Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08012000 - D2 . M 'Dr ♦ks . y t < t • ti Centra Costa TOt BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ` ..w �' County FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TATE: August 1, 2000 SU33JECT: Request for Reconsideration of Board of Supervisors' Decision to Grant an Appeal of an Administrative Decision to Authorize the Relocation of an Ors-Street "Guest" Parking Space on Wingset Place in the Alamo area, County rile #ZI998206 (District III) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECQ BND TION Adapt a motion to authorize a hearing to consider the reconsideration request, and schedule for an appropriate date. FISCAL IMPACT None. The applicant is responsible for all staff time and material charges for the review of the appeal associated with his request . BAQUN /REASQNS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS Fallowing receipt of a request from the subdivision developer (Gingrich) , on October 11, 1999, the Zoning Administrator authorized the relocation of one of the four parking spaces which were required to be placed within the turnaround of a subdivision in Alamo (SUB 7583) . Subsequently, two of the homeowners (Ciapponi and Yandell) within the subdivision appealed that decision to the Board of Supervisors . Several concerns were raised by the appellants including that the relocated space would interfere with access to a residence of one of the appellants. In addition, at the hearing on the appeal, the appellants raised other objections pertaining to the subdivision' s compliance with several conditions which had been attached to the subdivision permit tentative map approval by the County. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: - YES SIGNATURE RECOMATION Or COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMI APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON 4 u g u y t 1- , 2 Q Q Q APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER . xx ]Following the Board's discussion of the issues: IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the request for reconsideration of the Board's June 13, 2400,decision is DECLINED. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A xx UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - - - - TRUE AND CORRECT`' COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION 'TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPER'V'ISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contacts [ (925) 335-12143 Orig. Community Development Department ATTESTED„ Auguat 1 , 2000 cc: Gagen, McCoy, McMahon & Armstrong PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Rena Rickles THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Public Works Department, Eng. Serv. AND PoyNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel B4t DEPUTY c: \wpdoc\998205-b.bo RD\ Reconsideration Request Relocation of "guest" Parking Space Wingset Place, Alamo Pile #ZI998206 After taking testimony and attempting to find a solution that would be acceptable to all, it became evident that there was no solution that would be acceptable to both the subdivision developer and the appellants (residents) . On June 13 , 2000, the Board then unanimously voted to grant the appeal of the residents, and reversed the Zoning Administrator' s decision. The Board directed that the space be sited off-street, on one of the two lots that the subdivision developer still owns . The Board also acted to require that the subdivision developer comply with subdivision permit items not included in the original appeal pertaining to : • obliteration of the original driveway to the primary residence at the time the subdivision was proposed; and • planting of drought-tolerant, native trees . R Quest- for Recons i r7 ra 'i on In a letter dated June 23 , 2000, the attorney for the subdivision developer has requested the Board reconsider its decision to grant the residents ' s appeal . The letter questions whether the County has any authority over siting or relocation of the guest parking spaces after the final map had been recorded. Discussion The point now being raised by the subdivision developer is new to the appeal hearing, and it would be appropriate to allow this argument to be made to the Board before the prior Board decision on the appeal becomes final . Staff would also encourage the Board to consider again the alternatives presented to the Board at the June 13 , 2000 hearing. