HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004/03/10 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
' Regular Meeting
March 10, 2004
Chairman Macias called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho
Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia. Chairman
Macias then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Rich Macias, Cristine McPhail, Larry McNiel,
Pam Stewart
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Kevin Ennis,
Assistant City Attorney; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary; Joe
Stofa, Associate Planner; Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Brad Buller, City Planner, gave a brief overview of the meeting format and public hearing process.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by McNiel, carried 4-0-0-1, to approve the minutes of
February 11, 2004.
Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by McNiel, carried 5-0, to approve the minutes of the
Adjoumed Meeting of February 25, 2004.
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
A. USE DETERMINATION DRC2004-00093-STEVE KNECHT-A request to determine that a dog
breeding establishment with outside runs is similar to an Animal Care Facility within the Very
Low Residential District.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman Macias invited public comments.
Steve Knecht, 10158 Sun Valley, Rancho Cucamonga, stated his property is a little over an acre and
the closest house to the dog runs is approximately 200 feet away. He presented notes that had been
signed by the neighbors on either side indicating they have not experienced problems with the dogs.
He indicated they have been breeding and showing dogs for about 23 years and a lot of the dogs
they have are retired show dogs and they are part of their family. He stated they take the dogs for
walks all the time. He said he considers his operation an animal care facility because they always
have a standard open option to anyone who buys a dog from them that they will take back the dog at
any point because they want to be sure they go to good homes. He said it was his understanding
that no one in the City had ever applied for a kennel license. He stated a complaint was made to the
County and that started the investigation and the complaint was right after the fires. He thought it
might have come from one of the County workers behind his property. He did not think there had
been any complaints to the City about their operation. He said he built the kennels to be very secure
including fencing over the top because he wants to protect the dogs from predators, as they back up
to the mountains. He said he was more than willing to acquire a business license and register all the
dogs.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if the picture on page A16 of the staff report depicts a neighbor's
house.
Mr. Knecht stated that was the closest house, and it is over 200 feet.
Paul Moore, 13054 23rd Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he purchased a dog from Mr. Knecht.
He said he takes care of the dogs whenever the Knechts are out of town. He said the dogs are all •
caged and well taken care of. He indicated the dogs are very tame. He hoped the operation would
be allowed to continue.
There were no further public comments.
Commissioner McNiel felt that this area would be as near to ideal in a residential area for this kind of
use if it were permitted. He believed the Municipal Code does not allow the use because of the size
of the parcel being less than 2Y acres. He said that although the location may seem good,it can not
exist by law.
Commissioner Stewart stated that three elements of facts or findings that are necessary: 1)that it
meets the intent of the General Plan and the District,2)that it meets the goals and objectives of the
General Plan, and 3) is it a similar use as to what is allowed in the District. She did not feel the
application meets those findings. She believed it might have met the findings years ago before the
land was developed into acre or'/:acre residential lots. She did not feel it is a compatible land use
because the land is already developed. She stated it was disconcerting that tonight's decision would
apply to the entire district at large. She felt that the proposed use was problematic. She said that to
determine this use to be possible with a conditional use permit would mean others could also have a
kennel or an animal shelter facility in their back yard. She feared that if a conditional use permit were
granted, the Commission would in time be asked to revoke the permit in the future since there had
already been an anonymous complaint.
Commissioner McPhail concurred. She noted the lot is smaller than the 2' acre size that could be
considered.
Commissioner Fletcher agreed. He said he does not like to impose on what individuals can do on
their own property, but he stated the Commission must look at what is compatible for the rest of the
residents. He believed the use is a dog kennel, rather than an animal care facility and any other
finding would be a tweaking of the Code to fit one particular circumstance. He said if the
Commission were to make a favorable determination, it would mean any other similar size lot could
have a similar operation. He noted it was not a question of whether the applicant has a good
operation and raises healthy dogs, but is more a use determination.
Chairman Macias felt staff did a good job with a straightforward explanation and the Commissioners
had addressed the issues with respect to purpose and intent. He noted the Use Determination is for
an entire district and it is not a site-specific issue. He believed the Commission's role is to be
concerned about the preservation of the spirit, purpose, and intent of what the General Plan has in it.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 10, 2004
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt the resolution denying Use Determination
DRC2004-00093. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE -carried
Brad Buller, City Planner, requested that the City Attorney explain the options available t$ the
applicant.
Kevin Ennis,Assistant City Attorney, explained that the Commission approved a resolution denying
the Use Determination and the applicant could appeal the decision to the City Council.
Mr. Knecht asked if there was a way to bring the matter before the Planning Commission as a site-
• specific request.
Mr. Buller explained that the Commission made a determination this evening that the proposed use
does not fit the definition or the lot size or the other factors for the Very Low Residential area. He
said that means there is no provision for an applicant to even ask for a conditional use permit for that
use in that area.
Mr. Ennis said the action was a determination on the ability to apply for a conditional use permit and
because a use determination had been made by the Commission indicating this is not a use that
would be permitted in this particular zone; then the available option would be to appeal the
determination, rather than to apply for a conditional use permit.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
B. DESIGN AWARDS
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, distributed photographs of nominated projects completed in 2003.
He commented that several months ago, the Commission determined winners for projects completed
in 2002 and decided it would be best to combine those awards with the winners for projects
completed in 2003.
It was the consensus of the Commission that the votes would be turned in to staff to tally.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by McPhail, carried 5-0,to adjourn. The Planning Commission
adjourned at 7:28 p.m. to a workshop. The workshop adjourned at 8:00 p.m. and those minutes
appear separately.
Res se ully submitted,
- - ller �
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 10, 2004