open to providing that type of shelter.
MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
WORKSHOP
Mr. Douglas said that the focus on this law and most other laws that relate to the
Housing Element is not necessarily on what "is," but what the zoning allows. So, the
question is, does the City's zoning allow a non-profit to open up a homeless shelter
someplace in the City. CDD/Fong said the City would let the property owners know
that the property was being rezoned to allow for a homeless shelter. Mr. Douglas
said it was a two-step process: Amend the Zoning Code, which would require public
hearings and City Council action. If the Code were amended to allow homeless
shelters in certain areas it would be a simple process for individuals to go to the
counter at City Hall and go through plan check. CDD/Fong said that another
option/opportunity would be to arrange with a non-profit agency to provide shelter
for homeless individuals if HCD would approve such a scenario. Mr. Douglas said
that all cities are subject to the law so that no one jurisdiction gets burdened by
more than its fair share.
Mr. Douglas reiterated to C/Lee that the state's Housing Law sets forth what every
city has to include in its Housing Element of the General Plan. The State
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has the authority to
review and give its opinion as to whether or not it complies with state law, which
differentiates the Housing Element from every other element of general plans. If the
state does not certify the City's Housing Element, jurisdictions that take advantage
of grant programs could lose their eligibility for those grant funds. The other
concern is that if the State says that the Housing Element is not in compliance it
creates a possible legal exposure if someone were to sue the City because the
General Plan was not in compliance with state law. A few jurisdictions have been
sued on those grounds. Mission Viejo was sued a couple of years ago and the
court ordered that jurisdiction to amend their Housing Element and to rezone
property. C/Lee asked if there was a certain percentage of low, medium and high
density the City must have. Mr. Douglas said the formula was not based on
percentages, but on the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) fair share
allocation. On that basis, Diamond Bar's allocation was for463 lower income units
and Diamond Bar does not currently have any capacity because the maximum
density for the City is 20 units per acre. C/Lee asked if there were any candidates
and CDD/Fong said there was no 15 -acre parcel available. C/Lee asked how it
could be done and CDD/Fong said that the City had to demonstrate that it would
look into alternatives. For example, KMart is an area that could be considered in
the future as a specific plan with a mixed-use that would include residential units.
The City would not be penalized if no one wanted to build the units but the City has
to demonstrate that it could be accomplished by setting aside enough acreage to
accommodate the necessary units.
MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
WORKSHOP
Mr. Douglas said that the state is requiring the City to have a program so that within
the Housing Element there is a "program" commitment to evaluate potential sites
over the next couple of years and select appropriate areas for zone change.
C/Lee asked if there was any mixed-use development in Diamond Bar and
CDD/Fong responded that there was no vertical mixed-use. KMart could be
redeveloped as a mixed-use development with commercial, residential and
institutional components. The City would have to create zoning for vertical mixed
use.
Mr. Douglas pointed out that Rancho Cucamonga recently built a new project
across from city hall at Haven and Foothill that contains retail on the ground floor
with two levels of apartments above. Brea, Tustin, and other cities have these types
of mixed-use projects.
C/Lee had concerns with vertical mixed-use zones because he felt it was not good
for the type of living environment that Diamond Bar currently enjoys. He would not
have the same kind of concerns if a mixed use environment was spread over a
larger area.
C/Nolan respectfully disagreed with C/Lee. Diamond Bar is out of land and the
topography of Diamond Bar is unlike that of Los Angeles. CDD/Fong said it would
depend on the mix of use because the uses would have to be compatible. C/Nolan
said it seemed to be a desirable trend for those who wanted to be in a livable City
that offered those types of amenities. C/Lee said that land use is very limited in
Diamond Bar and he is concerned that there are already many people living in the
City. The number one problem is traffic.
Mr. Douglas continued speaking about CDGB funding, Section 8 rental assistance,
and other programs that would continue.
C/Nolan asked if there were any significant changes in the Housing Element since
the last presentation and Mr. Douglas said that there were no substantive changes.