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Board adopt a motion to reconsider the Board' s 6/13/2000 action, and schedule it for an appropriate hearing date . Consea encs of a Nec-Tati-ye ,Action In the event that the Board denies the reconsideration request, then the Board' s 6/13/2000 action will become final . The subdivision developer would then have at least three choices • Make modifications to the parking design in accord with the Board' s June 13 , 2000 action; • Submit a new "guest" parking design to the Community Development Department for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Said design may be accepted or may be rejected by the Zoning Administrator, but would be subject to the same administrative appeal process as was followed for this request; or • File court action on the County decision on the appeal . -2- LAW OFFICES OF GAGEN, MCCOY, MCMAHON bre ARMSTRONG WILLIAM E. GAGEN, JR. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION DANVILLE OFFICE GREGORY L. MCCOY 279 FRONT STREET %. :.V J. WCMAHON P. O, sox R)9 MARK L. ARMSTRONG DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526-0216 LINN K. COOMMbS TELEPHONE' (SIRS) 1937-0565 STEPHEN W. THOMAS FAX: (925) 1938-5985 CHARLES A. KOSS MICHAEL J. MARKOWITZ NAPA VALLEY OFFICE RICHARD C. RAINES THE OFFICES AT SOUTHBRIDGE VICTOR J. CONTI ('une �1",� �S f�('�(� 1030 MAIN STREET, SUITE 212 SARSARA DUVAL JEWELL .1 23, 2000 ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA 94574 ROGERT M. FANUCCI TELEPHONE: (707) 963-0909 ALLAN C. MOORE FAX: (7071 963-5527 PATRICIA E. CURTIN STEPHEN T. 6UEHL PLEASE REPLY TO: AMANDA JUDGE ALEXANDER L. SCHMID Danville FRANCISCA J. M. BROUWER ANDREW S. GUSTAFSON By hand delivery ��.�' Chair Donna Gerber Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c/o Clerk of the Board c c Room 106 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Board of f Supervisors Actions on Appeal ofAdministrative Administrative Decision of Deputy,honing Administrator Dated October 11, 1999 on Proposed Relocation of On-Street Parking Wingset Place, Subdivision 7693 County.File No. ZI998206 Dear Chair Gerber: The actions of the Board of Supervisors, following the close of the June 13, 2000 public hearing on the appeal of the above-referenced administrative decision of the Deputy Zoning Administrator,are confusing and subject to misunderstanding as to their effect. The Board of Supervisors had a narrow issue before it on June 13`x,namely whether or not to uphold the decision of the Deputy Zoning Administrator to approve the design for on-street parking spaces within the existing turnaround area or hammerhead on Wingset Place in Subdivision 7693,as proposed by DeBolt Engineering on behalf ofThomas Gingrich. More specifically, the decision by the Deputy Zoning Administrator was simply to approve a proposed relocation of one of the four on-street parking spaces within the turnaround as that relocation was proposed by DeBolt Civil Engineering. The Board of Supervisors could deny the appeal and approve the requested relocation or uphold the appeal and rej ect that request. The Board had no authority to compel some other parking configuration. Please see the enclosed copy of the letter decision of the Deputy Zoning Administrator dated October 11, 1999. The Deputy Zoning Administrator, in making his substantive decision, also confirmed the County's determination that no amendment to the final subdivision map for Subdivision 7693 Chair Donna Gerber June 23, 2000 Page 2 was required to accomplish this relocation of one parking space at the end of Wingset Place. Under such circumstances, in my opinion the Board's actions on June 131 overstep the authority of the County to direct or control the use of Wingset Place or any of the lots in Subdivision 7693. With approval of the final subdivision map in 1995, the Board of Supervisors and County officials certified that the subdivider had satisfied the requirements of and complied with the approved tentative subdivision map and its conditions. See Government Code Section 66499.35(d). That certification cannot now be undone by this Board of Supervisors. DeBolt Civil Engineering submitted the proposed relocation of one of the four on-street parking spaces to another location on the hammerhead because the Deputy Zoning Administrator advised that the appropriate procedure was to file such a request. Gene DeBolt expressed reservation about the need to do so but submitted the proposed relocation since it was the requested administrative remedy by a County official. If my opinion was requested at the time, I would have reconfirmed that such a submittal was not necessary. In fact,no administrative action or decision by the County is required to restrict or determine where vehicles may park on Wingset Place. This is a private road. Each ofthe homeowners and lot owners on Wingset Place have an easement to use Wingset Place for access to their respective driveways, for ingress and egress off Likely Drive and for parking that does not interfere with such private access,ingress and egress. None of the homeowners or lot owners in Subdivision 7693 may unilaterally control use of Wingset Place. The fact