Loading...
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