C/Nolan asked what percentage Diamond Bar was built -out and CDD/Fong referred
the Commission to the Land Inventory Appendix B that lists potential vacant sites
that might be available. Diamond Bar has only a few relatively small sites. The
inventory contains more than enough to meet the RHNA number except that most
of the sites are either moderate or upper. It does not mean that one of the sites
could not be designated for low and very low income — affordable housing.
MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
WORKSHOP
CDD/Fong indicated to VC/Torng that the Housing Element is updated each six
years. However, the General Plan must be reported to the state annually and part
of the General Plan report is the Housing Element.
C/Lee asked what people could sue the City for and ACA/ Kovacevich said that if a
homeless shelter was not zoned by right it could be grounds for suing the City. The
most the court could do under that scenario would be to order the City to identify a
site or issue a permit. Also, courts generally award attorney's fees and ultimately
advocating no responsibility to the court. Cities have much less control over what
will happen if the responsibility is ceded to a court. That is why it is important to try
and reach the goals and timeline for getting the Housing Element certified. In short,
if the City has not done what it is supposed to do a judge that knows nothing about
the City would end up deciding the matter for the City were the City to lose its case.
Therefore, it is incumbent upon the City to do what it can to try and achieve those
goals and do so in good faith.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice
Chairman Torng adjourned the Housing Element Workshop at 6:50 p.m.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
Nancy Fong, munity I
evelopment Director
T orng, Vic airman
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 27, 2008
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air
Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Nolan led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, and
Vice Chairman Tony Torng,
Absent: Commissioner Jack Shah and Chairman Steve Nelson
were excused.
,Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Greg
Gubman, Planning Manager; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; David Alvarez,
Planning Technician; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer; Gregg Kovacevich,
,Assistant City Attorney; Anthony Santos, Management Analyst; and Stella Marquez,
Senior Administrative Assistant.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION: VC/Torng and the Planning Commissioners presented a
Plaque to Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner on the occasion of her retirement from the City
of Diamond Bar.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Housing Element Workshop of May 13, 2008.
4.2 Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 13, 2008.
C/Lee moved, C/Nolan seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, VC/Torng
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, Chair/Nelson
MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 2
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS:
PLANNING COMMISSION
6.1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR CONFORMITY WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009
PT/Alvarez presented staff's report and recommended that the Planning
Commission find the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Capital Improvement Program to
be in Conformity with the City's General Plan.
C/Nolan asked what the Sycamore Canyon Creek repair would consist of
and CDD/Fong responded that the project will restorelrepair the habitat by
cleaning up the area to keep it natural. C/Nolan asked if the Summitridge
Trailhead project was a continuation of a previous project and CDD/Fong
responded that it was part of the Trails Master Plan that the City continues to
pursue to completion.
CDD/Fong responded to VC/Torng that based on the reduction of the City's
budget a number of projects have been reduced. Certain projects receive
funding in certain fiscal years. VC/Torng said it was interesting that traffic
and parks and recreation items were included in the funding and wondered if
the Planning Commission controlled the budget of those two departments.
PM/Gubman explained that the Capital Improvement Programs were
developed through the Public Works Department. The City Council will
ultimately make the decision whether the projects are fiscally prudent. State
law requires that before the City Council makes its decision the Planning
Commission must find that the programs are in conformity with the City's
General Plan to further its goals and policies. The Planning Department is
not directly involved in the budgeting of these programs. However, the
Planning staff is obligated to present the program to the Commission and
provide an analysis that supports its finding that the projects are consistent
with the General Plan.
There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter.
C/Nolan moved, C/Lee seconded, to find the Capital Improvement Program
to be in conformity with the General Plan for Fiscal Year 2008-2009. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, VC/Torng
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, Chair/Nelson
7. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Offered.
8. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
8.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
9. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
None
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Chairman Nelson adjourned the regular meeting at 7:27 p.m.
Attest:
RespectfWly Subfnitteo,
Fong, Fommuyy Development Director
�y Torng, Vice C firman