that Thomas Gingrich was the original subdivider does not give him the right to unilaterally control parking or to request the County to control that parking. Rather, use of Wingset Place is controlled by the easement rights, including the Wingset Place Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions ("CC&Rs"), recorded against each lot. As the Deputy Zoning Administrator confirmed in his decision, no "parking places" are delineated on the final subdivision map for Subdivision 7693. No specific driveway locations are delineated for any of the lots on the final subdivision map. No amendment to the final subdivision map is required for residents and their guests to utilize parking spaces different than or in addition to parking originally contemplated when the final subdivision map was approved by the Board of Supervisors and determined to be in compliance with the tentative subdivision map,when the final subdivision map and Wingset Place CC&Rs were recorded or when lots within the subdivision were sold and homes constructed on those lots. That the Board"directs"Mr.Gingrich to do something that affects use ofWingset Place does not give him some special,unilateral authority or responsibility to do so on that private road. Chair Donna Gerber June 23, 2000 Page 3 The fact that the Ciapponis painted "parking spaces" on the turnaround may give some people the impression, however false, that parking elsewhere within the hammerhead is somehow prohibited. In fact, parking elsewhere that does not block driveway access or emergency access is allowed under the private CC&.R's. Please note that the Wingset Place CC&R's have recently been amended to provide that parking in the turnaround area is limited to guests of residents. The Ciapponis have been parking their own vehicles for extended periods of time on the hammerhead,which actions precipitated this lawful change in the CC&R's by the homeowners and lot owners who use and control Wingset Place. Even assuming for purposes of argument that the County has some authority to "relocate a parking space"in the hammerhead at the end of this private road,the administrative decision on appeal before the Board of Supervisors was very narrow. The Board of Supervisors could either reject the proposed relocation or approve it. Instead, the unanimous action of the Board on the motion of the Chair seemed to be to "direct" Mr. Gingrich to reconfigure driveways to his two lots and provide an additional parking space for the other Wingset Place homeowners outside the hammerhead and on one or more of the lots still owned by Mr. Gingrich. Such a reconfiguration may be the preference ofthe Board,but that does not mean the Board has the authority within this appeal process to compel it to occur. To compound matters,the Board seemed to"direct"Mr.Gingrich to place signs on Wingset Place, remove materials from the Ciapponi lot, plant some trees and currently provide for six off-street parking spaces on each of his two lots for use by the Gingrichs and their guests. These additional actions of the Board ignore the reality that these matters were not before the Board on this appeal. This appeal afforded the Board with no legal process to take such actions. In addition,such County actions are not possible following the prior approval of the final subdivision map and certification of compliance with the tentative map and its conditions. Any effort to enforce those actions would also exceed the legal authority of the County. Although in my opinion this entire administrative process is improper under the circumstances in order to avoid any argument that Mr. Gingrich has not exhausted his administrative remedies,I am sending this additional letter to the Board of Supervisors. To the extent that this administrative process provides for the opportunity for a motion for reconsideration, as set forth in Section 26-2.2408 of the Contra Costa County Code,please consider this letter such a motion. In conclusion, please be advised that in my opinion each of the actions of the Board on June 131 are not legally binding on Thomas Gingrich and are unenforceable against him. Moreover,any County denial of,restriction on or condition for a lot line adjustment or other Chair Donna Gerber June 23, 2000 Page 4 ministerial application or permit submitted to the County by Mr. Gingrich or his representatives with respect to use and development of the lots on Wingset Place (e.g., building permit),that is undertaken for purpose of implementing or enforcing the actions of the Board on June 131, would also be without lawful authority. Mr. Gingrich reserves his right to contest any such implementation or enforcement of the June 131 Board actions at the time any such implementation or enforcement efforts are undertaken by the County. As I stated to the Board at the appeal hearing,the issues of concern here are matters that are best left to private resolution. Mr. Gingrich and his family are committed to a reasonable, private resolution of these matters. I hope the Ciapponis and Yandells remain willing to undertake such an effort to privately resolve these matters instead of assuming that the actions of the Board on June 131 will somehow be unilaterally enforced or implemented by the County at some future date. Very truly ours, irk L. Armstrong MLA:eac Encl. cc wt encls by U.S. Mail: Donna Gerber(at her District office) John Gioia Gayle B. Uilkema Mark DeSaulnier Joe Canciamilla Dennis M. Barg Robert H. Drake Heather Ballenger Silvan Marchesi Rena Rickles Thomas Gingrich Leo B. Siegel F:\CLMLA\31121\Ctaber4trO62300.wpd 7CJ t 'D y „ f? ,' 6�}i t i m u n ityCommuni Contra DennisDennisC}$Y+�f M.Barry,ACP p1t3�etlt Director / D@Velop1'i"lent Department l costa 1. . County Administration Building Counly • 651 Pine StreetLNOV 4th Floor, North Wing }- .�Martinez,California 94553-0095 9 1999 Phone: (92.5) 335-1214 �C tt 8OAF3i]OF S1JPERVt50R$ Ct3NTf�A tXt37A tdo, October 11, 1999 Eugene DeBolt DeBolt Civil Engineering 811 San Ramon Valley Boulevard Danville, CA 94526 Dear Mr. DeBolt: Re: Response to Proposed Roocation of On-Street Parking Wing Set Place Turnaround, SUB 7693, Alamo County File#ZI998206 This is a follow-up to your modified submittal following our initial letter of February 25, 1999 in response to your proposal to relocate one of the four on-street parking spaces within the turnaround of Wing Set Place. Presently, the four spaces are situated in a manner that would block access to one of the lots within your subdivision. Your request is intended to assure access to Lot 6. The approval of the tentative map for Subdivision 7693 authorized the Zoning Administrator to review and approve the design of the required four on-street parking spaces to be placed within the turnaround area of this subdivision. The existing parking spaces are not delineated on the Final Map for this subdivision, therefore a modification would not require an amendment to the Final Map for this project. As you will recall, in our initial letter,we noted that the Fire Protection District had expressed concerns with the proposed reconfiguration,which had contributed to our decision to reject the proposal. Subsequent to that date,you provided staff with additional documentation supporting the proposed dimensions of the relocated parking space. We also were informed by Inspector Mentink of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District that on further review, the District had withdrawn its prior objection to the proposal. The District is now satisfied that the proposed relocation of the parking space would not significantly affect the ability of District vehicles to maneuver within the subdivision, nor create significant safety risks in the area. Office Hours Monday-Friday:8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd&5th Fridays of each month a� Based on these factors, in my capacity as Deputy Zoning Administrator, this is to inform you that the attached parking relocation plan is approved. Your November 18, 1995 letter indicates that you are prepared to reflet the change on the improvement plan as an as-built modification. Please make the change to the improvement plan and submit copies of it to this Department, the Fire Protection District, and the Public Works Department. We also encourage you to notify the owners and residents within the subdivision of this change when it is implemented. OpporWnity f, or App al of Adania=iyC Ueci 'son 4I= �a�i The attorney for one of the residents within the subdivision(Ciapponi)is interested in the County review of this proposal and asked to be informed of this decision in the event that they wished to file an appeal. By copy of this letter, we are informing that party of this decision. This administrative decision may be appealed by any interested party directly to the Board of Supervisors. To be valid, the notice of appeal must be: # In writing, and concisely specify the facts of the case and the grounds for the appeal including the appellant's special interest and injury; +► Verified by signature under penalty of perjury that it is true and correct; and • Accompanied by a fee ofS125 and filed with the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Martinez by November 14, 1999. (Ref. Ord. Code Chapter 144 of Title I) Should you have any questions, please call me at(925)335-1214. Sincerely, o I L /�� ROBERT H. DRAKE Principal Planner Att. Approved 4n-Street Parking Relocation Plan -2- 7/ cc: Tom Gingrich Kenneth M. Miller,Morgan, Miller&Blair Clerk of'the Board Inspector Mentink, San Ramon Valleys Fire Protection District Public Works Department, Engineering Services Dior. File c lwpdoc\998206-c.ltr -3-